The Bad Theology Behind Opposing the Contraception Mandate

The recent legal objections to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate make me think of a controversy that figures repeatedly in the New Testament.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus criticizes religious leaders who refuse to temper their interpretation of the law with compassion and mercy, warning his followers of those who “tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on the shoulders of others; but they themselves are unwilling to lift a finger to move them.”

Two millennia have passed since then, but some religious leaders are still tying up burdens for others to bear, and they are still using the same legalistic tactics attributed to Jesus’ opponents in the New Testament.

Then, as now, we are being asked to believe that a tradition rooted in compassion and care for the most vulnerable somehow violates God’s law. The plaintiffs who argue that corporations have religious liberty rights (Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius, both headed to the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday (March 25)) or that signing a piece of paper declaring one’s cherished religious principles is a religious burden (Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. Sebelius) have resorted to similar legalisms. They are using their faith to put obstacles in the path of women seeking health care that is essential to their well-being and that of their families.

Christians should not think that these legal strategies represent the best part of our faith, and other people of good will should not be fooled into thinking that the Christian majority favors gamesmanship over compassion.

Read the rest here