S
scameter18
Guest
Are Catholics morally obligated to vote? Is it a sin to not vote? And if so, must we vote in absolutely every election or only major (say, state and national) elections?
- Status
L
LilyM
Guest
I think it is part of responsible citizenship to vote at every level of government. Even when the choices are lousy, a vote is still a power we can and should exercise that just might ensure the least worst (aka the best) candidate actually wins.
J
JRKH
Guest
I don’t believe that it is a sin not to vote. Don’t know what commandment it would fall under…
Peace
James
Peace
James
L
LilyM
Guest
The most apt would probably be ‘render unto Caesar’. Voting, IMHO, is along the lines of paying taxes, serving on juries and the like, one of the most important responsibilities attached to citizenship, and exercising that duty is one of the ways we render.I don’t believe that it is a sin not to vote. Don’t know what commandment it would fall under…
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
True but not exactly either…Taxes and Juries are “duties” imposed. Voting is a privilege and a right that can be exercised or not.
Paying taxes is something imposed and requires nothing more than obedience.
Serving on juries is not a “done deal” since there are many ways in which one can legitimately be excused from jury duty. In addition, one cannot be seated on a jury until the court “tests” you. There is no such “test” before voting. If you understand my meaning.
Voting is much more “Self Actualized”…
Voting, to do it well, requires research and a willingness to educate ones self in the various issues and persons running. OR it requires a great deal of trust in an organization who tells you how you should vote (organizations who “endorse” candidates).
These things require a voter to be “informed” and not simply go in and vote a name simply because that guy put out the most signs or whatever.
Also, consider that in any parliamentary procedure when a vote comes up there are three possibilities. Yea, Nay, and Abstain. Not voting is in effect Abstaining and so - Not voting IS voting.
In some cases, a person might make the legitimate decision that it would be better if they not vote at all. In such a case where the person is trying to make the most moral decision, one can hardly say that they are sinning.
Peace
James
G
GratefulFred
Guest
Well said, James. You expressed important points.
But, in the end, I believe we DO have a moral duty to vote. We do have a moral duty to inform ourselves as best we can and then vote our conscience.
On one level, we should explain our not voting to those killed in action obtaining and maintaining our FREEDOM. How can anyone justify a thought like this, “It’s fine you all died for my Freedom. But really, I should NOT have to maintain it by the simple act of learning and voting to maintain that Freedom. Give me a break !”
On the higher level, I believe that God DOES EXPECT us to vote. To paraphrase, Christ said, ‘Not every one who says “Lord, Lord” will enter the Kingdom of Heaven; but those who do My Father’s Will will enter.’
What is the Father’s Will? Paraphrasing again, Christ said: ‘The greatest Commandment is Love: Love God and Love others for the love of God’. One element of Loving others is to provide an orderly society where they can live in peace and hope of improving their lives. One simple element of providing an orderly society is VOTING.
Also test the premise: It is morally acceptable to not vote. If so, then ALL morally based people could not vote. That would leave only the immoral people voting. What would we get then? A moral society that God wants for us? I think not.
Moral people may honestly disagree on a number of subjects, but we are morally obligated to vote the candidates that best represent our conscience.
But, in the end, I believe we DO have a moral duty to vote. We do have a moral duty to inform ourselves as best we can and then vote our conscience.
On one level, we should explain our not voting to those killed in action obtaining and maintaining our FREEDOM. How can anyone justify a thought like this, “It’s fine you all died for my Freedom. But really, I should NOT have to maintain it by the simple act of learning and voting to maintain that Freedom. Give me a break !”
On the higher level, I believe that God DOES EXPECT us to vote. To paraphrase, Christ said, ‘Not every one who says “Lord, Lord” will enter the Kingdom of Heaven; but those who do My Father’s Will will enter.’
What is the Father’s Will? Paraphrasing again, Christ said: ‘The greatest Commandment is Love: Love God and Love others for the love of God’. One element of Loving others is to provide an orderly society where they can live in peace and hope of improving their lives. One simple element of providing an orderly society is VOTING.
Also test the premise: It is morally acceptable to not vote. If so, then ALL morally based people could not vote. That would leave only the immoral people voting. What would we get then? A moral society that God wants for us? I think not.
Moral people may honestly disagree on a number of subjects, but we are morally obligated to vote the candidates that best represent our conscience.
B
buffalo
Guest
The Catechism:
**
2240** **Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one’s country: **
Pay to all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.45 [Christians] reside in their own nations, but as resident aliens. They participate in all things as citizens and endure all things as foreigners. . . . They obey the established laws and their way of life surpasses the laws. . . . So noble is the position to which God has assigned them that they are not allowed to desert it.46
The Apostle exhorts us to offer prayers and thanksgiving for kings and all who exercise authority, "that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way."47
**
2240** **Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one’s country: **
Pay to all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.45 [Christians] reside in their own nations, but as resident aliens. They participate in all things as citizens and endure all things as foreigners. . . . They obey the established laws and their way of life surpasses the laws. . . . So noble is the position to which God has assigned them that they are not allowed to desert it.46
The Apostle exhorts us to offer prayers and thanksgiving for kings and all who exercise authority, "that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way."47
J
JRKH
Guest
Fred,
You too bring out many important points. Thank you.
The one thing that I believe I would rephrase is that instead of saying we are, “morally obligated to vote”, perhaps it would be better phrased, “our morality obligates us to vote”
Whadoya think???
Peace
James
G
GratefulFred
Guest
Works for me. We must first realize we are moral and then recognize our obligations and then respond appropriately.The one thing that I believe I would rephrase is that instead of saying we are, “morally obligated to vote”, perhaps it would be better phrased, “our morality obligates us to vote”
Whadoya think???
Peace
James
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
To take an analogy from a different obligation, we have an obligation to be charitable to those less fortunate. However this obligation does not specify exactly how much we must give, or to which charities we must give. It is a matter of prudential judgement as to whether or not we are adequately fulfilling our obligation to charity.
Similarly, we have an obligation to be engaged in and concerned for civic life. The paragraph of the catechism cited by buffalo earlier mentions exercising the right to vote along with defending one’s country as relating to the co-responsibility for the common good. Clearly the co-responsibility for the common good is the primary goal, and exercising the right to vote is just one way in which that co-responsibility is realized. Just as our obligation to charity does not mean I must contribute $1000 to the local homeless shelter, so the obligation to bear co-responsibility for the common good does not mean I must vote in every single election. Nor does it mean that every single person must serve in the military. There are many ways to serve the common good. It is a matter of prudential judgement as to whether casting a vote in any particular election is going to be one of those ways.
Similarly, we have an obligation to be engaged in and concerned for civic life. The paragraph of the catechism cited by buffalo earlier mentions exercising the right to vote along with defending one’s country as relating to the co-responsibility for the common good. Clearly the co-responsibility for the common good is the primary goal, and exercising the right to vote is just one way in which that co-responsibility is realized. Just as our obligation to charity does not mean I must contribute $1000 to the local homeless shelter, so the obligation to bear co-responsibility for the common good does not mean I must vote in every single election. Nor does it mean that every single person must serve in the military. There are many ways to serve the common good. It is a matter of prudential judgement as to whether casting a vote in any particular election is going to be one of those ways.
L
LilyM
Guest
But the CCC is clear - we don’t just have some sort of general obligation to ‘be engaged in and concerned for civic life’, we specifically have an obligation to exercise the right to vote, just as we specifically have an obligation to pay taxes. Both are listed in the CCC.
Now the obligation to defend one’s country can at least in some circumstances be fulfilled in ways other than actually picking up a gun. Note also that the obligation isn’t actually to pick up a gun anyways.
But you can’t exercise a right to vote by NOT voting, any more than you can exercise your body by not using it and sitting on the couch!
Now the obligation to defend one’s country can at least in some circumstances be fulfilled in ways other than actually picking up a gun. Note also that the obligation isn’t actually to pick up a gun anyways.
But you can’t exercise a right to vote by NOT voting, any more than you can exercise your body by not using it and sitting on the couch!
J
JRKH
Guest
I must disagree with the bolded item above.
As I expressed earlier, in the parliamentary system there are always three voting options - Yea, Nay, and Abstain… Not voting is, in effect, “abstaining” and therefore is a vote…
Note here that I am not promoting not going to the polls, but simply clarifying a point.
Peace
James
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Defending one’s country is also specifically listed in the catechism, yet you are willing to interpret that listing as a more general admonition than the mention of voting. Why the difference? And if you think that the decision to vote is not one of prudential judgement, then do you maintain that the catechism demands that I vote in a bond measure to decide on funding a new stadium? Or do you interpret the admonition as absolutely applying only to major congressional and presidential elections? Are we free to use our own judgement in the lesser elections?
Nor can you fulfill your obligation to charity by NOT giving anything of yourself to charity. Yet the exact degree if that fulfillment is a matter of prudential judgement.
I
Inquiringperson
Guest
Since Catholics are supposed to be opposed to evils like abortion and same-sex “marriage”, I think we are obligated to vote for politicians that are opposed to abortion and same-sex “marriage”.
G
GratefulFred
Guest
I fully agree that prudential judgment must be exercised to decide whether to vote for candidate A or B or to vote Yea or Nay on things like a stadium. But I fail to see how prudential judgment can be used to justify NOT voting - to abstain if you will.
Here is what I found in searching for an answer beyond what I have distilled in my life expereince:
Prudence, as Fr. John A. Hardon notes in his Modern Catholic Dictionary, is “Correct knowledge about things to be done or, more broadly, the knowledge of things that ought to be done and of thing that ought to be avoided.”
So how do we know when we’re exercising prudence and when we’re simply giving in to our own desires? Father Hardon notes three stages of an act of prudence:
· “to take counsel carefully with oneself and from others”;
· “to judge correctly on the basis of the evidence at hand”;
· “to direct the rest of one’s activity [vote]] according to the norms determined after a prudent judgment has been made.”
Disregarding the advice or warnings of others whose judgment does not coincide with ours is a sign of imprudence. It is possible that we are right and others wrong; but the opposite may be true, especially if we are in the minority.
So I listen carefully to the candidates and proponents of issues and then make my “for or against” decision by voting. As a Catholic, I also take counsel from the Church and adhere to the “5 non-negotiables” when I vote. I see no good reason to abstain.
IMHO it is dishonest to not pay enough attention to make a decsion and then fail to vote claiming it was a prudential (wise) decision to not pay attention and thus not vote.
Here is what I found in searching for an answer beyond what I have distilled in my life expereince:
Prudence, as Fr. John A. Hardon notes in his Modern Catholic Dictionary, is “Correct knowledge about things to be done or, more broadly, the knowledge of things that ought to be done and of thing that ought to be avoided.”
So how do we know when we’re exercising prudence and when we’re simply giving in to our own desires? Father Hardon notes three stages of an act of prudence:
· “to take counsel carefully with oneself and from others”;
· “to judge correctly on the basis of the evidence at hand”;
· “to direct the rest of one’s activity [vote]] according to the norms determined after a prudent judgment has been made.”
Disregarding the advice or warnings of others whose judgment does not coincide with ours is a sign of imprudence. It is possible that we are right and others wrong; but the opposite may be true, especially if we are in the minority.
So I listen carefully to the candidates and proponents of issues and then make my “for or against” decision by voting. As a Catholic, I also take counsel from the Church and adhere to the “5 non-negotiables” when I vote. I see no good reason to abstain.
IMHO it is dishonest to not pay enough attention to make a decsion and then fail to vote claiming it was a prudential (wise) decision to not pay attention and thus not vote.
L
LilyM
Guest
The reference to ‘defending one’s country’ is susceptible of more nuanced interpretation than the reference to voting because defending one’s country in itself is a much more nuanced term and concept. ‘Vote’ is not a word that is either difficult to understand or imbued with multiple layers of meaning.
Of course you should vote on funding for a sports stadium in your area - it is something that will have a huge impact on you personally and your community, for starters. I wish I had that sort of say in local matters in my country - here we just elect representatives to
the different levels of government every so often and hope they keep their promises about what they will do and how much they will spend on things.
But there aren’t ‘degrees’ of voting really. Either you vote or you don’t. Either you exercise that right when given an opportunity, by voting, or you do not. RepresentatIves can sometimes abstain because the rules under which they exercise their function as representatives specify that they are permitted to do this. There are no similar ‘rules’ anywhere else specifying that anyone else can exercise a right to vote by not voting.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Do you also hold that it is dishonest to not contribute to the local homeless shelter by saying that you did enough charity already because of numerous other works of charity that you did this year? If not, then why cannot a person honestly say that he has voted conscientiously in the presidential and congressionally election, but wants to skip the special school board election that is held 6 months later?
L
LilyM
Guest
Because it is only intended that one give to charity part time - one will always have demands on one’s time, talent and treasure that prevent full giving.
But one cannot be a part-time or partly-active citizen of one’s local community, state or country, any more than one can be a part time parent or spouse. One is there for one’s child or spouse whenever needed, however difficult or inconvenient, so one votes whenever a vote is required. And why not - again, the education of local children is something that should be the concern of every citizen. These children are going to be your future leaders and service providers - you want as much of a say as possible in how they are formed for those tasks, and choosing a school board is part of that.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I think the nuanced interpretation of defending one’s country is your choice. There are many people who do not do anything that could remotely be considered “defending one’s country”. Surely you are not claiming that they are all sinning. And as for voting, you said that I should (or must?) vote on the stadium bond issue if it has a major impact on the community. But what if, in my opinion, after studying the issue carefully, I still don’t have a strong opinion on how to vote? Or what if the bond issue does nit have a big impact on the community? I don’t see how the decision on whether to vote in this election would be anything other than a prudential judgement.
L
LilyM
Guest
Every tax payer contributes substantially to the defence of their country, as a substantial portion of their tax dollars pay for military personnel salaries, equipment etc etc.
Why should having a strong opinion be relevant? If your child is going out, you may not have a strong opinion as to whether they should be home by, say, 10pm or by 11pm. But both times will surely not be exactly equal, and you will choose whichever of the two you think is best, because that’s your job as a parent.
- Status