Papal Politics

I read a wonderful Op-Ed the other day that really gave a voice to what I think are now my basic political opinions. The article itself was how American conservatives and liberals always fight over which side the last papal encyclical helps politically. He summarizes the absurdity that ensues as follows:

"These arguments never seem to go anywhere. When a pope criticizes legalized abortion, liberal Catholics nod and say that yes, they agree, it’s a terrible tragedy ... but of course they can’t impose their religious values on a secular society. When a pope endorses the redistribution of wealth, conservative Catholics stroke their chins and say that yes, they agree, society needs a safety net ... but of course they’re duty-bound to oppose the tyranny of big government. And when the debate isn’t going their way, left and right both fall back on flaccid rhetoric about how the papal message “transcends politics,” and shouldn’t be turned to any partisan purpose."

What I like about the Vatican is that they still believe the Church has something to say about all of life. American liberal Christians have tended to say that the Church should keep out of our personal lives, while conservative Christians say it should keep out of our economics.

I think this is because in the American political spectrum, all political ideas take shape around some conception of universal freedom--all of us Americans are remarkably similar in that way. The left and the right just happen to formulate opposite views of what freedom is.

In my opinion, these opposing views of freedom are equally incoherent. On the left, you have these very rigorous demands placed on society regarding our treatment of the environment; but when it comes to bioethical issues, freedom of choice is held sacred.

On the right, I suppose it's just the opposite. On bioethical issues, conservatives decry the moral relativism of liberals; yet when it comes to the environment (among other issues), they say just leave it to the free market.

I like the pope's philosophy, because it seems to have an expansive view of the sacred--human life is sacred, the world is sacred, and therefore we need to work to create a social order that respects both human life and the world that we use for our benefit.

I think this translates to a sound, coherent philosophy of politics, one which may contradict the Republicans or the Democrats, depending on which bullet point you've hit in the somewhat arbitrary list of positions in each party platform.

Not that I'm all that familiar with the particulars of the Caritas in Veritate (it's very long), but I just know that philosophically, I'd rather take the pope's route than that of Republicans or Democrats.

Everyone in this country is suspicious of the Church giving political opinions--"separation of Church and state" and all that--but the truth is, if the Church seeks diligently to give serious thought to a range of important issues and express opinions intelligently, people will listen.

There are two opposite but equally fatal approaches that the Church has taken to politics. One is not to say anything, because somehow God is too high for politics. The other is to express opinions dogmatically, as if the issues need no further analysis.

We can do better as Christians to make our political opinions conform more to a Christ-centered view of the world, and to express our opinions sensitively and intelligently. We may or may not start by listening to the pope; I just think his views show that our current political spectrum is not the only way to think about politics.

Disclaimer: No, I'm not Catholic, I just happen to line up with the Vatican on certain political opinions.

Obama and Pro-lifers -- oops?

It's hard to talk about the issue of abortion. In my experience, most of the people who call themselves pro-"choice" on abortion say they would rather not have abortions going on. I think that's because we wouldn't have to worry that we've done something horribly wrong in our country. Even if, as Obama once suggested with his now infamous quote, it really is just too hard to tell whether life really does begin at conception, we could probably all breathe a little easier if there weren't any abortions, simply because then there would be zero possibility that we are allowing millions of innocent lives to be destroyed each year legally.

Maybe that's why this year's presidential campaign just didn't bring up the issue that much. But abortion was an issue for many people, including many Catholics (of whom I am not one). Obama tried to make pro-lifers of a more liberal persuasion feel more at ease about his 100% pro-choice voting record, emphasizing his desire to change the circumstances that lead to abortions. And this reassurance worked; for instance, Obama won the Catholic vote by nine points, whereas in 2004 Catholics voted for Bush over Kerry by five points.

And now some of these Catholics are starting to wonder what they've done. I found an interesting article by Melinda Henneberger, a Catholic Obama supporter who now realizes what a nightmare it could be if Obama is actually able to follow through on his promise to sign the so-called "Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA)." This act is misnamed, precisely because it can take away freedom--particularly the freedom of Catholic hospitals to refuse to do abortions.

You see, many Catholic hospitals receive public funding to serve communities that might not otherwise receive adequate healthcare. Yet under the FOCA, Catholic hospitals would lose federal funding unless they agreed to do abortions. And if they lost federal funding, they would simply close down. The Catholic Church is quite committed to social justice, and is willing to work with Obama on many issues, but they will not yield on the issue of respecting human lfe.

That article I just linked says that a third of hospitals in this country are Catholic hospitals. What if they started shutting down because of the FOCA? Shouldn't Catholic hospitals have the right to stick with their conscience on this issue? Can you imagine if the government told you that you could no longer receive funding to give health care to poor people unless you started killing innocent children? That's what it sounds like to Catholic bishops who are being pressured by pro-"choice" politicians to compromise on abortion.

Can Obama really be supporting this? I know it sounds awful, but it's actually been out there for people to see for quite some time now. Just don't count on mainstream media to love talking about it. This is precisely the danger of leaving abortion out of your reasons for voting for someone. You see, while abortion didn't tend to come up in all those debates, behind the scenes some of Obama's biggest supporters were special interest groups like Planned Parenthood, who have a strict agenda to push. A victory for Obama means that those special interest groups are now in the White House. All the campaign rhetoric is now over, and now it's time for these groups to reap the benefits of their support. So even though you voted for Obama because of other issues, you have to live with what the special interests can do through your new President.

Believe me, I know there are other issues. But pro-lifers really ought to understand why we're in this battle in the first place. It isn't because abortion is bad for you, like smoking is bad for you. It's because abortion kills innocent human life. Do those words make sense? Have they become nothing more than an irritating sound in your ear? Abortion kills innocent human life. I really wish that weren't true. I really wish America didn't allow this kind of thing. But it's true, and if it weren't true, then I promise you, the pro-life movement would have fizzled out about 35 years ago. There's simply no other reason to be so passionate about this issue. Surely it's also a good enough reason not to vote for people who don't oppose it.

I would so like to believe that we can find common ground on this issue, but the truth is, the Democratic Party has never ceased to disappoint me. Maybe this time will be different, but I'm not holding my breath. It's poignant to read what Henneberger is now thinking about this whole situation:

At the very moment when Obama and his party have won the trust of so many Catholics who favor at least some limits on abortion, I hope he does not prove them wrong. I hope he does not make a fool out of that nice Doug Kmiec, who led the pro-life charge on his behalf. I hope he does not spit on the rest of us—though I don't take him for the spitting sort—on his way in the door. I hope that his appointment of Ellen Moran, formerly of EMILY's List, as his communications director is followed by the appointment of some equally good Democrats who hold pro-life views. By supporting and signing the current version of FOCA, Obama would reignite the culture war he so deftly sidestepped throughout this campaign. This is a fight he just doesn't need at a moment when there is no shortage of other crises to manage.

No, it's not a fight that Obama needs, nor is it a fight that any of us need, or want. I do hope that Obama is not able to keep his promises.

If you voted for Obama, and you are pro-life, or maybe you're pro-choice but generally feel abortion is bad, then tell him what you think about abortion. Don't let him think that his election means he can push whatever agenda he feels like on this issue.

If you're a pro-lifer and you're concerned as I am about the Freedom of Choice Act, sign the petition now to stop it.