Political involvement

[Volkov]

Hello everyone,

I'm new here, and not Roman Catholic, so I hope this is the right place to ask.I did do some searches of the forums, but did not find a comprehensive answer.  I'm here to learn more about how Catholicism is "practiced" (for lack of a better term) in the real world.

Political involvement is a big question for me right now. Obviously, there are those people in American society that say “I would never do x, y, or z, but I cannot decide for someone else or have my religious beliefs trump civil liberties” (pick your issue: abortion, gay marriage, euthansia). And there are others who say that religious beliefs cannot be divorced from societal engagement, or that at the very least religious beliefs inform the formation of political beliefs, and that this is as it should be.

So my question is two-fold:

1. Clearly, a committed Catholic would not support legalizing or keeping legal abortion, euthanasia and so forth. BUT–is there any specific mandate from the Catholic side to ACTIVELY oppose these (besides simply not voting for candidates who support these positions or funding groups that do).
2. If Catholic social teaching invites active political participation (which I understand it does, at least implicitly), how would more “controversial” issues be viewed? For instance, if this were not a political non-starter today, would faithful Catholics be obliged morally to support a politician who wanted to ban non-abortive birth control? What would the justification for doing so be?

Thanks for your time in answering! I’m eager to learn more about the connection between faith and political involvement.

P.S. Just noticed the sticky–hope this post is okay here, as it’s not about discussing politics per se (at least specifics) as much as the connection between faith and political action.

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

1. Clearly, a committed Catholic would not support legalizing or keeping legal abortion, euthanasia and so forth. BUT–is there any specific mandate from the Catholic side to ACTIVELY oppose these (besides simply not voting for candidates who support these positions or funding groups that do).

If you mean, does the Church mandate political activity, the short answer is no. That is not because it does not matter, but because we are all different and have different callings. Some are called to a cloistered life. We are more varied than the simple categories. I can tell you in my own life, when I was just bit younger, it seemed perfectly obvious to me that political action was necessary and disturbing that not everyone was politically active. Now, I am a mom. My first priority is my children. I am getting to the end of a very difficult pregnancy, and frankly, I cannot be as active as I once was- or even as I would like to be.

Listening to God, and knowing what His specific path for your life is is key in answering your question. In short, if you are not active because you do not care, that is a serious problem. If you are not politically active because it is not feasible or not your calling, that is different.

1. If Catholic social teaching invites active political participation (which I understand it does, at least implicitly), how would more “controversial” issues be viewed? For instance, if this were not a political non-starter today, would faithful Catholics be obliged morally to support a politician who wanted to ban non-abortive birth control? What would the justification for doing so be?

You do ask complicated questions.

Is a Catholic compelled to support a politician who supports Catholic positions on moral issues? This is so often argued that it feels a bit like a dead horse. Still, your approach is different than most.

There are certain beliefs that the Church holds that are more important than others. Some call these the non-negotiables. Essentially your question is, is non-abortive birth control one of them? I think it is not. If the candidate supports capital punishment, opposes immigration reform, supports euthanasia and unnecessary war, I might smile, a bit, that he would outlaw condoms, but I will not vote for him. The same list weighed against abortion feels different.

The USCCB puts out a voting guide for this reason. It helps Catholic voters to know and understand the issues from a Catholic perspective, and it helps prioritize- as prioritize we must.

It is worth noting, since I brought up some contentious issues, that even where it is non-negotiable that a certain issue must be addressed, the Church rarely mandates a specific position on how to address it. Immigration, care for the poor, etc… are among those issues where you will find information and advice, but no direct mandate.

 

[Volkov]

Dear Beth Cecilia,

Thank you very much for your thoughtful reply. And best wishes for your pregnancy and baby!

I am familiar with the non-negotiables and the voting guides (both that of the Bishops and the booklet Catholic Answers Action put out, though the former seems much more expansive than the latter).

With regard to my second question, I was specifically curious about the “dividing line” between what was considered politically open for interpretation in good conscience and what was strictly non-negotiable (and under what circumstances that latter category held).

This is a somewhat unfair query to pose, as it presumes the creation of a hypothetical situation, but in my mind, the question was “if abortion, euthanasia, stem-cell research, gay marriage, and the death penalty were taken off the political table, would a Catholic still be obliged to vote for someone who supports restricting the availability of non-abortive birth control or other issues that are taught by the Church but don’t necessarily involve anyone else besides the individual and his/her life of faith.” (And I get that this is an intellectual morass, because you can make this argument vis a vis homosexual marriage, but the counter would be that there are societal ripples from such events.)

But the gist of what I’m driving at (forgive me if somewhat ineffectually) is that I can make the argument for banning abortion universal (as opposed to faith-specific) if I acknowledge the fetus has basic human rights from the moment of conception. Then it’s not so much a “my faith says versus your faith says,” but a universal matter–the fetus has a right to develop and be born. (Actually, one of the best defenses of this position I have recently read came from a pro-life atheist blog.)

However, it seems different to say one involves upholding a human universal (right to life), my understanding of which is informed by my faith, versus upholding a tenet of my faith universally, even when many in a democracy may not believe as I do. I’m just trying to understand where that line may be for committed Catholics. At the same time, I realize it would be very easy to run this issue around in semantic circles, with little to show for the effort. In any case, I suspect the answer I’m ultimately looking for was in your post above concerning there being no clear mandate on many issues.