This morning’s Free Lance-Star goes over Governor-elect Tim Kaine’s spirituality. An amazing background without question, Jesuit-influenced and all. Can’t help but be impressed by that.
So what has my dander up? The equation between the gravity of Catholic teaching on the death penalty and abortion:
Kaine pledged that, while his Catholic faith led him to personally oppose abortion and the death penalty, he would uphold the law.
He called the attacks on his positions ‘insulting.’
The real question, Kaine said, is ‘will you be true to your oath of office? There are hundreds of thousands of people in the United States who take the oath that, whatever my personal beliefs are, I’m going to uphold the laws of my state and of the country, and Catholics can take that oath just like anybody else.’
Kaine’s explanation worked. It deflected Kilgore’s attack ads, and perhaps even drew the Democrat more votes, Sabato said.
‘He was able to employ his Catholicism as a way of explaining his positions on abortion and capital punishment in a way that made moderate voters sympathetic to him,’ Sabato said. ‘Some people said, ‘Oh that’s contradictory,’ but that just goes to show what we know. Average people said, ‘That’s a subtlety I get–the governor has to follow the law whether he agrees or not.”
First of all, when at any point in time did the Kilgore campaign call Tim Kaine out on abortion? Fact: it didn’t.
Here’s the problem. Tim Kaine may personally disbelieve in abortion and the death penalty. But when the Kilgore campaign attacked Kaine on the death penalty, Kaine’s response was that he drew a line between his private beliefs and the way he will govern. This naturally raises eyebrows, not only for the dichotomy concerning Kaine’s past on the death penalty, but in Catholic eyes, it raises heckles about his obligations as a Catholic to defend and promote the culture of life.
This is not a question of debate or palatability. One cannot be a Catholic and be passive on the issue of abortion. Period. You can compare this to the adjoining FLS article where Attorney General-elect Bob McDonnell is grilled for his support of the death penalty.
McDonnell, on the other hand, says he sees no contradictions between his Catholic beliefs and supporting the death penalty.
“My clear understanding of the Catholic tradition and catechism is that there’s not a ban on the use of the death penalty, but a very narrow and limited use of the death penalty is what the popes have said is morally permissible,” McDonnell said. “Virginia’s got 13 very limited cases in which the death penalty can be used.
“When I add all that together, it’s a very limited, narrow application of the death penalty, and to me, that’s very consistent with Catholic teaching.”
Catholic leaders, including the pope, have expressed opposition to capital punishment.
Pope John Paul II wrote in a 1995 encyclical that the death penalty should be used only “in cases of absolute necessity” or “when it would not be possible to otherwise defend society.” The pope continued to write, “Today, however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”
Virginia bishops, including Arlington’s Paul S. Loverde and Richmond’s Francis X. DiLorenzo, have argued that Virginia’s sentence of life without parole should be used instead of the death penalty.
No such treatment for Kaine on the issue of abortion, even though the very same encyclical (Evangelium Vitae for those interested) has this to say on the subject of abortion:
Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. From the very beginnings of the Church, the apostolic preaching reminded Christians of their duty to obey legitimately constituted public authorities (cf. Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-14), but at the same time it firmly warned that “we must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). In the Old Testament, precisely in regard to threats against life, we find a significant example of resistance to the unjust command of those in authority. After Pharaoh ordered the killing of all newborn males, the Hebrew midwives refused. “They did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live” (Ex 1:17). But the ultimate reason for their action should be noted: “the midwives feared God” (ibid. ). It is precisely from obedience to God—to whom alone is due that fear which is acknowledgment of his absolute sovereignty—that the strength and the courage to resist unjust human laws are born. It is the strength and the courage of those prepared even to be imprisoned or put to the sword, in the certainty that this is what makes for “the endurance and faith of the saints” (Rev 13:10).
In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to “take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it”.
What is happening here is issue of dissent over the death penalty (which is allowed amongst Catholics) is being confused with the issue of dissent over abortion (which is not permitted amongst Catholics). These articles blur the lines in terrible fashion, thus the effort by to turn Kaine’s death penalty debacle into a free pass on abortion. Not so slick.
What makes this worse is the nominal Catholic who read these articles will simply hold them up as an imprimatur for their dissent with Catholic teaching. Their only problem? Kaine’s position of sanctioning abortion still isn’t consistent with his professed faith, and has only received the approval of a fawning press and the extreme liberals within the Democratic Party.
Time will tell if Governor Kaine has the courage to reconcile the two, and I sincerely hope he does.