Last week the United States Supreme Court issued decisions on two cases involving religious freedom. The first case was 303 Creative vs. Elenis (see Kevin J. Jones, “Supreme Court sides with web designer opposed to same-sex marriage” Catholic News Agency. June 30, 2023 online at https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/254692/supreme-court-state-laws-can-can-t).

In this case, Lorie, Smith, a web designer had filed suit to ensure that she was not be forced to design websites for weddings of same-sex couples. She was not acting out of hate towards same-sex couples. In fact, “Smith told CNA in December 2022: “I serve everyone, including those who identify as LGBT. I love to custom create and will work with anyone — there are simply some messages I can’t create regardless of who asks me.” She said her case is about freedom of speech for all artists” (Jones, “Supreme Court sides”). She filed this suit because designing websites celebrating same-sex marriages would violate her religious beliefs. The word “celebrating” is key here. In other projects, the work she did with the LGBT customers was unrelated to LGBT or faith issues. However, creating websites for their marriages would strike at a core issue of her faith.

Thus, the issue in this case was religious freedom, not the legality of the same-sex marriages (that was decided several years ago by the Supreme Court). I am grateful to see a Supreme Court decision that recognizes the religious freedom of those who hold to traditional values.

Today is July 4th when we celebrate our nation’s independence. Freedom is an important concept in our country. Freedom must be a right for all, not just those who agree with the “popular side.” The right for a same-sex couple to have a website for their wedding was not infringed upon in anyway in this court decision. They can have someone else design the website. This case just said the plaintiff could not be forced to create the website against her own beliefs.

Smith did not call for hate. Our Catholic faith says we must not inflict violence on others because we disagree with them. That would be a sin. Smith simply wants to be able to openly live what she believes.

For those who might be confused by Smith’s willingness to work with LGBT customers on some projects but not for their weddings, perhaps the following distinctions will help. Say a person owns a restaurant. Anyone is welcome to come in as a paying customer and enjoy a good meal. It does not matter if they are a same-sex couple or a heterosexual couple or just good friends. The point is to provide a meal, not provide any position. However, if a place hosted a dinner event organized by others promoting one side of any particular issue, people would probably assume the host supported the issue. Thus, the host should not be forced to host the event. This is not hate speech. In this case, Smith did not call from hatred towards same-sex couples. She simply doesn’t want to be forced to promote their belief in same-sex marriage.

As to forcing her to create the websites, think of it this way. If a person wants to build a house they designed, they would probably hire a contractor to do the work. Say they design a non-traditional house. They may contact a contractor whose passion is for tradition. The contractor declines the work because it is not of interest to him. Does anyone think the contractor should be forced to build that home? I would suggest the contractor would not be a good choice if the house has elements unfamiliar to them. Turning back to the same-sex marriage websites, why would a same-sex couple want someone who disagrees with their lifestyle to design a website celebrating their lifestyle? Why would they expect her to do a good job? What she does is art. The artist must believe in their work to produce good art.

The second United States Supreme Court decision this past week that I would like to write about is Groft v. DeJoy issued on Thursday (Peter Pinedo, “U.S. bishops praise Supreme Court’s unanimous Groff v. DeJoy religious freedom decision.” Catholic News Agency. June 29, 2023. Available online at https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/254707/us-bishops-praise-supreme-court-unanimous-groff-v-dejoy-religious-freedom-decision).

In this case, a part-time postal worker, Gerald Groff had been forced to work on Sunday against his religious beliefs. This decision by the Supreme Court did not say that an employer can never force an employee to work on their sabbath. What it did do is raise the bar for when they can force them to work. I think this is especially important for a job at a post office. Post offices in the United States are not open on Sunday. So, in taking a job there, Groff had reason to believe he would not be forced to work on a Sunday. If he were to take a job at a retail store that is open on Sunday, he might reasonably expect to have to work some Sundays but not at a post office. The Supreme Court decision says that the post office did not have sufficient reason to force the employee to work. I will add my own comment here. A hospital needs people to work on a Sunday for the good of the patients. The post office does not. Delivery companies do not traditionally work on Sunday. I don’t see a need to change that.

Here, I encourage you to think about how what you do on a Sunday might result in someone else not being able to attend church. For example, after attending Mass on Sunday, you go to buy your groceries. That means someone has to be working. In today’s age when most people do not go to church, there are probably plenty of store employees willing to work on Sunday but what if someone who does want to go to church is forced to work? Do you need to do your shopping on Sunday morning? I don’t have a definitive answer to this situation. I’ve already mentioned that many people don’t go to church anyway (we pray for them). There are also people of religions that celebrate their Sabbath on a day other than Sunday. Should they be forced to work on their Sabbath? It is not an easy topic. I offer it as something for you to think about.

As I conclude, I am grateful to see two Supreme Court decisions that support the religious freedom of believers. Yet, we must always remember that we need to strive to help lead people’s hearts to the Lord. A future Supreme Court decision could overturn these decisions. There are already members of Congress looking to change the Supreme Court because they think these decisions were wrong.

So, we ask the Lord to guide our ministries to help us lead people to the Truth that Jesus has taught us. We pray the Lord lead to find new ways to dialogue with others to present God’s Truth to them.

Peace,

Fr. Jeff