Obama, the Candidate of Catholic Values?

After my recent lengthy break from blogging due the responsibilities of returning to my job as a teacher, I feel that there's just been too much noteworthy news to ignore.  So I'm back until something else takes me away from daily posting.  It may not be what you might expect or even want, but for the time being I have returned--and again I'll try to make it daily, though I'll probably be posting in the evenings.

So what caught my attention most recently is a New York Times article that claims Obama is the candidate of Catholic values.  I found some very interesting stuff here--stuff worth serious consideration.  As faithful citizens we, as Catholics, are obliged to take a good look at where the candidates stand. I am impressed with anyone who takes the time to grapple with the issues, rather than simply taking a side as somehow right without giving it the effort of serious consideration.

While several issue and questions are important to us--just to name a couple and to point out where we agree and differ--I believe that questions of social justice and environment are at the forefront.  I'm merely one voice among many; however, unlike many voices in the Catholic blogosphere, I do believe there is considerable evidence that climate change is man-made--but that's only one issue, and should we vote on one issue only?  Also I believe we must consider the issues of poverty, and seriously consider what we can do about it--as we should with economy, war, capital punishment, and abortion.  They all have to be considered--everything has to be put in the balance.

So here's the article--I hope you find it comment worthy here at DDW.org:

When Douglas W. Kmiec endorsed Senator Barack Obama for president last spring, it made waves, especially among Roman Catholics.

A constitutional scholar who headed the Office of Legal Counsel under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush, Mr. Kmiec was well known as an articulate opponent of abortion.

He explains his current stance in “Can a Catholic Support Him? Asking the Big Question about Barack Obama,” which will be published in two weeks by Overlook Press. But reached this week in Denver, Mr. Kmiec agreed to give necessarily brief replies to questions sent by e-mail.

Q. What is your position on the morality of abortion, and how is it related to your religious faith?

A. I fully accept the teaching of the church that participating in an abortion is an intrinsic evil. My acceptance of abortion as a grave, categorical wrong is one part respectful deference to authoritative Catholic teaching and one part reasoned deduction from our scientific knowledge of genetics and the beginning of an individual life.

Q. Would you like to see Roe v. Wade overturned?

A. Yes, but not on the terms usually suggested by Republicans. Roe is mistaken constitutional law not just because it invalidated state laws on the subject but because it is contrary to what is described as a self-evident truth in the Declaration of Independence, namely, that we have an unalienable right to life from our creator. It may surprise the general citizenry that not a single sitting justice utilizes the declaration as a source of interpretative guidance.

But even employing the jurisprudential methods applied by the modern court, there is no satisfactory showing that abortion as a matter of custom and tradition was properly found to be an implied aspect of the liberties protected by the 14th Amendment.

Q. Given those views, why do you support Barack Obama?

A. There is a widespread misconception that overturning Roe is the only way to be pro-life. In fact, overturning Roe simply returns the matter to the states, which in their individual legislative determinations could then be entirely pro-abortion. I doubt that many of our non-legally-trained pro-life friends fully grasp the limited effect of overturning Roe.

Secondly, pundits like to toss about the notion that the future of Roe depends on one vote, the mythical fifth vote to overturn the decision. There are serious problems with this assumption: first, Republicans have failed to achieve reversal in the five previous times they asked the court for it; and second, it is far from certain that only one additional vote is needed to reverse the decision in light of the principles of stare decisis by which a decided case ought not to be disturbed. Only Justices Thomas and Scalia have written and joined dissenting opinions suggesting the appropriateness of overturning Roe.

So given those views, the better question is how could a Catholic not support Barack Obama?

Senator Obama’s articulated concerns with the payment of a living wage, access to health care, stabilizing the market for shelter, special attention to the needs of the disadvantaged and the importance of community are all part of the church’s social justice mission.

Applying this to the issue of abortion, the senator has repeatedly indicated that he is not pro-abortion, that he understands the serious moral question it presents, and, most significantly, that he wants to move us beyond the 35 years of acrimony that have done next to nothing to reduce the unwanted pregnancies that give rise to abortions.

Q. But all the same, isn’t your support at odds with Catholic teaching?

A. Quite the contrary. Senator Obama is articulating policies that permit faithful Catholics to follow the church’s admonition that we continue to explore ways to give greater protection to human life.

Consider the choices: A Catholic can either continue on the failed and uncertain path of seeking to overturn Roe, which would result in the individual states doing their own thing, not necessarily, or in most states even likely, protective of the unborn. Or Senator Obama’s approach could be followed, whereby prenatal and income support, paid maternity leave and greater access to adoption would be relied upon to reduce the incidence of abortion.

It is, of course, not enough for a Catholic legislator to declare himself or herself pro-choice and just leave it at that, but neither Senator Obama, who is not Catholic except by sensibility, nor Joe Biden, who is a lifelong Catholic, leaves matters in that unreflective way.

In my view, Obama and Biden seek to fulfill the call by Pope John Paul II, in the encyclical “Evangelium Vitae,” to “ensure proper support for families and motherhood.” It cannot possibly contravene Catholic doctrine to improve the respect for life by paying better attention to the social and economic conditions of women which correlate strongly with the number of abortions.

Q. You have been fiercely attacked by some Catholic abortion opponents and in one instance barred from receiving communion. How do you feel about that?

A. To be the subject of an angry homily at Mass last April 18 and excoriated as giving scandal for endorsing Senator Obama and then to be denied communion for that “offense” was the most humiliating experience in my faith life.

To be separated in that public manner from the receipt of the eucharist, and to be effectively shunned or separated from the body of Christ in the sense of that particular congregation, has left, I very much regret to say, a permanent spiritual scar. Thankfully, it has also given me a new appreciation for the significance of the sacrament in my daily worship. And the priest, having been called to order by Cardinal Roger Mahony, sent me an apology, which of course I have accepted.

Nonetheless, I remain deeply troubled that other church leaders not fall into similar traps. That would do untold damage to the church within the context of American democracy.

There are clearly partisan forces that want nothing more than to manufacture or stir up faith-based opposition to their political opponents. The church has been careful to underscore that Catholics have unfettered latitude to vote for any candidate so long as the intent of the Catholic voter is not to express approval of a grave evil.

Source

Comments

[Carol]

Sounds like,

"Why, of COURSE you should eat of the fruit of this tree -- "

[Jason]

In my opinion Mr. Kmiec simplifies the issue way too much. If anyone thinks that just because you vote Republican that Roe is going to get overturned that just plain silly. Furthermore if you are Catholic the Bishops and our Holy Father have talked extensively about how one should form their conscious according to Church teaching. Neither one of the candidates conform completely to Church teaching so one has to go with who will do the least amount of damage. I think Mr. Obama's support for abortion and blatant disregards for life, as was demonstrated in his opposition to the IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act is a stark example. My view is if I can't trust the man to protect the most innocent of life in what is supposed to be the safest place on earth why would I trust him to "save the planet" or take care of the poor. I also think it’s extremely dishonest to present Mr. Biden as a “good” Catholic given his voting record on abortion, to quote Archbishop Chaput “If you’re Catholic and you disagree with your Church. What do you do? You change your mind.”

Does this mean I’m voting for McCain? Maybe…maybe not there are also some third-party candidates out there that deserve to be looked at if not else to send a message to the two big parties that something needs to change.

[Pia]

I'm so glad you posted this DD. It has set my heart to rest. Thank you.

[Carol]

Obama would sanction the eradication of any imperfect human being at birth and/or shortly after. He has voted so. That should speak volumes to all of us. It's not as if he has wavered on his voting: He is 100% pro-abortion at any stage of the game (partial-birth abortion aka brain stabbing/collapsing) --and even after--when these poor infants survive an abortion, they are settled aware somewhere either alone or in a nurse's arms to gasp their only breaths, to struggle as a littlest Christ. Sickening that any Catholic anywhere would consider this maniac as a worthy leader.

As I say elsewhere, God knows we've earned an Obama, but let's hope we haven't bought him. I am none too much happier about McCain, but Ron Paul can't win it now, nor can Alan Keyes, and no, I'm not Republican, neither by nature nor by political party. But there are Supreme Court appointments coming up, and I'd just as soon it not be more baby-murderer-friendly. It is not a political battle we are speaking of; it is spiritual.

[Carol]

Trust me. I'm going to be nauseated as I exit the polls this time, too.. we voted an allegedly pro-life candidate the past two times (tho' why, I don't know -- his fruits have been minimal at best, and then he sent us to hell in a humvee) but I will do my level best to keep what I know to be the MOST deadly duo out of America's top office. Almost 50 million dead at home and Catholics don't care? I wouldn't need for the Pope to tell me to deny Communion to anyone whom I know supports the evil of abortion.

[Jason]

Here is a nice retort to Mr. Kmiec's support for Mr. Obama.

http://thecatholicthing.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=462&Itemid=2

[Lynne]

The fact that Cardinal Mahoney made the priest apologize to Mr. Kmiec is enough for me!

The man is misguided and is deliberately leading others astray. There is ABSOLUTELY NO CATHOLIC DOCTRINAL JUSTIFICATION FOR HIS ENDORSEMENT, PERIOD!

[James]

So, Deacon...what do you think about your choice now ?

[DDW]

I don't believe that I have ever indicated my choice of political candidate anywhere on my blog.

Please note that the title of the post is posed as a question. I still believe that the issues I mentioned in preface to the article on Douglas W. Kmiec are important and must be considered at all times.

Truthfully, I am somewhat leery of comments on posts from years in the past--it's typically a sign of trolling. However, I'll take your inquiry as being valid. I don't mind revealing my political leanings, but I will not endorse a candidate in public (as a representative of the Church there's an ethical principal that must follow in this regard). However, if asked in person--face-to-face--who I support, I will always be happy to answer.

[James]

Deacon, I remembered reading your blog in the past and returned to check it out again. While I was here I decided to see what, if anything, you had said about the election. Is that trolling ?

I found your comments interesting, and applaud your refusal to publicly endorse a candidate. However, and forgive me if I am wrong, I am able to induct a pronounced lean toward the party in question. I have a pronounced lean in the other direction. I have followed the whole Kmiec/ Obama courting of Catholic voters thing from the very beginning, and am of the firm conviction that Mr. Kmiec has been the point man in an all out effort to encourage American Catholics to ignore the Magisterium of the Church and Rome's directives on Natural Law, and vote for Democrats because of "social justice" issues-- issues which that party has never been able to address with any successful plan. I am of the opinion-- and it is only my opinion-- that a Catholic with a well-formed conscience would find it impossible to vote for a Democrat 99% of the time. That, of course, would not require a vote for a Republican, but that's another story.

To conclude with a restatement of a purely rhetorical question : if you did indeed buy into the Kmiec argument, how has that turned out for you ?

[DDW]

James, I appreciate your readership and the fact that you find the blog interesting. Frankly I don't have much time for it recently, but I keep it online in hopes that I might return to regular posting sometime in the not too distant future.

I don't know that I can agree with you that a Catholic with a well-formed conscience would find it impossible to vote for a Democrat 99% of the time. However, I do believe that a Catholic has a duty to vote according to the dictates of his or her conscience, whether that be voting for a Democratic candidate, a Republican candidate, or some other party's candidate. One's conscience might also lead one not to vote, although an obligation still exists to be involved in some way that promotes faithful citizenship and a just society.

Please understand that I did not buy into Kmiec's or anyone else's argument. Rather I have held my political positions for many long years, and in that time they have evolved according to my understanding of the teachings of the Church and the life in Christ.

To answer your question, in a purely rhetorical context, I would indeed be quite sorry, and it would have turned out quite badly, if I had not chosen to vote according to the dictates of my conscience.