“Regnum meum non est de hoc mundo.”
+
Our Blessed Savior is a King whose kingdom is not of
this
world.
His loyal subjects live in this
world, however, and so it is in this world that the true servants of
Christ the
King show their loyalty by adhering to - and even promoting -
His reign.
As much as they can, the friends of Christ the King do on earth
as it is
in heaven.
This includes how they
vote.
Today we will speak on voting and abortion.
The Church teaches that Catholics have a duty to vote; she
does not say whom we are to vote for, but she does tell us how we ought
to vote.
Every Catholic has a responsibility to vote
because elected
officials will determine the direction of the state.
Moreover, the Baltimore Catechism states that
voting “is a moral obligation when the common good of the state, or the
good of
religion, especially in serious matters, can be promoted.”
(New Confraternity Edition #3, answer to
question 246, page 145.)
Now as man has an eternal destiny, which the state
has no
rights to hinder a man from obtaining, so, in any election, the most
important
matters of concern are moral issues.
On October 1, 2004, Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis,
MO, issued a Pastoral Letter to his flock which gives clear advice on
how a
modern day Catholic must vote,
“there is no
element of the common good, no morally good
practice that a candidate may promote and to which a voter may be
dedicated,
which could justify voting for a candidate who also endorses and
supports the
deliberate killing of the innocent, abortion, embryonic stem-cell
research,
euthanasia, human cloning, or the recognition of a same-sex
relationship as a
legal marriage.
These elements are so
fundamental to the common good that they can not be subordinated to any
other
cause, no matter how good.”
Of
course, as the archbishop says, “if one candidate alone
upholds all the moral law in its integrity, then the decision to vote
for him
is clear.”
But what do we do when both candidates, to varying degree,
fail to uphold the moral law and thus fail to safeguard the common good
in its
integrity? The Archbishop says, “a Catholic may vote for a
candidate
who, while he supports an evil, also supports the limitation of that
evil, if
there is no better opponent.”
So suppose
there is a
candidate who supports
abortion in a limited number of cases but is otherwise opposed to it.
A Catholic may vote for him over his more
unsuitable opponent in order to restrict the use of procured abortions."
Archbishop Burke reminds us that this is not the choosing of
the lesser of two evils; no evil may be done that good come of it.
Rather, this manner of voting chooses the
good of limiting all the evil that can be limited at the time.
But could one simply not vote?
To this question the archbishop responds, “the
Catholic who
chooses not to vote at all, when there is a viable candidate who will
advance
the common good, although not perfectly, fails to fulfill his or her
moral
duty, in the limitation of a grave evil in society.”
Again, moral issues are the most important
issues in
any
election.
And currently, of all moral
issues, the issue of abortion is the most important criterion to
consider in a
candidate as to whether or not he will safeguard the common good of
society.
The common good is “common” only when it considers every
segment of society; it is “good” when it somehow services man’s eternal
destiny.
But the pro-abortion candidate dismisses “common”
in ‘the
common good’ when he ignores protecting the weakest in society; and he
dismisses “good” in ‘the common good’ when he governs so as to hinder
the
salvation of any of his subjects.
This last point must not be taken lightly. As Fr. Hardon S.J. said it clearly, “The
worst thing about abortion is not the taking away of an innocent human
life,
the worst thing is that the aborted person has not a certain chance at
heaven.”
But the complaint may be raised, as it often is,
should
voting be conditioned by one issue?
In my opinion, it is not only legitimate to be a
one issue
voter, but there may at times be even a moral imperative to vote only
considering one issue - if that issue is of grave importance for the
common
good and salvation of souls.
Clearly, any candidate who would preserve or even promote
the practice of a mother killing her child is not advancing the common
good.
Such a candidate has not Christ
for his king, but his enemy.
Nor, if the sad truth must be said, should
Catholics vote
for a candidate simply because he says he is a Catholic... such words
are cheap
without showing a willingness to promote Catholic positions. Even if such a candidate were to say he were
an altar boy should leave us unmoved; Adolf Hilter was an altar boy.
Finally, I do not think I have said anything
here
which you
did not already know.
For if we are
Catholics and claim Christ as our Savior and our King than we will
serve Him by
voting for that candidate who most submits himself to the laws of
Christ the
King.
May God grant us candidates who know they rule not by their
own right, but by mandate of Christ the King... before Whom we shall
all one
day appear to give an account on the day of Judgement.
On that terrible day may we all find
ourselves among the elected.