Christ’s parable of the unfit wedding guests was His critique of the religious and political leaders of His time.  The Chosen People of Christ’s time were the invited guests, who, for whatever reason, ignored the call to come to the Feast.

 

The parable goes on to describe how the King decides to invite anyone to come, since the original invitees were not worthy.  Here Jesus refers to Christians, those who were not originally part of the Chosen People, but who now are granted access to God and His Feast.  As the priest says at every Mass, “happy are those who are called to His Supper.”

 

But if we excuse ourselves from following through on the responsibilities of the Kingdom, if we Catholics ignore God’s will we run the risk of being declared unfit.  We can find ourselves on the outside of the wedding feast only too late realizing we have been excluded.

 

Last week we put in the bulletin a summary of the US Bishops’ Statement called Faithful Citizenship.  This weekend, all of us priests are speaking on the subject of putting our faith into practice, allowing our faith to inform our vote, and what moral imperatives have to be a part of our decisions on who and what to vote for.  With so many essential issues at stake, as there is in almost every election, we Catholics have to have consciences that are properly formed and informed in matters of faith.  And that is all we mean to preach.

 

“For generations it has been the determination of the Catholic [Church] not to endorse political candidates or parties.  This approach was initiated by Archbishop John Carroll—the very first Catholic Bishop serving in the United States.  It was long before there was an Internal Revenue Service Code, and had nothing to do with a desire to preserve tax-exempt status.  Rather the Church in the United States realized early on that it must not tether the credibility of the Church to the uncertain future actions or statements of a particular politician or party.”[1]  We Catholics should not feel at home in any political party, but we often identify ourselves so closely with one that many can’t or won’t hear their Church speaking above it.  “We should be guided more by our moral convictions than by our attachment to a political party or interest group.”[2]  “It is important for all citizens ‘to see beyond party politics, to analyze campaign rhetoric critically, and to choose their political leaders according to principle, not party affiliation or mere self-interest.”[3]

 

I realize this is difficult to do.  Having preached on this issue every two years in the American election cycle, I know full well that this is a sensitive topic.  That’s why I read this homily: I am careful to quote Church teachings and not say anything that would talk me into a corner.  But what I require from you, my parishioners, is that you listen with ears of faith, and not interpret what I’m saying through a political filter.  What the Catholic Church teaches is neither liberal nor conservative, neither left nor right, neither Democrat nor Republican: what we teach is Catholic, which means our morality won’t fit into any party but “reflects fundamental ethical principles that are common to all people.”[4]

 

Part of this sensitivity comes from a mistaken notion of the “wall of separation between Church and state,” which is not enshrined in any of our nation’s founding documents.  Jefferson coined this phrase in a letter to a Baptist congregation to comfort them that the laws of the new nation would not establish a state religion, and would not interfere with the doctrines or practices of any religion.[5]  “American Catholics have always supported the principle of keeping religious and civil authorities distinct…  Separating Church and state does not mean separating faith and political issues.  Real pluralism requires a healthy conflict of ideas.  In fact, the best way to kill a democracy is for people to remove their religious and moral convictions from their political decision-making.”[6]

 

The Catholic Church holds to itself the right to teach in matters of faith and morals, and not just to Catholics but to the world.  The Magisterium is a key voice in the formation of your conscience.  When people say, “Let your conscience be your guide,” what does this mean?  “Conscience is not something that allows us to justify doing whatever we want, nor is it a mere ‘feeling’ about what we should or should not do.”[7]  “Conscience does not miraculously appear out of nothing; it’s not a matter of personal opinion or private preference.  Conscience is always grounded in truth bigger than ourselves.  People who claim to be Catholic need to be honest with themselves and with the [Church].  They need to really act Catholic in private and in public, and that includes the way they make their political choices.  And it’s very much the job of a pastor to teach Catholics their faith and encourage them to apply it.”[8]

 

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that a poor conscience can be caused by “ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and charity.”[9]  The Catechism says of right conscience that it is “a judgment of reason by which the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act.”[10]  We don’t decide what’s right or wrong for ourselves, we learn what God has already revealed is right or wrong through His revelation in the Scriptures and the teachings of the Church and apply ourselves to it.

 

There are moral absolutes that underpin the Church’s law.  “In our contemporary world, many doubt all claims of truth.  Yet, in the absence of shared truth and values, the views of prominent opinion leaders dominate our society, often at the expense of the vulnerable.  If no one has the truth, politics becomes a matter of who has the most power.  Power politics devoid of truth—what Pope Benedict calls “the dictatorship of relativism”—cannot unify a nation or protect the common good.  History offers us many examples of its failures,”[11] Nazism, Socialistic Communism, and Islamist radical extremism, for example.

 

“Our Catholic faith proclaims the existence of a profound body of moral teaching, a subset of which is called ‘Catholic Social Teaching.’  At its foundation is the insistence that every human life has an inviolable dignity and must be protected against unjust aggression from conception, through every age and stage of life, up to an including natural death.  This is not a single ‘issue’ but a framework through which all moral considerations…must be viewed…  Catholic Moral teaching is also rooted in the Natural Law which is knowable by all men and women because it is written on the human heart…  Its existence is an objective reality and does not require one to have any religious belief.”[12]

 

The bulletin article summary of Faithful Citizenship lists a bunch of important moral issues for Catholics: the death penalty, poverty, racism, the economy, religious freedom, hunger, homelessness, education, employment, health care, living wage, immigration, private property, unions, peace, slavery, and environmentalism.  These and many others have important moral dimensions.  But “Catholics may and do disagree about the most effective public policies for responding to them.  How these issues are best addressed and what particular candidates are best equipped to address them requires prudential judgments.”[13]  Reasonable people may disagree and debate the best ways to deal with these needs: the Church leaves that up to society to respond to: “While people of good will may sometimes choose different ways to apply and act on some of our principles, Catholics cannot ignore their inescapable moral challenges or simply dismiss the Church’s guidance…that flow from these principles.”[14] 

 

The Church’s moral teachings show us that there is no upper limit to the good that we can do for people: there is always more we can do for the “dignity of every human being, the pursuit of the common good, and the protection of the weak and vulnerable,”[15] and how to accomplish these things is a matter of opinion.  But there is a lower limit below which we cannot descend: the natural law, the Ten Commandments, the “thou shalt not’s” tell us there is a boundary to evil actions we cannot cross.[16]  And there can be no difference in opinion on these.

 

“There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor.  Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons.  These are called ‘intrinsically evil’ actions.  They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned.”[17]  “It is a serious sin to deliberately endorse or promote [evil] actions, and no candidate who really wants to advance the common good will support any action contrary to the [moral law].”[18]

 

Which actions are intrinsically evil?  Abortion, Euthanasia, Embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and homosexual “marriage,” just to name a few.  The Church has taught definitively on these matters and they are not open for interpretation or nuance.  The Church has spoken, and as Catholics we are obligated to listen to this teaching and allow our consciences to be informed by it.  As Jesus said to the Apostles, “Whoever hears you, hears me.”[19]  Embryonic stem cell research and cloning are really specific points about abortion, for these procedures require the deliberate killing of a human being, since life begins at conception, and no amount of rationalization about the medical good that can come from fetal experimentation or manipulation can counteract the evil of destroying human life.

 

Regarding homosexual marriage, the Catholic Church in California is particularly concerned that our vote on this issue has already been ignored by the State Supreme Court, and so we have joined with other citizens to promote a State Constitutional amendment that will simply define marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman.  On the November ballot it is called Proposition 8, and I urge you to read about it and vote in favor of it.  There will be handouts and bulletin information over the next couple of weeks for your information.

 

Now, regarding abortion and euthanasia: they are the “‘pre-eminent threats to human dignity because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental human good and the condition for all other [goods].’[20]  It is a mistake with grave moral consequences to treat the destruction of human life merely as a matter of choice.  A legal system that violates the basic right to life on the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.”[21]  There is a “grave and clear obligation to oppose [abortion and euthanasia] by conscientious objection…  It is never licit to obey [such laws], or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of it, or vote for it…  We have a grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law…  This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it.”[22]  “Those who knowingly, willingly, and directly support public policies or legislation that undermine fundamental moral principles cooperate with evil.”[23]

 

We may not be able to restore justice completely, and may have to make partial or gradual steps to limit the harm of evil laws.  The California ballot will also ask you to vote on Proposition 4, which is similar to a proposition we have had before, which would require the notification of parents or another adult before a minor can have an abortion.  Why a 12-year-old has to have parental permission for ear piercings, tattoos, or even just to get an aspirin from the school nurse, but can independently make a choice to kill life in the womb is beyond comprehension.  Please study this proposition, and vote yes.

 

“Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia.  For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the [Church] on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, one would not for that reason be [out of communion with the Church].  While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment.  There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.”[24]  There is a hierarchy of values that causes us to look at the issues of abortion and euthanasia as the first and most important issues of candidates and parties and laws.  Pope John Paul II wrote, “Above all the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights—for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture—is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination.”[25]  In other words, if you don’t have the right to be born, you don’t have the right to peace, to immigrate, to health care, to private property, to organize a union, et cetera.  “The right to life is the right through which all others flow.  To the extent candidates reject the fundamental right by supporting an objective evil, such as legalized abortion, euthanasia or embryonic stem cell research, Catholics should consider them less acceptable for public office.” [26]

 

On the other hand, “adopting a consistent ethic of life, the Catholic Church promotes a broad spectrum of issues,” as I listed earlier.  “Opposition to abortion and euthanasia does not excuse indifference to those who suffer from poverty, violence and injustice.  Any politics of human life must work to resist the violence of war and the scandal of capital punishment.  Any politics of human dignity must seriously address racism, housing…and health care…  But being ‘right’ in such matters can never excuse a wrong choice regarding direct attacks on innocent human life.  Indeed, the failure to protect and defend life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims to the ‘rightness’ of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community.”[27]

 

So we have two seemingly competing values: a plethora of social justice issues that all need our attention, and the pre-eminent threat to human life and dignity of abortion and euthanasia.  We can err in two ways here: “The first [way] is a moral equivalence that makes no distinction between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity.  The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many.  It must always be opposed.  The second [way] is the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity.  …Unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture,… the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act.  These are not optional concerns which can be dismissed…”[28]  “The Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made a similar point: ‘The Christian faith is an integral unity, and thus it is incoherent to isolate some particular element to the detriment of the whole Catholic doctrine.  A political commitment to a single isolated aspect of the Church’s social doctrine does not exhaust one’s responsibility towards the common good.’”[29]  “As Catholics we are not single-issue voters.  A candidate’s position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter’s vote.  Yet a candidate’s position on a single issue that involves intrinsic evil…may legitimately lead a voter to disqualify a candidate from receiving support.”[30]

 

On the one hand, there are many issues of social justice that demand our attention; on the other hand, abortion and euthanasia require our specific response.  On the one hand, Catholics may disagree on how to promote most social justice issues; on the other hand, Catholics must unite around the eradication of abortion and euthanasia as specifically evil acts.  On the one hand, there is no upper limit to the good we can do for others; on the other hand, there is a lower limit of bad acts we cannot cross.  On the one hand, we are not single-issue voters; on the other hand, in matters of grave evil a single issue of grave evil may disqualify a candidate.  On the one hand, “the consistent ethic of life [does not] treat all issues as morally equivalent”; on the other hand, this ethic does not “reduce Catholic teaching to one or two issues.”[31]  Do you see what the US Bishops are doing here?  They are outlining the boundaries for our faithful citizenship.

 

Here are some specific points within these boundaries.  “A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil…if the voter’s intent is to support that position.  In such a case a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil.”[32]  “A Catholic would be guilty of [mortal sin], and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia.”[33]  If you think abortion or euthanasia is okay, you need to ask yourself whether you really are a Catholic: having a different opinion than the Church’s teaching on human life is like calling yourself Catholic but not believing in the Trinity or the Divinity of Jesus, or the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.  If you would vote for a candidate or a proposition precisely because it’s contrary to the teachings of the Church, it’s time for a reality check.

 

“There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons.  Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil.”[34]  “Could a Catholic in good conscience vote for a candidate who supports legalized abortion..?  Could a voter’s preference for the candidate’s positions on the pursuit of peace, economic policies benefiting the poor, support for universal health care, a more just immigration policy, etc. overcome a candidate’s support for legalized abortion?  In such a case, the Catholic voter must ask and answer the question: What could possibly be a proportionate reason for the [nearly 49 million] children killed by abortion in the past 35 years?”[35]  Archbishop Chaput of Denver recently answered this question with these haunting words: “Catholics who support ‘pro-choice’ candidates…need a compelling proportionate reason to justify it.  What is a ‘proportionate’ reason when it comes to the abortion issue?  It’s the kind of reason we will be able to explain, with a clean heart, to the victims of abortion when we meet them face to face in the next life—which we most certainly will.  If we’re confident that these victims will accept our motives as something more than an alibi, then we can proceed.”[36]

 

In today’s first reading, Isaiah describes the overwhelming sense of evil as like a “web that is woven over all the nations,”[37] it holds us down, restricts our freedom, and negatively affects our life.  Ripping through this web is not something we sit back and wait for God to do.  By our actions, motivated by consciences that have been properly formed in the faith, God has given us the responsibility of pulling apart the veil of death that our culture has woven over itself.

 

“All Catholics…need to remember that we’re citizens of heaven first.  That’s our home.  We serve our nation in this world best by living our Catholic faith fully and authentically, and bringing our Catholic witness for human dignity vigorously into our nation’s political life.  We need to stop being embarrassed to speak and work for the truth.  We can be disciples, or we can be cowards.  In today’s world, there no room for anything else.”[38]