Does voting for a candidate who supports evil make one complicit in that evil?

With the election just weeks away, candidates are doing a final push to inform the public of where they stand on the issues. Still, it can sometimes be difficult to know just who the better candidate is, especially on "values" issues, like the poor and the unborn. Christians and other religious people are often especially conflicted in how they should vote on these matters.

For instance, one candidate may talk more about helping the poor obtain a better quality of life - a very noble goal indeed that all Christians should embrace. On the other hand, another candidate may also want to help the poor, but puts additional emphasis on human life itself, especially that of the most helpless - the unborn and the elderly. So which matters more: quality of life, or life itself? For true Christians, the answer must be life itself, for if we don't value the sanctity of life for its inherent worth, then there can be no real quality of life anywhere.

But there is another reason we should consider in putting life itself above all else: the idea that to support a candidate who supports evil such as abortion and euthanasia can make us complicit in that evil.

The following is an excellent homily delivered recently by a very holy and wise man, Deacon Joe Hulway. He graciously granted me permission to share with you his wonderful and eloquent explanation of why Christians must solemnly consider the candidates they support, and do all they can to choose good over evil. 

----From Deacon Hulway (partially excerpted):

...In the Book of Numbers, Moses says…“Would that all the people of the Lord were prophets! Would that the Lord might bestow his spirit on them all!”

Moses spoke wise words. And Jesus implemented those words. All the people of the Lord have been bestowed with the Holy Spirit through their baptisms. All are called to be prophets…

But what is a prophet? We sometimes think of a prophet as someone who foretells the future, and sometimes God spoke through prophets of old with exactly that intention. But more generally, a prophet is someone, guided by the Spirit, who can read the signs of current events and can interpret the will of God for the community or society.

And this is something we should all strive to do. It is not only a part of our baptismal call, it is also part of the U.S. Bishops’ call to evangelization. The bishops gave us three evangelization goals for the United States. The third goal is: “To foster gospel values in our society, promoting the dignity of the human person, the importance of the family, and the common good of our society, so that our nation may continue to be transformed by the saving power of Jesus Christ.”

In case anyone hasn’t watched TV, read a newspaper, listened to the radio, or logged onto the Internet, let me inform you that we have a very important election coming up in just over a month. The results of this election will impact our ability to meet the bishops’ goal, the goal to foster gospel values in our society. As we prepare for the election, we need to be prophets. We need to pray for the guidance of the Holy Spirit and interpret the will of God for our country, our state, and our local community.

And there will always be differences in political views because different people have different interests, different experiences, and different approaches to solving problems. We can agree that we want peace in the world, but disagree whether that is best accomplished by increasing military power or reducing it. We can agree that we want to reduce poverty, but disagree whether government assistance or job creation through free market policies is the best means to this end. We can agree that education needs to be improved, but disagree whether it is a funding or an accountability problem.

All these differences are acceptable ones for Christians, for Catholics, to debate. We can have common goals, but some take a conservative approach to reaching those goals, and some prefer a liberal approach. And based on our preferred approach, we can debate which political party, or which individual candidate  is the best one for our community.

But there are some issues to consider where one of the proposed solutions is not morally acceptable. And many of these issues are the ones that pertain to life: abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research. For example, we must deal in our society with the fact that many children are conceived unintentionally. The current government administration in Washington proposes two solutions to this situation. First, offer free, that is taxpayer-funded, contraception. And when that fails, provide taxpayer-funded access to abortion services.

We are being forced to pay for two morally unacceptable approaches which contradict our religious beliefs. And to make matters worse, much of this is being done by presidential mandate without any checks and balances from Congress.

I cannot stand up here and tell you which party or which candidate you should support and vote for. You need to pray for guidance from the Holy Spirit. But I can make sure you are aware of positions of candidates and parties that are in conflict with Catholic Christian teaching. Bishop John Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois issued a letter in his diocesan paper. It says many things better than I can. He wrote: “My job is not to tell you for whom you should vote. But I do have a duty to speak out on moral issues. I would be abdicating this duty if I remained silent out of fear of sounding ‘political’ and didn’t say anything about the morality of these issues.”

The bishop notes that, since 1992, the Democratic Party has stated that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. Which is bad enough, but this year the party platform removed the word rare and also states that it “supports the right to abortion regardless of the ability to pay.” Again this means taxpayer-funded. He points out that: “The Democratic Party Platform also supports same-sex marriage, recognizes that ‘gay rights are human rights,’ and calls for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal law signed by President Clinton in 1996 that defined marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman.”

Bishop Paprocki recognizes that there is much good in the Democratic platform as well. He says: “There are many positive and beneficial planks in the Democratic Party Platform, but I am pointing out those that explicitly endorse intrinsic evils.” With regard to the other party, he writes: “I have read the Republican Party Platform and there is nothing in it that supports or promotes an intrinsic evil or a serious sin.”

The bishop wraps up his letter with these words: “Again, I am not telling you which party or which candidates to vote for or against, but I am saying that you need to think and pray very carefully about your vote, because a vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy. I pray that God will give you the wisdom and guidance to make the morally right choices. May God give us this grace. Amen.”

Bishop Paprocki is performing his duty as a prophet. What about you and me? Roughly 50% of people who identify themselves as Catholics, plan on voting in such a way as to make themselves “morally complicit” with intrinsic evil, to putting their eternal salvation in serious jeopardy. You may pass around mass political emails, you may post articles on Facebook, but the only ones who read them are like-minded people.

Instead, consider sending thoughtful personal emails to friends and relatives who may be disillusioned with the whole political process, who may be inclined to vote differently than you or tempted to sit the election out. Explain to them your concerns in a loving way. Better yet, give them a call. Get involved; be a prophet. Get others involved; get out the vote. More importantly, save souls.

We have two presidential candidates to choose from. One claims to be a Christian, but many of his values appear to be anti-Christian, and are definitely anti-Catholic. The other is a Mormon, technically not a Christian, but his views are much more in-line with Catholic teaching. Jesus said: “There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me. For whoever is not against us is for us.” 

(For the full context of Bishop Paprocki's letter, click here.)

------

These moving words by Deacon Hulway give us a lot to consider. While neither presidential candidate is planning to deny help for the poor, one wants openly supports certain evil actions like abortion into the ninth month, and wants to force Christians to pay for things they find morally reprehensible like contraception, including those that induce abortion. Doesn't voting for that candidate knowing full well what he supports make one complicit in that evil? 

What do you think?  Click on the comments link in the bar below to share your thoughts. No registration necessary.