• Log In
• Register

In a recent poll, Gallup reported “Catholic voters overall show a preference for Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry and have done so since late May, after tending to support President George W. Bush earlier in the year.”

This surprising result begs the question: “How can Catholics, the largest organized group opposed to abortion, support a pro-choice candidate over one who is pro-life?” One does not have to read very far to discover the answer:

According to Church doctrine, Catholics are supposed to attend Mass and receive Holy Communion every Sunday.

This Catholic admits sleeping in once every month or so, and not having been to confession in a while. However, thanks to good parenting and a well-formed conscience, the author takes the teachings of his faith very seriously and wonders how serious the Kerry supporters are about their Catholicism. Who is a Catholic in Gallup’s eyes? Is it a man whose parents had him baptized when he was born? Is it a woman whose parents made her go to church, but who no longer attends, except at Christmas?

There is a serious dichotomy between being Catholic and voting for a candidate who doesn’t support Catholic beliefs. Ergo, a Catholic who votes for John Kerry—the pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage, liberal senator from Massachusetts—is either a hypocrite or just someone who does not take his Catholic religion seriously.

The Catholic Church has taken steps to influence its faithful in the voting booth this fall. Catholic Answers, an influential group of American laypersons, has published a “Voter’s Guide for Serious Catholics.” The pamphlet identifies “Five Non-Negotiable Issues,” all of them highly controversial in America today: abortion, euthanasia, fetal stem cell research, human cloning, and homosexual “marriage.” The pamphlet informs voters that “[a] well-formed conscience never will contradict Catholic moral teaching,” instructing them to determine how candidates stand on the five issues and then vote for the candidate who is on the right side of those issues.

While Catholic Answers is not an official part of the Catholic Church, its positions in the pamphlet restate the stances that several American bishops have taken. Raymond Burke, the bishop (for the uninitiated: a bishop is the highest-ranking priest, responsible for the churches in a geographical area, called a diocease) of the La Crosse, Wisconsin diocease, wrote an open letter to his parishioners exhorting them to let their faith influence their votes:

Bishop Michael Sheridan of the Colorado Springs, CO diocease goes even farther. In a May 1, 2004 letter, Sheridan stated that in his diocease, voters as well as politicians that support homosexual “marriage” or abortion “may not receive Holy Communion until they have recanted their positions and been reconciled by the Sacrament of Penance.”

To Catholics, Holy Communion is the central sacrament of their faith. The main point which distinguishes Catholics from the similar Lutheran and Episcopalian religions (aside from recognizing the Pope’s authority as head of the Church) is that Catholics believe the bread they eat is actually transformed into Christ’s body.

Catholics who have committed “mortal” sins, distinguished from so-called “venal” or minor sins by their seriousness, are not supposed to take Communion—big “C”—and are thus out of communion—little “c”—with the Church. Mortal sins are usually violations of the Ten Commandments or key church doctrine such as adultery and abortion. Bishop Sheridan has taken it farther by declaring that voters who support abortion or euthanasia are actively sinning and thus out of favor with the Church:

Is the Catholic Church wrong in taking sides in politics? Several Democratic Catholics think so. On May 10, 2004, forty-eight congressmen wrote a letter to Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, chairman of a task force which is currently considering how the Church should handle politicians who “vote contrary to church guidelines.” “The writers said they do not believe it is their role to transform the teachings of the Catholic Church into legislation, noting ‘we live in a nation of laws and the Supreme Court has declared that our Constitution provides women with the right to an abortion.’ Further, they said, they are sworn to represent all Americans not just Catholics.”

By their statement that they are sworn to represent “all Americans not just Catholics,” the politicians, which include House minority leader Nancy Pelosi and minor presidential candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich, actually endorse the idea that American Catholics should not support politicians who cast votes for abortion by making a distinction between the beliefs of Catholic Americans and other voters.

Besides, politicians exercising their faith is nothing new; at the core of Republican Catholics’ opposition to abortion is their religious faith. In both his presidential bids, Senator Joseph Lieberman refused to campaign on Sundays.

Kerry’s idol John F. Kennedy became the first (and only) Catholic president by assuring voters that he would not let the Pope influence his politics. Voters need not have worried: as we know now, Kennedy did not let the Pope, or the Bible, or even his marriage vows influence his personal life. Marilyn Monroe was merely one of many women with whom JFK committed adultery. John Kerry could stand to choose better role models.

Characteristically and blatantly, Kerry has tried to have it both ways. “I oppose abortion, personally. I don't like abortion. I believe life does begin at conception. [However…] I can't take my Catholic belief, my article of faith, and legislate it on a Protestant or a Jew or an atheist,” he said in July 2004. “We have separation of church and state in the United States of America.”

This statement is so inane and disingenuous that I hesitate to legitimize it with logical argument.

I’ll start with “Separation of Church and State.” Contrary to popular belief, this term is not found in the Constitution or Declaration of Independence: it is a quote from the following 1800 Thomas Jefferson letter to the Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut:

Now that you have the whole quote, interpret it however you please. My point is this: if someone is truly religious, what is more important to them: their politics or their religious faith? Politics is transitory; religious faith is forever. If a politician can subordinate his religious faith, what other beliefs can he ignore for political expediency? Substitute “murder” or “adultery”—both of which are against Catholic teaching and illegal—for “abortion” in Kerry’s quote and its ridiculous nature becomes apparent. Here, I’ll do it for you:

To a Catholic, abortion is murder. The fact that one was made legal in 1973 and is more socially acceptable to nonbelievers and members of other religions should not matter to a faithful Catholic.

The differences between the two parties on most issues are so minor that they are inconsequential to a Catholic. Bush’s and Kerry’s positions on taxes, health care, and even the War on Terror, are not markedly different enough for Catholics to base their votes upon. Indifferent on most political issues, abortion is where Catholics draw the line.

The only place where the parties differ in the eyes of a Catholic—or any religious person—is on the battlefields of so-called “Culture War”: abortion, euthanasia, fetal stem-cell research, and the overall culture of moral relativism. While there are pro-life Democrats and pro-choice Republicans, the official platforms are starkly different: Republicans call for ending abortion, while the Democrats support abortion and other issues anathema to the teachings of the Catholic Church. In fact, the Democrats had Ron Reagan Jr. speak at their National Convention in support of federal funds for stem cell research.1

On the issues that matter to the Catholic Church, the Democratic Party and its so-called “Catholic” candidate John Kerry are clearly on the wrong side of the Catholic Church. Thus the Church has every right to instruct its faithful not to vote for a pro-abortion politician. To suggest otherwise is absurd and intellectually dishonest.

The American Catholic Church claims 25 million members, a huge voting bloc that could almost single-handedly determine an election: approximately 104 million people voted in 2000. The Church’s recent move to influence its followers’ votes is doubly good for America and the Catholic faithful. First, it makes clear that abortion, or supporting a pro-abortion politician, is morally indefensible. Second, it forces Catholics—voters and politicians alike—to get off the fence and decide what they are.

Politicians like John Kerry call themselves Catholic because they know a lot of uninformed Catholics will identify with them based on their religion. Voters who consider themselves Catholics because their parents were Catholic or because they go to church every Christmas, but don’t take the Church’s teachings into account in the voting booth, obviously do not take their faith seriously.

To these people, their religion means about as much to them as my ethnic heritage means to me. I have a couple of great-great grandparents who sailed to America from Ireland, but I don’t go around claiming to be Irish. In fact, the extent of my Irish-ness is using it as an excuse to get drunk on St. Paddy’s Day.

To both politicians and voters I say this: If you take your Catholicism as seriously as I take my Irish-ness, quit calling yourself Catholic.

Discuss this Article

Have an opinion, a question, or correction? Leave comments for this article in the discussion area.