In November 2002, the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a “Doctrinal Note on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life.” In this presidential election year in the United States, that document has been cited many times in an attempt to define the proper role of a politician, particularly a Catholic politician.

In a critical passage, the doctrinal note states that “those who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a ‘grave and clear obligation to oppose’ any law that attacks human life. For them, as for every Catholic, it is impossible to promote such laws or to vote for them” (4).

When people enter the political arena and stand for public office they immediately invite scrutiny. For what values do they speak? What is their vision of a good and just society? How much are they driven by conviction?

Vision of life and values

Catholics, when they enter the political arena, should bring with them a vision of life and a recognition of values rooted in their Catholic faith. The Catholic bishops’ summary, “The Challenge of Faithful Citizenship,” tells us that: “The Catholic approach to faithful citizenship begins with moral principles. The directions for our public witness are found in Scripture and Catholic social teaching.”

The same document goes on to list the key themes from Catholic social teaching:

1. Life and dignity of the human person

2. Call to family, community and participation

3. Rights and responsibilities

4. Option for the poor and vulnerable

5. Dignity of work and the rights of workers

6. Solidarity

7. Caring for God’s creation

The Vatican doctrinal note also points to a range of issues, all of which have moral content and involve a moral judgment by everyone involved in the political process.

The doctrinal note reminds us: “When political activity comes up against moral principles that do not admit of exception, compromise or derogation, the Catholic commitment becomes more evident and laden with responsibility … This is the case with laws concerning abortion and euthanasia (not to be confused with the decision to forgo extraordinary treatments, which is morally legitimate). Such laws must defend the basic right to life from conception to natural death. In the same way, it is necessary to recall the duty to respect and protect the rights of the human embryo. Analogously, the family needs to be safeguarded and promoted, based on monogamous marriage between a man and a woman, and protected in its unity and stability in the face of modern laws on divorce: in no way can other forms of cohabitation be placed on the same level as marriage, nor can they receive legal recognition as such.”

Face to face with moral principles

The instruction from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith continues its description of areas in political activity that come face to face with moral principles. “The same is true for the freedom of parents regarding the education of their children; it is an inalienable right recognized also by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. In the same way, one must consider society’s protection of minors and freedom from modern forms of slavery (drug abuse and prostitution, for example). In addition, there is the right to religious freedom and the development of an economy that is at the service of the human person and of the common good, with respect for social justice, the principles of human solidarity and subsidiarity, according to which ‘the rights of all individuals, families and organizations and their practical implementation must be acknowledged.’”

As the doctrinal note continues, it points out, in this range of political activities that come up against moral principles: “Finally, the question of peace must be mentioned. Certain pacifistic and ideological visions tend at times to secularize the value of peace, while, in other cases, there is the problem of summary ethical judgments which forget the complexity of the issues involved. Peace is always ‘the work of justice and the effect of charity.’ It demands the absolute and radical rejection of violence and terrorism and requires a constant and vigilant commitment on the part of all political leaders.”

In the Catholic tradition, responsible citizenship is a virtue. Participation in the political process is a moral obligation. Believers are called to become informed, active and responsible participants in the political process.

The U.S. bishops’ statement, “The Challenge of Faithful Citizenship,” says: “Catholics who seek political office have a particular responsibility to bring together their faith, moral convictions and public responsibilities. This is about more than one election. It requires on-going participation in the political process.”

Who has ultimate power?

Sometimes a single issue will be so important that it overrides a whole range of lesser issues. Human slavery is one such issue. It simply cannot be condoned no matter how much political support it might enjoy. The same could also be said for the classification, discrimination and even elimination of people for ethnic reasons. This is simply wrong and cannot be justified on the grounds of its political correctness and popularity.

Increasingly, it has become necessary to focus on the primary human values. Our Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, speaks of the on-going struggle between a culture of death and a civilization of love. This is a battle for the soul of humanity.

What is at issue in our nation today is the basic question, “Who has ultimate power over the life of another.” Is that life to be protected by the laws of our land in recognition that no one person has the right to take the life of an innocent person, or should we accept another vision of life and set another standard? This is the defining issue and this may very well be the defining moment for our nation. Leaving aside the rhetoric and the emotional and manipulative posturing, the question is “Who ultimately has the right to take another innocent life?”

It is for this reason that the church speaks out so strongly in support of all innocent human life, and at the same time challenges all involved in the political process — voters, supporters of individual candidates and the candidates themselves — not to support legislative activity and public policy that allows abortion.