Polls show Kerry, the all-but-certain Democratic candidate, running neck-and-neck among Catholics with President George W. Bush. Polls are unreliable indicators of the outcome this early in the race, but at least there has been no Catholic surge to the Catholic senator from Massachusetts so far.
Instead, Kerry's candidacy has generated heated debate among Catholics. People like me, who write about politics and religion, can attest to that. Make the incontestable observation that Kerry's positions on issues like abortion and same-sex unions conflict with the views of his Church, and you can count on getting furious letters from Kerry supporters eager to call you a narrow-minded bigot.
Typically, these people angrily point out that that, as one of them remarked, “issues such as care for the poor, homeless, and hungry” are what really matter from a Christian perspective.
Of course these things matter. They matter a lot. So do other issues. Still, in many years of observing and writing about politicians, I have yet to encounter one who said he or she was indifferent to the poor, homeless, and hungry.
Except in the minds of people who imagine it's helpful to call Bush a tool of special interests or Kerry a tax-and-spend advocate of big government, the real issues debate isn't about whether to meet the needs of the dispossessed but how — and that's a question on which serious people can and do disagree.
The situation is radically different where the so-called social issues are involved. Here, like it or not, Kerry pretty consistently clashes with the Catholic Church and Bush generally agrees.
When Kerry's Catholic admirers try to deal with this uncomfortable fact, they usually turn to some version of “seamless garment” thinking. The implication is that all issues have pretty much the same moral weight.
In reality, however, some issues bear directly upon fundamental moral principles while others concern contingent, debatable questions of fact and tactics. Seamless garment thinking, by contrast, tends to reduce everything to seamless mush.
Unfortunately, the Catholic bishops' national organization has contributed to this particular confusion over the years by making quadrennial statements on political issues that reflect this unhelpful approach. The current version, released last fall by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, covered topics from abortion to teacher salaries without attempting to set priorities.
This is in contrast with a document published last year by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reminding Catholic politicians and Catholic voters of their serious obligation to oppose “any law that attacks human life.” Among the issues, the statement mentioned abortion, euthanasia, the right to life of the embryo, the family, parental rights in education, and peace.
Now the bishops find themselves having to cope simultaneously with the dilemmas posed for them and the Church by the Kerry candidacy and with the sharply opposed views of divided Catholics.
Cardinal Francis Arinze, the head of the Vatican's congregation for the sacraments and worship, raised the stakes for his American brothers with his press conference comment that pro-choice Catholic politicians like Kerry should not be given or receive communion, a position few of the Americans have seemed ready to embrace up to this time. One thing for sure: we're in for six contentious months between now and November.
Russell Shaw is a freelance writer from Washington, D.C. You can email him at RShaw10290@aol.com.
To purchase Shaw's most popular books attractively priced in the Catholic Exchange store, click here.
