Mary Veeneman: Here's the first way some have responded. Shortly after the election, Fr. Jay Scott Newman made headlines by instructing his parishioners not to receive communion without first going to confession if they had voted for Barack Obama. His explanation for this direction was that in voting for Obama individuals had given material cooperation with intrinsic evil and that was sufficient to make those concerned unable to take communion.
Fr. Newman's directive certainly created a stir among Catholics and non-Catholics alike. It also reveals a failure (on Fr Newman's part) to engage fully with Catholic teaching on this issue.
Here's a second way Catholics are responding: Let's call it a prudent conscience. In 2007, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) released a document titled, Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship in anticipation of the 2008 election. In this document, the bishops make clear that the voter is not to make decisions based on one issue alone. They write,
With a well-formed conscience and prudence, then, Catholics are called to make "practical judgments regarding good and evil choices in the political arena" (21). Perhaps the most important point made by the bishops in the document is that the right to life is tied to other human rights. All issues surrounding life are tied to one another because a failure to cherish the life of any person or group will ultimately result in a lessened respect for all life.
The bishops are clear that the destruction of human life at any stage of life (from conception to death) is wrong and must always be opposed by Catholics. What they do not state is any one particular way in which Catholics must participate as a citizen. Fr. Newman's argument about those who voted for Obama is that they materially cooperated with evil in the act of voting for an individual who supports abortion rights. What Faithful Citizenship shows is that there is a great deal of complexity in making political decisions. The definition of material cooperation with evil also shows this. Material cooperation with evil is an act on the part of one person in which he or she cooperates with another person who is involved in wrongdoing. The key here is that the cooperator's ultimate intention is not the same as the one involved in wrongdoing. Cooperating may mean working for an individual who is committing some kind of moral wrongdoing without directly participating in the particular acts of wrongdoing.
Many people opposed to abortion voted for Obama because they liked a number of his policies and saw a potential in his language of abortion reduction. At the same time, in the days following the election, there was a sound of alarm coming from many of the members of the USCCB. This sound of alarm is not about Catholics who voted for Obama, but what Obama's election and passing FOCA could mean for the Catholic health care system.
What do you think? Do you agree with the USCCB's discussion of the formation of conscience and the need to make practical judgments?
Here's a second way Catholics are responding: Let's call it a prudent conscience. In 2007, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) released a document titled, Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship in anticipation of the 2008 election. In this document, the bishops make clear that the voter is not to make decisions based on one issue alone. They write,
"The Church equips its members to address political and social questions by helping them to develop a well-formed conscience. Catholics have a serious and lifelong obligation to form their consciences in accord with human reason and the teaching of the Church. Conscience is not something that allows us to justify doing whatever we want, nor is it a mere "feeling" about what we should or should not do. Rather, conscience is the voice of God resounding in the human heart, revealing the truth to us and calling us to do what is good while shunning what is evil. Conscience always requires serious attempts to make sound moral judgments based on the truths of our faith" (17).The document further teaches that Catholics must not take a route to a good end if it involves immoral actions along the way.
With a well-formed conscience and prudence, then, Catholics are called to make "practical judgments regarding good and evil choices in the political arena" (21). Perhaps the most important point made by the bishops in the document is that the right to life is tied to other human rights. All issues surrounding life are tied to one another because a failure to cherish the life of any person or group will ultimately result in a lessened respect for all life.
The bishops are clear that the destruction of human life at any stage of life (from conception to death) is wrong and must always be opposed by Catholics. What they do not state is any one particular way in which Catholics must participate as a citizen. Fr. Newman's argument about those who voted for Obama is that they materially cooperated with evil in the act of voting for an individual who supports abortion rights. What Faithful Citizenship shows is that there is a great deal of complexity in making political decisions. The definition of material cooperation with evil also shows this. Material cooperation with evil is an act on the part of one person in which he or she cooperates with another person who is involved in wrongdoing. The key here is that the cooperator's ultimate intention is not the same as the one involved in wrongdoing. Cooperating may mean working for an individual who is committing some kind of moral wrongdoing without directly participating in the particular acts of wrongdoing.
Many people opposed to abortion voted for Obama because they liked a number of his policies and saw a potential in his language of abortion reduction. At the same time, in the days following the election, there was a sound of alarm coming from many of the members of the USCCB. This sound of alarm is not about Catholics who voted for Obama, but what Obama's election and passing FOCA could mean for the Catholic health care system.
What do you think? Do you agree with the USCCB's discussion of the formation of conscience and the need to make practical judgments?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
I agree with others-- and it was my first thought --if I can't vote for a candidate without "material cooperation with evil," I can't vote. Nor, as someone else pointed out, can I pay taxes. I would have to go to jail. Therefore, I HAVE to take a more lenient and holistic look at candidates in order to participate in a democracy. We ALL participate in systems of evil, but the message I get is that "God, through Jesus Christ, forgives." We do our best in a fallen world.
I agree that we need to look at more than just one issue. We have to weigh all. We need to get off this wagon that one issue trumps all. It doesn't. At the same time we must not be silent about any issue. One issue doesn't trump every other (with maybe two more) so that Christians are to be mute on other issues. That is dangerous too. Wish the world and reality was less complex.
We need to speak out against the FOCA and speak for the Democratic 95/10 Initiative, I believe. We need to quit pining for an overturning of Roe v Wade.
The longer I look and listen, the easier I realize why many Mennonites and all Amish never vote. There is no squeaky clean candidate, no not one. Because we're comparing all with Jesus, and what he brought, as in the Sermon on the Mount. This is in part why I believe we're all to enamored and taken up with politics. But that doesn't mean we should withdraw. Where to find the balance.
Thanks Sue Van Stelle- 11:08a, for that comment, and many good comments here.
I must say that no candidate is perfect, but we have to look at where a candidate stands on all the issues before casting our votes. We know that this "world system" is basically controlled by satan, otherwise he would not have been able to offer it to Jesus in the wilderness. However, I also believe that Obama is one who hears from GOD and will lead the USA in the manner that will be best for all the people. Ultimately, each individual who decides to have an abortion, will have to answer to Almighty GOD, just as anyone who willfully commits sin - be it lier, killer, thief - you name it.
Thanks for this opportunity to comment.
Quote from Matt: "I've never heard anyone say, "We need more abortions in this country."
NARAL recently said that the Hyde Amendment has kept 50% of woman that would have had an abortion from getting an abortion (due to lack of medicare coverage) and that this was an injustice and a infringement on a woman's rights.
That's pretty close to saying "We need more abortions", I suppose more like "We wish the government would pay for more abortions".
Good for Father Newman! I would have loved to have been in his church for that! I am a Catholic woman, I have Catholic beliefs and am horrified by this country's decision to appoint Barrack Obama as president. Why? His abortion stance.
I am a single mother of 4 children and although life's not always easy, I know that each one of my children is a gift from God. Every time I think of abortion, I think of the first time I looked at my children's faces; of holding them when they were minutes, hours, days old, and it horrifies me that every day, thousands of children are not only killed but butchered, in such excruciating, barbaric ways. How anyone can do that to their own unborn baby is beyond me. I wish that people would stop being so selfish, self-centered and blind and open their eyes to what they're really doing to their beautiful, innocent baby before it's too late.
If we can't save our own babies from ourselves, how can we ask God to save us?
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.