[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12355-12357]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  RESTORING FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO SPIRITUAL LEADERS OF AMERICA ON 
                 POLITICAL AND MORAL ISSUES OF THE DAY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I am on the floor tonight 
because recently we remembered the 60th anniversary of D-Day, World War 
II. We remembered, we had Memorial weekend, Memorial Day, and then we 
had the funeral of President Reagan. I think we all remember the price 
of freedom from those who served in World War II and in all of our 
wars; and certainly Mr. Reagan led this great Nation as we tried to 
create freedom for

[[Page 12356]]

other countries, and he certainly distinguished himself in that way.
  I am here tonight to talk about what I consider a real threat to the 
morality of America, and that is that the spiritual leaders of this 
great Nation are prohibited from expressing their first amendment 
rights to speak out on the moral and political issues of the day.
  Many people know the history of this. Some do, some do not. The 
history is that from the beginning of this great Nation, until 1954, a 
spiritual leader could speak in his church, synagogue, or mosque on any 
issue of the day and not feel that there would be any retribution from 
the Internal Revenue Service. Well, one might say, what do you mean the 
Internal Revenue Service? Well, in 1954, Lyndon Baines Johnson, a 
United States Senator, offered an amendment on a revenue bill going 
through the Senate that was never debated. In fact, the Republican 
majority accepted Senator Johnson's amendment on unanimous consent, so 
there were no hearings, no debate, or anything. And basically what Mr. 
Johnson was trying to do at that time was the H.L. Hunt family in Texas 
was adamantly opposed to his reelection, and they had a couple of 
501(c)(3) think tanks, and so he wanted to quiet those think tanks. So, 
therefore, he put an amendment on a revenue bill going through the 
Senate that was never debated.
  The unintended consequences of Mr. Johnson's amendment was and is the 
fact that churches that are 501(c)(3)s are prohibited from having any 
type of sermons that might be interpreted as being political at all. I 
do not know how one can uphold the teachings in the Bible if one does 
not talk about certain moral issues of the day.
  This Nation was built on Judeo-Christian principles; and if this 
Nation is going to remain strong, then it must remember the Judeo-
Christian principles that are the foundation of this great Nation.
  The reason I wanted to come to the floor tonight, Mr. Speaker, is the 
fact that the bishop of Colorado Springs issued a pastoral letter to 
all of the Catholics in his diocese, and I will submit this entire 
letter for the Record.
  The reason I bring this tonight to the floor is that the Bishop 
Sheridan of Colorado Springs has a responsibility to the teachings of 
Jesus Christ as well as the teachings of the Pope. Being a Catholic 
leader, he does feel very strongly about the pro-life issue; he does 
feel very strongly about stem cell research; he does feel strongly 
about euthanasia, the protection of our elderly. So he issued this 
pastoral letter reminding the Catholics in his diocese that in this 
year's election they should look carefully at those running for 
political office.
  Now, he did not mention Democrat or Republican, he did not mention 
anything of that nature or the name of the candidates. But what he did 
was to issue this pastoral letter. And then Barry Lynn, who is the 
leader of the Americans for Separation of Church and State, noted in 
his letter of complaint to the Internal Revenue Service that Bishop 
Sheridan used ``code words.'' Code words like pro-choice, pro-life, 
liberal, conservative, Democrat or Republican.
  Mr. Speaker, this bothers me in this great Nation that we would have 
an agency that because of the Johnson amendment is to enforce the law, 
but this was not part of the Johnson amendment. There is nothing in the 
Johnson amendment that talks about code words. That was an 
administrative decision by the Internal Revenue Service that if you as 
a religious leader, whether you be Protestant, Catholic, Jew, or 
Muslim, if you have these types of sermons and you might mention these 
words like pro-life or pro-choice, then you could have your 501(c)(3) 
status jeopardized.
  Mr. Speaker, I am of the firm belief that this Nation, I do not 
believe that my colleagues on either side of the aisle, whether they 
are religious or nonreligious, believe that we should have code words 
that someone who is speaking from the heart, speaking from the Bible 
might get themselves in trouble because they are advocating what the 
church stands for, what their religion stands for.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I tonight want to work toward my close by saying 
that I hope that we as a legislative body will look seriously at this 
issue. I do not know if the House will bring this bill up that I 
introduced, H.R. 235; but I believe sincerely that prior to 1954, every 
preacher in this country, every rabbi in this country, every priest in 
this country, every cleric in this country had the right to speak on 
these issues and to speak based on the Constitution and based on the 
teachings of their religion.
  So, Mr. Speaker, with that, I would like to say that I hope that the 
men and women who have worn the uniform for this Nation, those who have 
given their lives for this Nation, I believe sincerely that they 
believe that our spiritual leaders in this great Nation do have freedom 
of speech; but when it comes to the moral and political issues of the 
day, they do not have freedom of speech. So I hope that again the 
leadership of both parties will work with me to restore that freedom of 
speech. It only means that a minister or a priest or a rabbi or a 
cleric, if they choose to talk about these issues, may do so.
  I close by asking God to please bless our men and women in uniform 
and their families and please, God, bless America.

 A Pastoral Letter to the Catholic Faithful of the Diocese of Colorado 
        Springs on the Duties of Catholic Politicians and Voters

       Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ: This coming November 
     we Americans will participate in one of the most important 
     national elections in recent history. The president, senators 
     and congressmen who are placed in office by our votes will 
     serve at a time in which issues that are critical to the very 
     survival of our civilization will be at the top of the 
     political agenda. As we prepare for these elections I 
     consider it my duty as your bishop to write to you about 
     these matters so that you might go to the polls this fall 
     with a well-informed conscience.
       The Church teaches that ``man has the right to act in 
     conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral 
     decisions.'' Often we hear people claim that they are making 
     decisions in accord with conscience even when those decisions 
     defy the natural law and the revealed teachings of Jesus 
     Christ. This is because of a widespread misunderstanding of 
     the very meaning of conscience. For many, conscience is no 
     more than personal preference or even a vague sense or 
     feeling that something is right or wrong, often based on 
     information drawn from sources that have nothing to do with 
     the law of God.
       The right judgment of conscience is not a matter of 
     personal preference nor has it anything to do with feelings. 
     It has only to do with objective truth. ``Conscience must be 
     informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed 
     conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its 
     judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true 
     good willed by the wisdom of the Creater. The education of 
     conscience is indispensable for human beings who are 
     subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer 
     their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.''
       All people have a grave obligation to form their 
     consciences by adhering to the truth, precisely as that truth 
     is found in the natural law and in the revelation of God. As 
     Catholics we have the further obligation to give assent to 
     the doctrinal and moral teachings of the Church because ``to 
     the Church belongs the right always and everywhere to 
     announce moral principles, including those pertaining to the 
     social order, and to make judgments on any human affairs to 
     the extent that they are required by the fundamental rights 
     of the human person or the salvation of souls.'' In other 
     words, as people who profess the Catholic faith, we must 
     ``have the mind of Christ'' in every judgment and act.
       Among the many distortions and misrepresentations that 
     prevail in the current debates about the relationship between 
     religion and the social order (politics) is the assertion 
     that faith and policies are to the kept separated. This, 
     apparently, is based upon the American doctrine of the 
     separation of church and state. In fact, the wall that 
     separates church and state is the safeguard against both the 
     establishment of a state religion and the imposition or 
     sectarian religious beliefs and practices, such as particular 
     denominational forms of worship or theological tenets. In no 
     way does the American doctrine of separation of church and 
     state even suggest that the well-formed consciences of 
     religious people should not be brought to bear on their 
     political choices.
       The Second Vatican Council was abundantly clear on this 
     matter. ``Nor, on the contrary, are they any less wide of the 
     mark

[[Page 12357]]

     who think that religion consists in acts of worship alone and 
     in the discharge of certain moral obligations, and who 
     imagine they can plunge themselves into earthly affairs in 
     such a way as to imply that these are altogether divorced 
     from the religious life. This split between the faith which 
     many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted 
     among the more serious errors of our age. Long since, the 
     Prophets of the Old Testament fought vehemently against this 
     scandal and even more so did Jesus Christ Himself in the New 
     Testament threaten it with grave punishments. Therefore, let 
     there be no false opposition between professional and social 
     activities on the one part, and religious life on the 
     other.''
       When Catholics are elected to public office or when 
     Catholics go to the polls to vote, they take their 
     consciences with them. Pope John Paul II has consistently 
     taught this as, for example, when he said that those who are 
     directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a ``grave and 
     clear obligation to oppose'' any law that attacks human life. 
     The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has declared 
     that, ``in this context, it must be noted also that a well-
     formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a 
     political program or an individual law which contradicts the 
     fundamental contents of faith and morals.'' Anyone who 
     professes the Catholic faith with his lips while at the same 
     time publicly supporting legislation or candidates that defy 
     God's law makes a mockery of that faith and belies his 
     identity as a Catholic.
       In November we will once again have the privilege of 
     exercising our most precious right as citizens--the right to 
     vote. Our choices will be made from among an array of 
     candidates who take a variety of positions with regard to 
     many important issues. In the midst of what could be a 
     difficult and confusing exercise it is very important to 
     remember that not all issues are of equal gravity. As men and 
     women of good will we strive to achieve true justice for all 
     people and to preserve their rights as human beings. There 
     is, however, one right that is ``inalienable'', and that is 
     the RIGHT TO LIFE. This is the FIRST right. This is the right 
     that grounds all other human rights. This is the issue that 
     trumps all other issues.
       The November elections will be critical in the battle to 
     restore the right to life to all citizens, especially the 
     unborn and the elderly and infirm. As a result of the pro-
     life efforts of countless Americans the number of abortions 
     performed in our country is now declining for the first time 
     since the appalling Supreme Court decision of 1973 that made 
     it ``legal'' to kill our children. We cannot allow the 
     progress that has been made to be reversed by a pro-abortion 
     President, Senate or House of Representatives. Neither can we 
     permit illicit stem cell research that makes use of aborted 
     babies. Any movement to promote and legalize euthanasia must 
     be halted. Our votes have the power to stop these 
     abominations.
       There must be no confusion in these matters. Any Catholic 
     politicians who advocate for abortion, for illicit stem cell 
     research or for any form of euthanasia ipso facto place 
     themselves outside full communion with the Church and so 
     jeopardize their salvation. Any Catholics who vote for 
     candidates who stand for abortion, illicit stem cell research 
     or euthanasia suffer the same fateful consequences. It is for 
     this reason that these Catholics, whether candidates for 
     office or those who would vote for them, may not receive Holy 
     Communion until they have recanted their positions and been 
     reconciled with God and the Church in the Sacrament of 
     Penance.
       In recent months another issue has reached the level of our 
     legislatures. It is so-called ``same-sex marriage.'' Those 
     who now promote this deviancy often present it as a human 
     right denied homosexual persons and thus illegally 
     discriminating against them. But, in fact, no one has a right 
     to that which flies in the face of God's own design. Marriage 
     is not an invention of individuals or even of societies. 
     Rather it is an element of God's creation. It is God who 
     created us male and female. It is God who joined man and 
     women so that they could be fruitful and multiply and fill 
     the earth. Every civilization known to mankind has understood 
     marriage as the union of a man and a woman for the 
     procreation and rearing of children. And yet now, in 21st 
     century America, there are those who would want us to believe 
     that all people of all times have been mistaken about the 
     true nature and purpose of marriage. No one can simply 
     redefine marriage to suit a political or social agenda.
       Once again, we must be clear about this matter. The future 
     of our world depends upon the strength of the family, the 
     basic unit of society. The future of the family depends on 
     the state of marriage. The family--father, mother and 
     children--reflects the nature of God Himself, who is a 
     communion of selfless and self-giving love. For this reason 
     marriage and family life cannot be whatever we want them to 
     be. They are only and always as God has created them. As in 
     the matter of abortion, any Catholic politician who would 
     promote so-called ``same-sex marriage'' and any Catholic who 
     would vote for that political candidate place themselves 
     outside the full communion of the Church and may not receive 
     Holy Communion until they have recanted their positions and 
     been reconciled by the Sacrament of Penance.
       The Church never directs citizens to vote for any specific 
     candidate. The Church does, however, have the right and the 
     obligation to teach clearly and fully the objective truth 
     about the dignity and rights of the human person. These 
     teachings, in turn, must inform the consciences of voters. 
     ``By its intervention in this area, the Church's Magisterium 
     does not wish to exercise political power or eliminate the 
     freedom of opinion of Catholics regarding contingent 
     questions. Instead, it intends--as is its proper function--to 
     instruct and illuminate the consciences of the faithful, 
     particularly those involved in political life, so that their 
     actions may always serve the integral promotion of the human 
     person and the common good.''
       Dear friends in Christ, I exhort you with all my heart to 
     take courage and proclaim the Gospel of Life to those who 
     will stand for elected office this fall. It is by your 
     prayers and by your votes that politicians who are 
     unconditionally pro-life and pro-family will serve our 
     country. Conversely, if our voices remain silent or if, God 
     forbid, we vote contrary to our informed consciences, we will 
     see our country led down a short path to ruin. We want 
     freedom for all, but there can be no freedom without truth. 
     In the words of our Holy Father: ``When freedom is detached 
     from objective truth it becomes impossible to establish 
     personal rights on a firm rational basis; and the ground is 
     laid for society to be at the mercy of the unrestrained will 
     of individuals or the oppressive totalitarianism of public 
     authority.''
       Let us all pray for those politicians who claim to be 
     Catholic yet continue to oppose the law of God and the rights 
     of persons that, by the grace of God, they will be converted 
     once again to the full and authentic articulation and 
     practice of the faith.
       Finally, I wish to affirm my brother bishops who have 
     proclaimed the truth of these critical matters and who have 
     admonished those Catholic politicians who place themselves at 
     odds with the truth of God. May that truth which is the 
     foundation of genuine freedom prevail in our country.
       Given at the Chancery on this first day of May 2004, the 
     Feast of St. Joseph the Worker.
                                Most Reverend Michael J. Sheridan,
     Bishop of Colorado Springs.

                          ____________________