El Ignaciano / September 2024

 The Good Samaritan, the Adulterous Woman and Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship

Elena Muller García

I write this a little less than three months before the 2024 Presidential Election in the United States.  In Florida, the November ballot will also include Amendment 4, which seeks to codify abortion rights all through pregnancy in the state constitution.  It is important to clarify certain points regarding teachings of the Catholic Church as we approach the general election. I will first address the General Election. Then I will treat Amendment 4.

PART 1: THE GENERAL ELECTION

I remember the nasty comments that I heard from some Catholics in the days prior to the 2016 and the 2020 elections, such as, a parishioner telling another that she could not remain in the church if she voted for a member of a certain party, and some circulated a video by a priest from another part of the country saying that it was a mortal sin to vote for a certain candidate. I remember someone telling me to hold my nose and vote for a specific candidate even if I did not find him suitable for office. On a Facebook page today I found similar comments. It seems that 2024 has become a replay of 2016 and 2020. If we all pause and reflect, we might avoid that.

I will use the 2015 version of the document on Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: The US Bishops’ Reflection on Catholic Teaching and Political Life as a reference point as well as the New Introduction to the document that the bishops published in November of 2023 and the four new additional short statements intended to be inserts for parish bulletins.  As those familiar with the document from years past know, the bishops did not change the 2015 edition. They said that they will rewrite it for the 2028 election.[i]

Enter the Good Samaritan

The 2023 Introductory Note begins with a direct reference to the Good Samaritan, taken from Pope Francis’ encyclical “Fratelli Tutti”:

“Let us look to the example of the Good Samaritan. Jesus’ parable summons us to rediscover our vocation as citizens of our respective nations and of the entire world, builders of a new social bond. This summons is ever new, yet it is grounded in a fundamental law of our being: we are called to direct society to the pursuit of the common good and, with this purpose in mind, to persevere in consolidating its political and social order, its fabric of relations, its human goals.” (N. 66)

1

After introducing Pope Francis’ image of the Good Samaritan, the Bishops then proceed to praise the goodness of participating in our nation’s political life: “Our freedoms respect the dignity of individuals and their consciences and allow us to come together for the common good.” They follow this by pointing out the other not so praiseworthy side of election time:  “Increasingly, it seems, election seasons are a time of anxiety and spiritual trial. Political rhetoric is increasingly angry, seeking to motivate primarily through division and hatred.”

I have experienced the anxiety and spiritual tribulation, and I have seen how division and hatred are being sown. It is harder for me to see respect for the dignity and conscience of individuals.  In some instances, instead of an election it seems that we are getting ready for a general trial where we will judge others for their political decisions. 

Enter the Woman Caught in Adultery

The main concern for some does not seem to be who, after careful consideration of values and circumstances, they are going to vote for.  Instead, the focus becomes: which party a Catholic cannot vote for. When necessary, add in the threat of eternal damnation for voting for the wrong party. In my imagination I envision the modern day self-proclaimed teachers of the law and Pharisees gathering their crowds on social media to throw digital stones at the present day sinner, who could be a woman or a man, whose political views dare to differ.

I surmise that when the bishops speak of “spiritual trials” in this introduction, as I quoted above, they refer to the inner turmoil that one can feel, faced with the current state of politics. I, for one, feel it. But the phrase also fits in with the judgmental attitudes of some: the trial of the man or the woman caught in the wrong political party. 

Aware of the strife and division that occurs during election time, and inspired by the Good Samaritan, the Bishops propose the moral framework of the 2015 Forming Consciences with “the hope of binding these wounds and healing these bitter divisions.”

Unwittingly, a narrow reading of Forming Consciences, has contributed to that political judgmental attitude among Catholics. I suggest that a look at the document, paying attention to each of its nuances, may lead us to a place where Catholics make their own political decision following their conscience without having to face the inquisitorial judgement of others.

Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship

There is no space here to cover all the points covered in Forming Consciences. I will only cover a few salient points.

2

Intrinsically evil and preeminent

A narrow reading of “intrinsically evil acts” which occurs 10 times in the document leads to isolate abortion and euthanasia in a category of their own. Here is one occurrence which also includes mention of these acts as preeminent threats to human dignity:

 “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. A prime example is the intentional taking of innocent human life, as in abortion and euthanasia. In our nation, “abortion and euthanasia have become preeminent threats to human dignity because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental human good and the condition for all others” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 5). It is a mistake with grave moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life merely as a matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right to life on the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.” (See no. 22)

Taken on their own, these statements can lead to the belief that one only need to consider a candidate’s position on abortion. This would be erroneous because one has to consider the integral unity of Catholic doctrine:

 “It must be noted also that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals. The Christian faith is an integral unity, and thus it is incoherent to isolate some particular element to the detriment of the whole of Catholic doctrine. A political commitment to a single isolated aspect of the Church’s social doctrine does not exhaust one’s responsibility toward the common good. (See no. 30) Emphasis is mine.

All the rights are interconnected:

“The right to life implies and is linked to other human rights—to the basic goods that every human person needs to live and thrive. All the life issues are connected, for erosion of respect for the life of any individual or group in society necessarily diminishes respect for all life. The moral imperative to respond to the needs of our neighbors—basic needs such as food, shelter, health care, education, and meaningful work—is universally binding on our consciences and may be legitimately fulfilled by a variety of means. Catholics must seek the best ways to respond to these needs. As St. John XXIII taught, “[Each of us] has the right to life, to bodily integrity, and to the means which are suitable for the proper development of life; these are primarily food, clothing, shelter, rest, medical care, and, finally, the necessary social services” (Pacem in Terris, no. 11). (See no. 25)

3

Facing Difficult Choices

A common narrow reading of the following statement forgets the last phrase of the second sentence, and for that reason I have emphasized it:

“Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who favors a policy promoting an intrinsically evil act, such as abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, deliberately subjecting workers or the poor to subhuman living conditions, redefining marriage in ways that violate its essential meaning, or racist behavior, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases, a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate’s opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity. (See no. 34) Emphasis also mine.

It seems that people who zero in on intrinsic evil are unaware that a Catholic voter should not ignore the other important issues that comprise the totality of Catholic doctrine. 

Furthermore, the Bishops realize that a Catholic may reasonably vote for a candidate who promotes abortion or euthanasia if the voter has morally grave reasons to do so:

“There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position even on policies promoting an intrinsically evil act may reasonably 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.” (See no. 35)

In some cases, the bishops point out that a voter may “take the extraordinary step of not voting for any candidate.” (See no. 36)

In addition, in making these decisions, “voters should take into account a candidate’s commitments, character, integrity, and ability to influence a given issue. In the end, this is a decision to be made by each Catholic guided by a conscience formed by Catholic moral teaching. (See no. 35)  

Perhaps all the above can be summarized in the following way: “The Church is involved in the political process but is not partisan. The Church cannot champion any candidate or party. Our cause is the defense of human life and dignity and the protection of the weak and vulnerable.” (See no. 58)

4

 In this regard, it is worth recalling the words of Pope Francis in his apostolic exhortation Gaudete et Exultate:

“Our defense of the innocent unborn, for example, needs to be clear, firm and passionate, for at stake is the dignity of a human life, which is always sacred and demands love for each person, regardless of his or her stage of development. Equally sacred, however, are the lives of the poor, those already born, the destitute, the abandoned and the underprivileged, the vulnerable infirm and elderly exposed to covert euthanasia, the victims of human trafficking, new forms of slavery, and every form of rejection.” (Chapter 3, 101)

And the Four New Bulletin Inserts

The first paragraph of each of the four new bulletin inserts is the same, even though each insert deals with a different principle of Catholic Social Teaching, namely:  Dignity of the Human Person, The Common Good, Solidarity, and Subsidiarity.  After stating the purpose for the inserts, which is to apply the four main principles of Catholic Social Teaching to concrete issues, the following clarification follows: “This is not to tell the faithful for whom or against whom to vote, but instead to help them form their consciences in accordance with God’s truth as they approach this often-challenging decision.” [i]

During this election season may we follow the example of the Good Samaritan and seek to heal wounds and divisions instead of throwing verbal or digital stones at each other.

PART 2: THE FLORIDA ABORTION AMENDMENT

Strictly speaking ballot issues are policy issues, not partisan, even though in practice opposition to an amendment tends to fall along party lines. Nevertheless, it is important to recognize the difference. Whereas a religious organization cannot advise its members on which candidates to vote for, it has the right and obligation to advice on policy issues.

Brief Background on Florida’s Abortion Laws

In 1989 the Florida Supreme Court declared that the privacy clause to the state constitution did include abortion rights. That decision prevented any law limiting abortion in Florida, including parental consent, from taking effect. That changed 25 years later with this year’s April 1 decision of the Florida Supreme Court’s ruling that abortion rights are not included in Florida’s privacy laws.

5

As a result of that decision the Florida Heartbeat Protection Act that had passed by the legislature in 2023 was allowed to take effect on May 1 of this year. The Heartbeat Protection Act prohibits abortion at six weeks, except in cases of rape, incest and human trafficking up to 15 weeks of pregnancy. The Heartbeat law also makes exception for cases where it is necessary to save the life of the mother and to prevent serious irreversible physical impairment.

On the same day that the Florida Supreme Court declared that the privacy clause of the Florida constitution does not apply to abortion rights, it declared that the ballot initiative to “limit government interference with abortion” met the requirements to be included in the 2024 ballot as Amendment 4.

Although in ruling that the amendment wording meets the requirements of Florida’s stipulation on amendments the justices are not taking sides on whether they agree with the proposal or not, it is interesting to note that the four justices that signed the majority opinion are all male.  The three female justices of the Florida Supreme Court dissented.

Florida’s Amendment 4 would legalize abortion again

In its own words, what does Amendment 4 propose?

“Ballot Title: Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion
“Ballot Summary: No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

As I see it, in stating that “no laws shall prohibit, penalize, delay or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health” Amendment 4 clearly seeks to enshrine abortion rights into the Florida Constitution all through pregnancy. I will definitely vote “No.”

It is important to note that although the amendment does not prohibit parental notification before a minor has an abortion, it eliminates “parental consent.” As it has been pointed out, abortion would be the only medical procedure that a minor can have without parental consent.

Say “NO’” to Amendment 4 Campaign

Several Florida grassroots organizations and the Florida Catholic Conference have pointed out many ambiguities in the wording of Amendment 4 that could lead people to inadvertently vote for the measure not realizing what they are voting for. It is for this reason that they have joined together in the “Say “NO” to Amendment 4 Campaign. Here is the link: Amendment 4 – Not What it Seems – Way Too Extreme (votenoon4florida.com)

6

The reader can find more information on this campaign from the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops: Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops - Florida's Pro-Abortion amendment - Tallahassee, FL (flaccb.org)

Assistance for Pregnant Women

The Florida Pregnancy Care Network provides wellness services and emotional and material support to pregnant women in need. The Network administers the Florida Pregnancy and Parenting Support Services Program for the Florida Department of Health. The law that passed the six week ban increased the funding for pregnancy care centers to $25 million (up from $4 million in 2022).

The network has a confidential Helpline 24/7 at (866) 673-4673. It can also be reached at: Home - Florida Pregnancy Support Services Program

Each of the seven Florida dioceses offer help for pregnant mothers and their unborn children:

1 Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States (en Español), which provides a framework for Catholics in the United States. (English PDF | PDF en Español)
2 The Dignity of the Human Person | en Español
The Common Good | en Español
Solidarity | en Español
Subsidiarity | en Español

Elena Muller Garcia, holds an M.A. in Religious Studies from Barry University. She worked for 25 years at Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Palm  Beach and is currently an instructor with the diocese’s School of  Christian Formation. Elena arrived in the United States from Cuba in 1961 as part of Operation Pedro Pan.