Chapter 18. The Bishops, the Sisters, and Religious Freedom / Elizabeth A. Castelli

"On an Antinomy in the Discourses of Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Conscience"

“…4 religion entails the actual requirement of "submission to the Magisterium," as Castelli reminds us. (Castelli, 2015). It is important to make this distinction because the only reason Castelli thinks her analysis catches the Vatican in a contradiction about religious freedom is that she fails to understand the difference institutional freedom of religion from individual religious freedom.…”

“…More frequently than optimal, no attempt is made to distinguish the two -with the notable exceptions in the Danchin, Mahmood, Shackman, Sullivan collection of Elizabeth Castelli (Castelli, 2015), Saba Mahmood (Castelli, 2015), Winni Sullivan (Castelli, 2015). Readers suspicious of my insistence upon this distinction might rightly ask at least two questions straightaway.…”

“…It is important to make this distinction because the only reason Castelli thinks her analysis catches the Vatican in a contradiction about religious freedom is that she fails to understand the difference institutional freedom of religion from individual religious freedom. Of course, in the Catholic context, "Religious freedom emerges as nothing more than a mode of shoring up the Magisterium… not a set of values that shelters and protects acts of conscience…" (Castelli, 2015) That's what freedom of religion is all about! The Church's assertion of religious freedom is an assertion of institutional sovereignty, the right to rule within its own domain.…”

“…Castelli's dare that "bishops should put their money where their collective mouth is and to defend religious freedom in their own polity," reflects Castelli's fundamental confusion about the difference between institutional sovereignty or freedom and individual freedom of conscience. (Castelli, 2015) Not only do the two differ, but the sovereignty won in freedom of religion is precisely what makes denial of individual religious freedom possible and legally unassailable. Of all American heroes of individual religious freedom, Roger Williams again knew this best of all, given his own experience of religious oppression constructed in the interests of the freedom of religion of the Massachusetts Bay Colony.…”

La vida no es una sola: los usos políticos de la “vida” en Latinoamérica

“…Bajo esta consideración, los derechos humanos universales son aquellos derechos fundamentales otorgados por Dios a los seres humanos individuales. Esta "versión teologizada de los derechos humanos" (Castelli, 2007, p. 684) a menudo reclama como foco central el derecho a la vida. Desde el punto de vista del conservadurismo religioso, sólo cuando el derecho a la vida es asegurado, la gente puede disfrutar de los demás derechos, como el derecho a la dignidad, a formar una familia, a la libertad de conciencia, a nacer dentro de los límites del matrimonio heterosexual y a conocer la identidad (qua genética) de los padres, y a mantener relaciones conyugales procreativas.…”