An interesting chewy from a reader

Written by someone I know who promotes distrbutivism, contra 'X'.

X... admonishes us that voting for some particular candidate is not only forbidden, but makes one "morally obtuse." When asked for his authority for this fatwa, he can only say "Are you kidding?" and then tells us that it is based on Kerry's "liberal scorecard of 97%." I was unaware that the Church had a formal position on this "scorecard," especially since very few of the issues on such "scorecards" are ones touching a dogmatic issue, or when they do, the "liberal" is more likely to be closer to what the Church teaches on social doctrine. What is the Catholic position on capital gains taxes? On universal health care? On Free trade? These are the kinds of issues that make up such political scorecards, and upon which X... can speak with such authority that he is incredulous that anybody could disagree. But in fact, on all of these issues, men of good will can apply the teaching in opposite ways. What is interesting in such cases is not *what* one decides, but *how* one decides it. For example, does one rule for or against capital gains taxes based on solidarity with the poor, or because one subscribes to the economistic view of man, a view condemned by the Church in general and the current pope most specifically. Yet from such ambiguities, X... can preach with certainty, and even with arrogance.

But of course, the central issue for X... is abortion, and it is so central that all other considerations of prudence must be cast aside. The problem is that there are at least two errors here, one prudential and one theological. In the first place, Catholics of good will can indeed decide that the Republicans are not serious about this issue and are merely using it to manipulate to voters of a certain ideological stripe. Grounds for this suspicion abound, not the least of which that the Republicans (who initially supported abortion) have been running (and winning) on the issue for at least 30 years but have not actually done anything about it. With most of the judges appointed by Republicans, a judicially imposed rule cannot be changed. And then there is the strange circumstance that it took nearly three years to pass a largely symbolic PBA ban that had already been passed in the Clinton years. But aside from the prudential considerations, there is the theological problem. X... seems to be relying on a version of the "hierarchy of truths" hypothesis, which states that some truths are more "central" then others and suggest that one can be a good Catholic while ignoring or even rejecting truths further down the hierarchy. It is quite true that some truths are more central, but this does not make truths lower down such a hierarchy any less true. Abortion is crucial because it is so final, but it is no more or less true than the just wage or solidarity with the poor. If one makes a decision that the GOP is not serious in its support of the Church on this one issue, but is deadly serious in its opposition to the Church on all the other issues, then one should be able to exercise their Christian freedom in that decision, without the pontification of those who appear to be slightly more "catholic" than the Pope, a pope who has certainly not confined his concerns to any one issue.

As usual with such theological errors, it plays into the hands of the devil. In exchange for one issue, about which the Party apparently has no serious intention of doing anything, we get to betray the Church on a whole host of other issues. Could the devil himself play his cards any better than that? The Republican faithful have been urged for decades by those who, without any authority, pretend to speak in the name of the Church, to vote for candidates based on this issue alone. But in fact it is nonsense; the Republican Party is NOT an anti-abortion party; it is a party with an anti-abortion wing. And that's the end of it. Indeed, the Party leadership would weep copious tears if this issue were somehow resolved, since it would no longer be available to make Catholics forget about other issues.

X.... closes this diatribe with the wish that he could be as "morally obtuse" as the people who might vote for Kerry. Well, X..., be careful of what you wish for, because your wish has been granted. Not only have you joined the ranks of the morally obtuse, but you have done so with an arrogance that would astound a mullah issuing a fatwa. These are complex issues about which the best of men debate the best of ways to implement Catholic teaching. Such as you and I would be advised to exercise just a bit more humility before offering condemnations, and offering them before the Church does.

It's quite true that, for the most part, the Stupid Party doesn't much care about abortion and has played games with prolifers for decades. It's one of the reasons I put no trust in princes. However, though they don't much care about abortion, they also don't care much for it. Unfortunately, Dems do. They are not a party of indifference, but of fanatical love of death to the point of self-destruction. Even when it clearly loses them votes, they cling to it like limpets, wishing to extend the death of innocents as far as it can possibly be extended. I can't vote for that. But I don't think that the Stupids are the virtuous opposite of the Evils. I just think them the Stupid variation from the Evils, and that they are quite capable of their own evils (and perhaps greater evils than the Evil Party if they ever get brains). Their deathless faith that original sin does not effect the free market or the state of Israel, their remarkable inability to believe that the vast Big Brother machinery they are erecting for the sake of security today will be extremely useful to some Hillary Macbeth of tomorrow, their cynical tendency to use the family as a pawn in their support for the corporation's war against the State (much like the Dems cynical tendency to use the family as a pawn in their Statist war against the corporation). All these things make me puke. But I basically side (for the moment) with the Stupid Party because, if they don't care about much besides lining their pockets and acquiring more power, at least they have not yet become zealously committed to the death of unborn babies. When and if they do become not merely indifferent, but fanatically committed to the Sacrament of Abortion, I will spit on them without regret and vote for the Quixote Party. Politics is the art of the possible as long as it's possible. When it becomes impossible, I will say, "A pox on both your houses." and await the judgement.