Catholics and Politics

The perfect Catholic politician would be, by inclination and in practice, solidly pro-life and pro-family. He (or, indeed, she) would campaign against abortion, euthanasia and capital punishment alike. He would be deeply concerned with issues of social justice and strongly resist elective military action. He would exercise a preferential option for the poor, and oppose unwarranted spending on armaments. He would regard anti-environmental policy as an affront to God’s creation. He would stand up to corruption and political dealmaking. He would exercise his faith within a political ministry, independent of secular ideology or party line. His private life would be a model of integrity. And he would do all that without compromising his obligations to his constituents, not all of whom may be Catholic.

Such a politician is rare, if he exists at all. Certainly, within a system of direct representation, he would find it difficult getting elected, or even raising the requisite funds to fight an election campaign.

Of course, no political party embraces all the policies and attributes of our ideal Catholic politician. Even the Italian political party favoured by generations of popes, the Christian Democrats, did not meet all the criteria of Catholic teachings (it eventually collapsed under the weight of a vast corruption scandal).

These considerations are on the agenda this year for Catholics as voters in South Africa and in the United States prepare to participate in their national elections.

In South Africa, Catholic pro-life activists have thrown their weight behind the African Christian Democratic Party, an imperfect choice for Catholics, but the only reasonable national option for those Catholics to whom pro-life issues are the litmus test.

Other Catholics may well weigh up several other issues, including those on which the teachings of the Catholic Church have no direct impact (such as fiscal matters or crime prevention), before casting their ballot.

While voting on the basis of pro-life issues alone is legitimate, it is not an act of disloyalty to the Church to consider also other policy areas.

The bishops of Southern Africa have followed a wise approach of staying out of party politics. While our bishops comment on pertinent issues to offer moral guidance–to politicians and the faithful alike–they abstain from partisan politics.

Not so in the US. The presumptive Democratic Party nominee, John Kerry, is a practising Catholic who also supports the pro-choice movement. Although he says that he privately opposes abortions, he wishes not to impose that view on others.

Recently, some US prelates threatened to withhold Communion from Catholic candidates who have adopted public positions that they consider contrary to Catholic teaching. Archbishop Raymond Burke of St Louis went as far as suggesting publicly that Mr Kerry should be banned from receiving Communion until he changed his policies to reflect Church teaching fully.

Much as one may disagree with Mr Kerry, this would be wrong not only in terms of canon law–supporters of abortion are not automatically excommunicated unless they have actually participated in one–but would undermine fundamental democratic principles.

More than that, it suggests that for the Church the questions of abortion and gay unions are not just central policy issues, but the only policy issues. By doing so, these bishops trivialise other important areas that relate to Catholic teaching, such as poverty, peace and the environment.

The bishops have a right to guide the faithful on moral issues–but they have no right to dictate policies to Catholic politicians, or to instruct voters (directly or indirectly) on how to vote.