| A Voter's Guide Amid today's political
jostling, Catholic citizens are wondering whether they can, in conscience,
vote for candidates who support the legalized killing of human beings in
the embryonic and fetal stages of development by abortion or in biomedical
research.
Responding to requests to clarify the obligations of Catholics on this
matter, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, under its
Prefect, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, released a statement "On Worthiness to
Receive Holy Communion." Although this statement dealt primarily with the
obligations of bishops to deny Communion to Catholic politicians in
certain circumstances, it included a short note at the end addressing
whether Catholics could, in good conscience, vote for candidates who
supported the taking of nascent human life in the womb or the laboratory.
Cardinal Ratzinger stated that a "Catholic would be guilty of formal
cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy
Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely
because of a candidate's permissive stand on abortion." However the
question of the moment is whether a Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion
candidate for other reasons. Ratzinger's next sentence answered that
question: a Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion Catholic politician only
"in the presence of proportionate reasons."
What are "proportionate reasons"? To consider that, we must first
repeat the teaching of the Church: the direct killing of innocent human
beings at any stage of development, including the embryonic and fetal
stages, is homicidal, gravely sinful, and always and everywhere profoundly
morally wrong. Then, we must consider the scope of the evil of abortion
today in our country. America suffers 1.3 million abortions each year.
That is a tragedy of epic proportions. Moreover, many supporters of
abortion propose to make the situation even worse by creating a publicly
funded industry in which tens of thousands of human lives are produced
each year for the precise purpose of being "sacrificed" in biomedical
research.
Thus, in order for a Catholic citizen to vote for a candidate who
supports abortion and embryo-destructive research, one of the following
circumstances would have to obtain: either (a) both candidates were in
favor of embryo killing on roughly an equal scale, or (b) the candidate
with the superior position on abortion and embryo-destructive research was
a supporter of objective evils of a gravity and magnitude going beyond
that of 1.3 million yearly abortions plus the killing that would take
place if public funds were made available for embryo-destructive research.
Frankly, it is hard to imagine circumstance (b) in a society such as
ours. No candidate advocating the removal of legal protection against
killing for any vulnerable group of innocent persons other than unborn
children would have a chance of winning a major office in our country.
Even those who support the death penalty for first-degree murderers are
not advocating policies that in practice result in more than one-million
killings annually.
As Mother Teresa reminded us on all of her visits to the United States,
the grave evil of abortion tears at our national soul. It is a betrayal of
our nation's founding principle that recognizes all human beings as
"created equal" and "endowed with unalienable rights." The evil is
staggering. What evil could be so grave and widespread as to constitute a
"proportionate reason" to support candidates who would preserve and
protect the abortion license and even extend it to publicly funded
embryo-killing in our nation's laboratories?
Certainly, policies on issues such as welfare, national security, the
war in Iraq, social security, or taxes, taken singly or any combination do
not provide a "proportionate reason" to vote for a pro-abortion candidate.
Consider, for example, the war in Iraq. Although Pope John Paul II
pleaded for the world to find an alternative to the use of military force
to meet the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, he did not bind the conscience
of Catholics to agree with his judgment of the matter, nor did he say that
it would be morally wrong for Catholic soldiers to participate in the war.
In line with the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on "just
war," he recognized that a final judgment of prudence as to the necessity
or resort to military force rests with statesmen, not with ecclesiastical
leaders. Catholics may, in good conscience, support the use of force in
Iraq or oppose it.
Abortion and embryo-destructive research are different. These are
intrinsic and grave evils; no Catholic may legitimately support them.
In the context of contemporary American social life, abortion and
embryo-destructive research are disproportionate evils. They are the
gravest human rights abuses of our domestic politics. They are to our time
what slavery was to the time of Lincoln. Catholics are called by the
Gospel of Life to protect the victims of these human rights abuses. They
may not legitimately abandon the victims by supporting those who would
further their victimization.
(Note: This column originally appeared in the September 17, 2004
edition of The Wall St. Journal).
Reprinted with permission of
The Catholic Advocate.
Copyright © 2004 by the Archdiocese of Newark.
|
