Our Sunday Visitor
August 14, 2005
INTO THE DEEP
‘No Religious Test’
Anti-Catholic bigotry is unconstitutional and wrong – even when it comes from Catholics
By Colleen Carroll Campbell
Long before President George W. Bush announced his nomination of Circuit Judge John G. Roberts, Jr., to the Supreme Court, Bush’s critics were pledging to carefully scrutinize any nominee he might choose. They would abide no ideologues or zealots, they said, no extremists who would undermine our constitutional principles.
By these standards, Roberts’ confirmation would seem to be a slam dunk. A well-respected judge on the second highest court in the land, Roberts began his career with a Harvard law degree and a clerkship under Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist. He went on to become an accomplished litigator, arguing 39 cases before the Supreme Court.
In the legal community, Roberts is widely considered a man of keen intellect and sensible judgment. He is also known for keeping his personal beliefs to himself – a quality that has led some conservatives to complain that Roberts is not ideological enough to shift the court to the right. Such complaints, and Roberts’ low profile, would seem to immunize him from charges that he is a zealot or fanatic.
But Roberts has another quality, one that makes him automatically suspect in the minds of America’s secular elites: Roberts is a Catholic. Not only that, but he seems to actually believe and practice his faith. He goes to Mass on Sunday. So does his wife – sometimes even during the week – and she has done pro-bono legal work for Feminists for Life, an organization that aims to give women alternatives to abortion.
Such details might sound mundane to the average American. But journalists have reported them with breathless urgency in recent weeks. Some have wondered aloud if Roberts’ Catholicism will impede his ability to interpret the law fairly, and many activists on the left have concluded that it would. Since they believe that the only fair reading of the Constitution and the law is to require abortion on demand, gay marriage, euthanasia, and embryonic stem cell research, anyone who disagrees is considered unfair. And faithful Catholics who take Church teaching seriously do, indeed, disagree.
Which explains why abortion supporters like writer Adele Stan find Roberts’ background “scary” and his wife’s charity work alarming. Writing in the online version of The American Prospect, Stan accused President Bush of “playing the Catholic card” by nominating Roberts. “Bush is betting he’s bought himself some insulation,” Stan wrote, “any opposition to Roberts, particularly because of his anti-abortion record, will likely be countered with accusations of anti-Catholicism.” Stan suggested that Democrats dodge those accusations by enlisting pro-abortion Catholic Senators Dick Durbin, Ted Kennedy, Patrick Leahy, and Joseph Biden to lead the charge against Roberts.
Like Stan, today’s Catholic bashers justify their bigotry by disguising it as concern for our “constitutional principles.” But the idea that the only Catholics qualified to hold public office are those who openly repudiate the principles of their faith directly contradicts Article Six of the Constitution, which says that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust.”
As Americans, we have a responsibility to call journalists and public figures to account when they attack the Church to score cheap political points. And as Catholics, we have an obligation to let our politicians know that we will not abide anti-Catholic bigotry, even when it comes from fellow Catholics.
Colleen Carroll Campbell is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.