Rocco called it, aptly, a “repudiation,” and now others are weighing in with their thoughts about how Catholics voted yesterday.

Here’s Thomas Reese, SJ, from the Washington Post:

Catholic voters ignored the instructions of a group of vocal bishops and delivered 54% of their vote for Barack Obama as president of the United States. These bishops, led by Archbishops Charles Chaput and Raymond Burke, argued that abortion was the most important issue in the election and that no other issues outweighed it. As a result, they argued, Catholics could not vote for a pro-choice candidate.

Although these bishops were a minority of the U.S. bishops, they received much attention in the media because other bishops kept silent or simply referred people to their 2007 document, Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship. The silence of the majority gave the impression that the vocal bishops were speaking for all the bishops.

Some media outlets estimated the number of vocal anti-Obama bishops at 50 or more. I do not trust these numbers. Some of the bishops included in the tally only spoke out against Nancy Pelosi when she gave an interpretation of Catholic teaching, with which they disagreed. Others simply repeated what Faithful Citizenship said, that abortion “is not just one issue among many.” The document also said, “As Catholics we are not single-issue voters.”

Most Catholics ignored the bishops who told them not to vote for a pro-choice candidate. Hispanic Catholics, who are touted as the future of the church in the United States, voted overwhelmingly for Obama and white Catholics split their vote between the two candidates. The laity repudiated Archbishop Burke’s description of the Democratic Party as the party of death. They clearly agree with what the bishops said in Faithful Citizenship: “Church’s leaders are to avoid endorsing or opposing candidates or telling people how to vote.”

The Chicago Sun-Times, meantime, in Obama’s hometown, offered these thoughts, from Fr. Andrew Greeley:

It would appear from the pre-election polls that more than half of American Catholics voted for Barack Obama. How could they do that when their bishops ordered them to vote for John McCain? In fact, no such order was issued, though some bishops came pretty close to it. Most bishops were content with a somewhat obscure statement about the evil of abortion which also urged Catholics to consider all the items on the Catholic pro-life agenda.

Some years ago, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger issued a statement on the subject to which he added a footnote about cooperation in evil. Sometimes such cooperation can be “formal and direct,” as when one votes for a pro-choice candidate because one deliberately agrees with and supports that position. Other times, however, the voter does not approve of the candidate’s position on abortion but votes for him because of other “proportionate” reasons. Then the cooperation is “material and indirect.”

What might such a reason be?

It might have been that while the candidate did not reject abortion, he supported most of the other Catholic positions on life, i.e. he condemned unjust wars, the death penalty, torture, kidnapping, cruelty to immigrants that his opponents implicitly support.

Some bishops and priests argue that abortion is such a horrible evil that there can be no proportionate reason. That might be their opinion, but it goes beyond Catholic ethical demands. Another — and similar — stand might be that the Catholic voter would have to abstain from all politics since there are very few political leaders who support the whole list of Catholic life issues. Opposition to abortion does not by itself exhaust the moral obligations of the Catholic social ethic.

Looking for more? Check out Rocco’s joint for the latest.

UPDATE: Michael Sean Winters over at America’s blog has more trenchant analysis of just what happened last night.

More from Beliefnet and our partners
Close Ad