Church and politics do mix  Conscientious voter has obligations By Bishop Fred Henry Calgary Sun  November 26,2000 In Parker and Hart's comic strip, the Wizard of Id, the King is confronted with the message: "He is risen." A dialogue ensues between the monk and the King. Unable to understand the meaning of death and resurrection, the King, feeling tricked, lets out an anguished cry, "AAUGH! ... my sins are all back on me." The monk says: "No they're not, sire" and urges the King to try to understand. But the King will have none of it and he proclaims, "I don't want to try, I'm the King." The monk is left with his own thoughts as the King walks away, "There goes the poster boy for a separation of church and state." The old chestnut of the separation of the church and state is partially valid and partially invalid. I would agree the church should stay out of politics if that means that the church should not offer official support to political parties or specific candidates. Giving official support to a party or candidate means putting the church's credibility and authority behind everything that the party or the candidate is going to do, and that's manifestly unwise. Second, the Christian moral and social agenda is so highly articulated and so complex that no one political party can promise to respond to it all. No partisan basket can carry all our eggs. I disagree the church should stay out of politics if that means the church should not teach about the moral dimensions of social and political life. Social and political life are human activities, and every human activity has moral dimension and the church is supposed to be a teacher of morality. To exclude the church from democratic political dialogue is either to say politics has nothing to do with human dignity or the common good, or it is to say the church ought not to concern itself with human dignity or the common good, both of which are absurd. There are at least three things the conscientious voter has to be concerned about. First, to be informed about the issues. It's not enough to know who's Liberal and who's Canadian Alliance, etc. That has importance, but more important are the demands of the common good. What are the areas that need attention if our society is to promote the worth and dignity of every human? It's not difficult to compile a list of issues that are of significant concern. Foremost are the human life issues: Abortion, euthanasia, the federal role in health care, for-profit health care, home care and pharmacare, palliative care, reproductive and genetic research, housing and immigration. There is also discrimination and racism, the need for quality educational opportunities for all citizens, social assistance, doing something about the root causes of homelessness, poverty and violence in our country and support for family life. Beyond the national level, there are questions about the world's economy, food and agriculture, refugees, human rights violations and our country's relationship with those who perpetuate them. Finally, at a level that is practically cosmic, are matters connected with the environment and weapons of war and destruction. These are just some of the issues that face our country, and therefore our elected representatives, and therefore us. If this is the case, one might be tempted to say that nobody should vote unless they have PhDs in moral philosophy, economics and political science. I don't think that's necessarily so. We don't need to have answers for every detail of every problem. Our task is to be aware of what the problems are and to see our representatives hold the right principles to deal with them, principles like the dignity of the human person, like responsibility for the common good, like concern for the poor and the powerless. This brings us to the second thing a conscientious voter has to do. Take a stand on the candidates and the issues. We have to determine what is the right general direction for our society to take and who is going to take us in that direction. We must reach some conclusions before we get into the voting booth. What we do there is too important to be left to a whim. In this context, I offer two warnings. First, beware of oversimplification. One kind of oversimplification is to think there is some easy, universal solution to all problems. "All this country needs is a major tax cut." Another oversimplification is to tell ourselves all the issues are deeply complicated, so nothing can be done and it doesn't make a difference whom we elect. If that's our attitude, we are abdicating our responsibility. My second warning is to avoid demonization. It's always tempting to believe a candidate is really as bad as he or she is portrayed by the opponent. The candidate is simply a crook and belongs in jail. If that's really the case, then we don't have to think any more. We just vote for the other guy. Most of the time things are not that simple. Dirty politics not only vitiates the political process, they offer a kind of mindless and false security to voters. The third thing the conscientious voter has to do is get to the polls and cast a ballot. I am always horrified when I read about the percentages of citizens who do not vote. Don't they care? Don't they think it makes a difference? Or is it just too much trouble? The catechism of the Catholic Church (No. 2240) says that our responsibility for the common good makes it "morally obligatory" to exercise our right to vote, just as it is morally obligatory to pay taxes and to defend our country. Is it a sin not to vote? It is, if sin means not living up to what is "morally obligatory." --------------------------------------------------------------------------------