Today Bishop Martino of Scranton, Pennsylvania faces unheard-of opposition from some segments of his congregation over his highly-political positions on pro-choice politicians. A full page ad and other protests show the wrath of the faithful in his blatant move to affect Pennsylvania politics. While there is very little disagreement on the moral issues involving respect for life among Catholics, there is a great deal of disagreement over whether the clergy or other leaders should endorse specific politicians.
Even more importantly, Catholic theology on other issues predominantly favors the Democratic platform over Republican positions. There is a very simple position that Obama and others can take that could diffuse the issue in the debate and in the next month.
Martino takes the hard line that Burke of St. Louis took in the last election:
...public officials who are Catholic and who persist in public support for abortion and other intrinsic evils should not partake in or be admitted to the sacrament of Holy Communion
Both are at one end of a spectrum of Bishops.
But neither Obama nor Biden support abortion. The difference is their methods in trying to reduce its prevalence. Obama's answer in the "faith forum"--that determining the exact moment at which an embryo earned full civil protection "was above his paygrade"--seemed flippant and even offended some. There is a far better way to approach the issue, and even though it may seem to have too much chutzpah (to mix metaphors) here it is:
Both Senator McCain and I want to reduce abortions. The difference is our methods. While the end result of his positions would be to invade your privacy, put doctors and nurses in jail, and put the federal government in the position of deciding among different religions, we would reduce abortions by increasing health care, support and respect for families. We know that works because it worked during the Clinton administration.
This puts the debate away: In the same way that Biden told Palin "See, we agree on civil unions..." Obama could simply establish the fact that McCain had the same goals as he did. McCain's methods, then, are shown to be offensive and anti-American.
In addition, for those who work with specific communities it will be important to point out to Catholic friends that Republicans violate other serious "right to life" dictates and that there is no single Church-authorized political position. Here are a few snippets of what is a very active debate today:
On Pre-emptive war, theVatican says:
"Engaging in a preventive war without clear proof that an attack is imminent cannot fail to raise serious moral and juridical questions," the compendium said under the heading "legitimate defense."
Of course, that position has been less clearly defined. You don't hear a lot of Catholic spokesmen speaking out against war, or capital punishment, or torture as election issues. It's clear the Vatican plays politics well:
When a reporter asked if Catholics could vote for a politician supporting legalized abortion, Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls said the "Holy See never gets involved in electoral or political matters directly."
Today Catholics (and citizens of every faith who are pro-life in the true sense of the term) face a delicate balancing act. The Vatican has spoken (albeit esoterically) about that balancing act in saying that a Catholic might vote for a pro-choice candidate for other reasons than his/her pro-choice stance--say, his/her position on war or social justice.. From Cardinal Ratzinger (Benedict) in 2004:
When a Catholic does not share a candidate's stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.