We do not tell Catholics how to vote. The responsibility to make political choices rests with each person and his or her properly formed conscience.

To help form your conscience, before you vote:
1) Weigh all the issues.
2) Understand that all issues do not have the same weight.

BEFORE THE CROSS | Viewing election issues through a lens of faith
SUBMITTED ON AUGUST 25, 2016 by Archbishop Robert J. Carlson
Let's talk about voting.

Jesus isn't running for public office this year. Neither is His mother. That means we can stop looking for the perfect candidate. From the perspective of the Catholic faith, the perfect candidate isn't out there.
It also means I'm not going to tell you how to vote — not because IRS tax codes prohibit it but because faith doesn't require it. I only intend to write about what faith requires — to look at issues that weigh on every Catholic conscience, issues by which we can measure every candidate.

In addressing those issues, I don't intend to substitute for anyone's conscience. Rather, I intend to help in the formation of everyone's conscience.

Abortion remains the number one issue that weighs on the Catholic conscience in every election. Why? Because abortion is the destruction of innocent life on a massive scale. In the U.S. alone, it involves the deaths of almost 1 million children every year, resulting in the deaths of more than 50 million children since 1973. When the powerful can eliminate the vulnerable, and society is told to look the other way, something is drastically wrong. And that pattern sets a template that will express itself in other ways.

Abortion is a direct contradiction to the faith. If we don't object to it, we have little grounds to object to anything else, and little grounds to claim that our concern with other issues is motivated by our Catholic faith. Candidates who support abortion are telling us that they will make decisions by criteria that are in fundamental contradiction to the faith. In the face of that, it strains credulity to believe any promises they make about caring for the poor and vulnerable in a way that is acceptable to the faith.
There are other issues, too. Like what? Racism.

That one word conjures a set of events and attitudes, actions and non-actions, that can't fail to capture our attention. Looking across the country, in our own city, or into our own hearts, there's widespread evidence of a problem and we can't ignore it. To turn our backs on the anguish and frustration of our brothers and sisters is to turn our backs on Jesus, who said, "Whatever you did not do for the least of these you did not do for me." In other words: racism touches the heart of our Catholic faith.

What will we do about systemic racism? Faith doesn't give us one solution. But candidates who spend more time talking about tax policies than they do about healing racial divisions are telling us that they can't see or won't address a major issue that's tearing apart the human family. How can we trust them to represent us, to see and prioritize and address the most important human problems on our behalf?
There's more to be said about these and other issues, and I'll say more later. But I've said enough to uncover a dilemma that has haunted Catholics in every election of the past 20 to 30 years. It's time to confront that dilemma head on: we've created a party system in which it seems that half of the Catholic issues are championed by Democrats and half of the Catholic issues are championed by Republicans.
That isn't satisfactory. Catholics represent almost a quarter of the American population. Can't a voting bloc of 25% of the nation create a political landscape that regularly features candidates who represent Catholic values?

So, what can we do — each one of us, every day — to help change that system, to help something better emerge? We spend a lot of time and energy asking, "How did we get here?" But that's time and energy wasted if it's only spent on recrimination. We need to spend our time and energy asking: "How do we make something better?"

And, because we can't wait until something better emerges, we need to ask, "How should we vote in the meantime?"

How can we think about the election, talk about the election, and form our consciences in preparation for the election — not first as Democrats or Republicans, but first and last as Catholics? I'll address that in the coming weeks. 
 
Part II of IV -  SEPTEMBER 01, 2016
Many issues confront us in this election. Abortion and euthanasia. Immigration and national security. The list goes on.

The issues don't carry the same weight. In one sense that means different issues appeal to different people. But is there an objective scale of values to weigh the issues? How do we consider all the issues, while giving each issue its proper weight?
The U.S. Catholic bishops provide guidance in a document issued every four years in preparation for the election: Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship.

Intrinsically Evil Acts
Some actions are what the Church calls "intrinsically evil acts." Please understand that term. It doesn't mean the people who do them are intrinsically evil. It means that these acts never are morally good. We should never approve or perform or support these actions.

Among these actions are abortion, euthanasia, embryo-destructive research, acts of racism, and same-sex marriage.

"There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called 'intrinsically evil' actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned." ("Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship," #22)

In terms of giving each issue proper weight, intrinsically evil actions have extra weight because they represent direct assaults on human dignity.

Other Serious Concerns
Other issues, even if they don't involve intrinsically evil acts, are so important that faith requires us to give them serious consideration. Among these are the economy, immigration, foreign policy, the approach to terrorism, the environment, systemic racism, health care and religious liberty.
"Although choices about how best to respond to these and other compelling threats to human life and dignity are matters for principled debate and decision, this does not make them optional concerns or permit Catholics to dismiss or ignore Church teaching on these important issues." ("Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship," #29)

Faith doesn't give us one way to address these. What's the proper balance between generosity and national security in an immigration policy? What's the best way to secure basic health care for everyone? What kind of educational reform or job creation plan will make the best contribution toward healing racial inequality? There's room, within the faith, for different answers to those questions, but there's no room for not asking them. In terms of weighing things, these issues shouldn't be ignored.

Number and Kind
The distinction between intrinsically evil acts and other serious issues is a first step in developing an objective scale of values for the issues. But it's only a first step. What kind of moral calculus will help us give each issue its proper weight?

Consider a simple example. The Church is opposed to abortion and the Church is opposed (when society can protect itself by other means) to the death penalty. But these issues don't carry the same weight for the Catholic conscience. Why not?

First, they differ in number. Abortion results in the killing of almost 1 million children every year — more than 50 million since 1973, the year when the Supreme Court declared that abortion was a constitutional right. The death penalty resulted in the killing of 28 people in 2015, has never resulted in the deaths of more than 100 in a year (the high was 98 in 1999) and the total is 1,437 since 1976, the year when the Supreme Court found the death penalty to be constitutional.

Let me be absolutely clear: 1,437 deaths from the death penalty is 1,437 too many. But the number of deaths from abortion and the number of deaths from the death penalty are objectively different. That objective difference factors into the weight we give to each.

Second, these issues differ in kind. Abortion is the directly willed killing of the innocent; the death penalty is the willed killing of those found guilty in a court of law.

Once again, let me be absolutely clear: it's a violation of human dignity whether the person is innocent or guilty. But the death of the innocent and the death of the guilty are objectively different in their moral quality. That objective difference factors into the weight we give to each.

Abortion weighs more heavily than does the death penalty on the Catholic conscience. The difference isn't merely a subjective matter of preference. It's an objective difference in number and kind.

Weighing All the Issues
Comparing the weight of abortion with the weight of the death penalty is a fairly straightforward case for the Catholic conscience. Placing all the relevant issues in the scales, and assigning each its proper weight, is an enormously complex task. But that's what it means to consider the issues and measure the candidates as a Catholic.

If we're going to form our consciences an=d vote as Catholics, we need to develop a new and deeper kind of moral calculus. Classifying issues as intrinsically evil, or by number and kind, isn't the last step in that process, but it's a step in the right direction. It helps us replace a subjective scale of preferences with a more objective scale of values. It helps us replace party identification with Catholic identity. It helps us engage in the deeper conversation we need to have with each other: How do we consider all the issues while giving each its proper weight? 

Part III of IV - SUBMITTED ON SEPTEMBER 08, 2016
Sometimes, when we consider all the election issues and give each its proper weight, we're left with a dilemma. What if one candidate is unacceptable on a set of issues that are non-negotiable for a Catholic voter, while the other candidate is unacceptable on a set of issues that a Catholic voter can't ignore? What should we do then?

First, we should pray. We should pray for the guidance of the Holy Spirit in our discernment. We should pray that the candidates (and their parties) will be open to the grace of conversion — even if only one step at a time. We should pray that God will raise up better candidates. (I often say that we should pray for holy priests, because we get the priests we pray for. Perhaps we need to start praying for political candidates as well.)

Some people think that's pie in the sky — that prayer makes no difference. I would encourage us to look to the life of St. John Paul II. He was a great example of how prayer moves culture and shapes history. We would do well to heed his example.

Second, it's possible to give voice to your conscience by not voting for either candidate. That's a drastic step, to be sure, because you effectively silence yourself. But it can't be dismissed as a possibility. Sometimes the world presents the devil's bargain: a choice between supporting one grave evil or another. Sometimes we have to choose none of the above.

Third, it's also possible — after weighing all the issues and giving each its proper weight — to vote for the candidate that you believe will do the least harm. Sometimes that's the best we can do.

No matter which option we choose, however, there will be consequences, and we have to be prepared to face the consequences of our action or inaction. Perhaps that's our greatest contribution. Faith tells us that our suffering is redemptive when it's joined to the Cross of Christ. And we have the Eucharist, which gives us the strength to unite ourselves to the suffering of Christ. That's why, when things look darkest, Catholics are at their best — this is a time for us to shine.

Special considerations
When judging the candidates in light of the issues, we should keep in mind these special factors.

1. Look not only at what a candidate says about a particular issue, but also what they actually have done in regard to that issue. It's easy for a candidate to pledge words on a given issue. Voting records and actions give you a better picture of what they're likely to do.
2. Look not only at a candidate's position on an issue, but also at whether they have any ability to influence that particular issue. Some candidates aren't going to be in a position to influence a particular issue. Some issues aren't ripe for change. At the same time, however, a candidate's views on issues that are beyond their influence still sheds light on how they will make decisions on issues that are within their influence.
3. Recent history shows that decisions on issues that are critical to the Catholic conscience are often being made by appointed judges, not elected legislators. At least since the Supreme Court's Roe v Wade decision, we have lived in an age in which the courts have taken some key issues out of legislators' hands. Recent Supreme Court decisions on marriage (2013, 2014 and 2015), abortion (2016) and immigration (2016) indicate that we're still living in that age. On many key issues the courts have had — and are likely to have — the last word.

Does that mean candidates don't matter? Not at all. It means that, in addition to judging the candidates by the issues, we have to consider what kind of judges a particular candidate and the candidate's party will nominate and appoint. Even when we aren't directly voting on judges, we can't ignore the question of who is appointing the judges. 

I haven't resolved every issue regarding the upcoming election, nor do I intend to. My intention is to help us form our consciences and frame our conversations as we prepare to vote.

In addition to the immediate issue of this election, however, I'd like to raise our eyes to a broader horizon for a moment.

When we do so, I return to one of my main questions: Can't a voting bloc of 25 percent of the nation create a political landscape that regularly features candidates who represent all of our Catholic values?

We aren't there yet. But what steps will move us in that direction? Let me suggest three things.
1) If we spend more time listening to political ads than we do listening to God, then that's part of the problem.

If we do that, we not only consume but also perpetuate a culture that puts politics before prayer. That's backward. We need to create a different kind of culture. That's a long term project, to be sure, but it starts right now, with individual people and individual acts. Whether it's reading the Bible, praying the Rosary, sitting before the Blessed Sacrament, praying quietly as you drive or something else, make listening to God a priority. Be the change you wish to see.

2) If we don't listen to each other with genuine interest when we disagree, then that's part of the problem.
Political ads often feature the worst things a candidate has done or said, with the implicit judgment: "What a jerk!" or "What a liar!" That doesn't foster faith-filled (or even reasonable) conversation. We need to create a different kind of culture

Let's establish a family atmosphere, even if only among ourselves. Let's ask each other: "How do you plan to vote?" And: "Why do you like that candidate?" And: "How do you weigh that issue?" Then let's listen to each other with genuine interest, not just waiting for the next chance to score points in a debate. Being genuinely interested in each other, listening to and loving each other even amidst our differences — if we don't do that within our own Catholic family, what hope is there for the broader culture? We need to be the change we wish to see.

3) There's a temptation to disengage because the situation is such a mess. But let's name that for what it is: a temptation to despair. We're called to be a people of hope, and hope expresses itself in continued engagement.

So, let's remember that the day after the election, Jesus will still be Lord. People will still need to hear the Good News of his saving love. Each of us will be called to take up our cross and follow Him, serving others and suffering for our convictions. That's how our faith has shaped culture in the past; that's how our faith will shape the culture in the future. In that sense, our mandate won't have changed, no matter who wins or loses.

Faith tells us that we bring a change by being the change we wish to see. Let's start with this election. 

It is my hope that these pages will help you become a better informed voter.

September 2, 2012
Spiritual Ponderings
Faithful Citizenship Part I

My favorite television show when I was in college was The West Wing. The television show followed the fictitious President Bartlet (played by Martin Sheen) and his presidential staff as they tried to do what they thought was best for America. Aaron Sorkin (the show’s creator) gave me and others an inside backstage look at politics in a way that was both engaging and entertaining. In one of the first episodes of this award winning television show the President’s Chief of Staff Leo McGarry (played by John Spencer) makes the insightful comment. “There are two things that people should never seen how they are made: laws and sausages.” As I watched the show, I began to see exactly what he meant for the process of making laws in our country is a very complicated process.

Many Americans, today, love their country and truly believe that democracy is the best form of government but at the same time they are also worn out and disgusted by how our government works and many are beginning to believe that their vote really does not matter. Then throw into this mix the growing rift between government and religion and we have probably one of the most difficult topics for a priest to speak about but nonetheless, I will be devoting my Spiritual Ponderings column for the month of September to discussing the idea of the role of Church in politics.

There are many in our country who say that religion has no role in politics and they have tried to mutate the idea of “Freedom of Religion” into “Freedom from Religion.” Many of these people proclaim that they are trying to keep religion out of politics out of some desire to promote our nation’s founding fathers key ideas and this could not be any more absurd. All a person has to do is look at the writings of our early founding fathers to see that their wish was not to have any official state religion so that people of any faith could live out their faith with the assumption that the basis of any faith was the development of the human person. The following are just some quotes of our nation’s founding fathers in which they comment on the idea of religion and politics:

George Washington (1st U.S. President )
"While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian." _{--The Writings of Washington, pp. 342-343.}

Thomas Jefferson (3rd U.S. President, Drafter and Signer of the Declaration of Independence)
"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever; That a revolution of the wheel of fortune, a change of situation, is among possible events; that it may become probable by Supernatural influence! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in that event." _{--Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, p. 237.}

John Hancock (1st Signer of the Declaration of Independence)
"Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual. ... Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us." _{--History of the United States of America, Vol. II, p. 229.}

Benjamin Franklin (Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Unites States Constitution)
"Here is my Creed. I believe in one God, the Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by His Providence. That He ought to be worshipped… "That the most acceptable service we render to him is in doing good to his other children. That the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be the fundamental points in all sound religion, and I regard them as you do in whatever sect I meet with them. --Benjamin Franklin wrote this in a letter to Ezra Stiles, President of Yale University on March 9, 1790.

As we can see that the early founders of our nations saw that religion had a major role to play in politics for religion was what gave people the proper virtues to desire the good of all and not just of him or herself.

Fr. Thomas M. Pastorius
September 9, 2012
Spiritual Ponderings
Faithful Citizenship Part II

Last week, we began our reflections on the role of Religion in politics and we saw that the founders of our great nations truly believed that religion was necessary for the good of the nation because it helped formed men and women into the virtuous people that would make democracy work.

If we think about it Christianity in a special way should mix well with politics for they both ultimately have the same goal the betterment of the world and the flourishing of the human being. As Catholics, we believe that the world is a better place when the poor are taken care of, civil rights are protected and all people strive for the common good. Politics according to the Greek philosopher Aristotle is all about building a just society where human beings can flourish. In my opinion those who wish to keep religion out of politics are either selfishly pursuing their own good or they do not understand that religion is not meant to keep human beings subjected as slaves to supreme being but rather religion is all about allowing a human person to become the best person he or she can by following the guidance of his or her Creator. For example, my car reaches better performance the more that I follow the manufacturer’s suggestions. If the manufacture tells me to put unleaded gas into the tank then I do so because I can assume putting diesel into the car will hurt the engine. St. Irenaeus of Lyon said that “the glory of God is a human person fully alive.” Sadly though there are individuals who practice their politics and/or faith for their own selfish purposes and not for what faith and politics were meant for.

It is my firm belief that those who desire to separate religion from politics have in some way fallen under one of the seven deadly sins. A true atheist (someone who did not believe in God ) would not care if I am religious or not as long as I was working for the common good. The seven deadly sins though are so deadly because they distort our realities. A person who is in the midst of pride for example believes that he or she is the most important person in the world and not God and therefore they do not like it when religious people tell them that it is more important to care for the less fortunate than getting more praise and admiration. A person filled with envy will be looking to create laws that allow them to either get ahead of others or to get what others have and so therefore they will dislike it when people try to enact laws that protect others from harsh economic realities. If one is suffering from wrath (out of control anger) he or she is not going to want to be limited by laws that prevent them from getting revenge or from releasing their aggression.

Those who are caught up into greed and avarice will not want to have laws that prevent them from getting more and more stuff in order to protect the environment or others who are less fortunate. Those who are slothful will not want to hear about their duty to the common good. Finally those who are caught up in the addictions of lust will not want to hear how their addictions are hurting others. What better way to get your way in a democratic state than to convince the other person not to vote or at least through his or her religion to the side instead of pursuing excellence?

The United States Bishops Conference has put out a pastoral letter called Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States which is better known simply as Faithful Citizenship. I ask that before you dismiss the document because it was written by bishops that for one reason or another you may or may not trust, that you remember that you simply cannot dismiss a person’s argument because you do not like him or her for after all a broken clock is right twice a day. In the first few pages of the document the Bishops make it very clear that it is not their role to tell people who to vote for but rather as shepherds of Christ’s flock they are to help us inform our conscious so that we can make wise and prudential decisions. There role is like that of a math teacher who gives her students the skill necessary to solve the word problem but it is still up to the student to do the work and solve the equation.

It is not enough for a person to simply vote his or her conscience but rather one must inform one’s conscious before he or she makes a decision remember that “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” As I tell engaged couples that I am preparing for marriage we can choose to perform a loving act but we do not determine whether an act is loving or not. A husband cannot say to his wife: “I love you,” and then sucker punch her and say that punching her was moral because he loved her. The truth of the matter is that his punching her showed that he did not really love her.

Fr. Thomas M. Pastorius
September 30, 2012
Spiritual Ponderings
Faithful Citizenship Part V

Over the last month, I have been reflecting with you about the role of Church and politics. Today let us look at the last four of the seven key ideas that the bishops lay out for us in their document Faithful Citizenship.

The next area is titled “Option for the poor and vulnerable” and immediately calls to my mind a famous quote from St. Vincent de Paul: “Do not be afraid to neglect the Lord in the tabernacle for the Lord in the Poor,” which reminds me that the Lord himself said that whatever I do to the poor I do to him. Here is what the bishops have to say: “While the common good embraces all, those who are weak, vulnerable, and most in need deserve preferential concern. A basic moral test for our society is how we treat the most vulnerable in our midst. In a society marred by deepening disparities between rich and poor, Scripture gives us the story of the Last Judgment (see Mt 25:31-46) and reminds us that we will be judged by our response to the “least among us.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains: Those who are oppressed by poverty are the object of a preferential love on the part of the Church which, since her origin and in spite of the failings of many of her members, has not ceased to work for their relief, defense, and liberation through numerous works of charity which remain indispensable always and everywhere. (no. 2448) -#54”.

The fifth area of concern is the dignity and rights of workers. The bishops remind us that people are not economic agents because we have a higher dignity than being cogs in an economic machine. “The economy must serve people, not the other way around. Work is more than a way to make a living; it is a form of continuing participation in God’s creation. Employers contribute to the common good through the services or products they provide and by creating jobs that uphold the dignity and rights of workers—to productive work, to decent and just wages, to adequate benefits and security in their old age, to the choice of whether to organize and join unions, to the opportunity for legal status for immigrant workers, to private property, and to economic initiative. Workers also have responsibilities—to provide a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay, to treat employers and co-workers with respect, and to carry out their work in ways that contribute to the common good. Workers, employers, and unions should not only advance their own interests, but also work together to advance economic justice and the well-being of all.” - #52.

The sixth area is called by the bishop “solidarity” which is a call to remind ourselves that we are to take care of all our brothers and sisters in the world and not just those who have the same nationality as us. We are a global community created by the same God. “We are one human family, whatever our national, racial, ethnic, economic, and ideological differences. We are our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers, wherever they may be. Loving our neighbor has global dimensions and requires us to eradicate racism and address the extreme poverty and disease plaguing so much of the world. Solidarity also includes the Scriptural call to welcome the stranger among us— including immigrants seeking work, a safe home, education for their children, and a decent life for their families. In light of the Gospel’s invitation to be peacemakers, our commitment to solidarity with our neighbors—at home and abroad—also demands that we promote peace and pursue justice in a world marred by terrible violence and conflict. Decisions on the use of force should be guided by traditional moral criteria and undertaken only as a last resort. As Pope Paul VI taught: “If you want peace, work for justice” (World Day of Peace Message, January 1, 1972). - #53)

The seventh and final area is caring for God’s creation. “We show our respect for the Creator by our stewardship of God’s creation. Care for the earth is a duty of our faith and a sign of our concern for all people. We should strive to live simply to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. We have a moral obligation to protect the planet on which we live—to respect God’s creation and to ensure a safe and hospitable environment for human beings, especially children at their most vulnerable stages of development. As stewards called by God to share the responsibility for the future of the earth, we should work for a world in which people respect and protect all of creation and seek to live simply in harmony with it for the sake of future generations. - #54

I pray and hope that these reflections have instilled in you a sense of duty to be the best citizen of our wonderful country that you can be and that our reflection on the seven deadly sins have opened many of us to an awareness of our own prejudices, biases, and fears so that we can allow God to shape our hearts more and more and finally, I pray that you will remember the seven key areas not only when you are voting but at every moment of our lives.