 "Photo:")
In every election year since 1976, the United States Council of Catholic Bishops produced and approved a general statement that makes clear the Roman Catholic position on many contemporary social and political issues. On Nov. 17, the Council passed the 2008 guide, titled "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship," in Baltimore, Md., with a 98 percent majority. The Council of Bishops made clear that its intent is not to coerce Catholics into voting for a particular candidate; this choice resides with each individual voter. Rather, the document is meant to be a way of influencing social perceptions. The document focuses on seven key themes: the right to life and the dignity of the human person; call to family, community, and participation; rights and responsibilities; options for the poor and vulnerable; dignity of work and the right of workers; solidarity; and caring for God's creation.
To better dissect this document and its influence on Roman Catholics in America, The Church of the 21st Century sponsored a panel discussing the Bishops' statement on Tuesday. Gregory Kalscheur, S.J., a faculty member in the Boston College Law School, moderated the talk, which featured Paul Manuel, chair of the department of politics at St. Anselm College; Thomas Massaro, S.J., director of the Licentiate in Sacred Theology program at Weston Jesuit School of Theology; Alexia Kelley, executive director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good; Reginald Whitt, O.P., founding member of the St. Thomas School of Law faculty; and Maria Davila, a professor of Christian ethics at the Andover Newton Theological School.
Kalscheur emphasized the importance of Catholics allowing themselves to be guided by their moral convictions rather than by tenacious adherence to one political party. The bishops recognize the necessity of prudence, which can also be called "the art of the possible," Kalsheur said. To foster a dialogue about the meaning of such prudence, he posed a series of hypothetical situations and allowed the panelists, taking the role of bishops, to discuss possible strategies.
"What should parishioners in your diocese know about the document and how should they react?" Whitt was the first to respond to this situation, and said that Catholics must avoid the temptation to become single-issue voters. He said he believes that they must look at all issues of human dignity and not isolate the "right to life," a seeming preoccupation that began over 20 years ago with the Reagan Revolution of neo-conservatism. Whitt said that voters must take a more holistic approach because "all candidates are compromised by some intrinsic evil." Alexia Kelley reiterated this statement by saying that this document represents "a great opportunity to convey Catholic social teaching." It displays an often-overlooked vision of the common good as well as a "powerful discussion of intrinsic evil," she said.
Continuing the discussion, Maria Davila said it is important for the discussions to go beyond the narrow realm of Catholic social teaching to begin dialogue involving all moral teaching of the last 2,000 years, all with an ecumenical vision in mind. Manuel remarked that the real purpose of the bishops' statement is "not to catechize the masses, but to reflect on what it means to be an informed ethical Christian person in the current day." The document puts forth a distinct hierarchy of evils in which issues of life are seen as more important than environmental issues on this scale. All of these things must be taken into consideration, especially a voter's "intent," which has serious consequences for both one's spiritual well-being as well as salvation, Manuel said.
When Kalscheur asked about the business of bishops in politics, all of the panelists agreed that Catholic thought has a distinct place. "We need to do remedial work," Massaro said, regarding the need to inform Catholics and to combat the societal notion that the separation of church and state prohibits faith from the political realm. Not only do Catholics have an obligation to vote because they are citizens, they are also called to participate in politics because "exercising faith is part of being disciples," Whitt said. This idea is stressed throughout the document and it serves to refute the view of Christian anarchism, or the belief that American politics is so broken that it would be sinful to even participate. "If we bow out, we leave the field to those without consciences," Kelley said.
The final topic was the idea of changing American culture, not just its politics, to reflect the ethical teaching of the church. Massaro said he believes that this is an essential focus for both the church and Catholic voters because, "every election is about every social issue." He said, however, that the document sadly lacks this sentiment. For example, the bishops' statement only mentions the late Cardinal Bernardino's "consistent ethic of life" one time, something that took far greater precedence throughout the 1990s.
In the end, there is only one difference between having the informed conscience of an ethical person and the informed conscience of an ethical Christian person: a distinct teleology and cosmology. This is the Christian story, and it "grounds our beliefs in a narrative," Massaro said. Christianity and politics must naturally go hand in hand because Christians believe that God has informed man how to live; it answers the question of why we care about ethics: "It pleases God," Manuel said.
Be the first to comment on this article!