When CNA asked about the role of the Church in the public square under an Obama administration, Father Pavone replied:
“The Church will face increasing pressure to not interfere with the positions of public officials on issues like abortion and marriage; yet the actions of a pro-abortion administration and a pro-abortion Vice-president will necessarily prompt a response from the Church. In other words, we have to be ready to fight.”
Vatican journalist John L. Allen Jr. told CNA that the Catholic Church “isn’t a political party, and its primary concerns aren’t about policy or legislation.”
The Church’s focus should be “where it’s always been – spiritual life, the sacraments, fostering a relationship with God through Christ.”
“That said, the Church is obviously interested in public affairs from the perspective of justice, and as it does with every government, it will want to try to work with the Obama administration to promote human dignity. In practice, that will mean continuing to make moral arguments on behalf of unborn life, while also pursuing natural areas of agreement with the new administration such as immigration reform, economic justice, peace, and environmental protection.”
Allen suggested the Church and the Obama White House could work together to promote development in Africa, saying 2009 is shaping up to be a “Year of Africa” for global Catholicism. Pope Benedict XVI plans to visit Cameroon and Angola in March and the Synod for Africa will be held in October.
Citing exit polls, Allen said Obama captured a majority of overall Catholics while narrowly losing among white Catholics. Noting that many of those white Catholics were “undoubtedly” motivated by life issues such as abortion, he said that if Obama truly wishes to be a unifier, “he needs to reach out and find common ground on the life issues, especially abortion.”
In Allen’s view, most of the bishops adhered to the position of their “Faithful Citizenship” document, with only a “small minority” making statements with “a clear partisan edge.”
“I think it would be a mistake to treat the result as a ‘defeat’ for the bishops; for the vast majority of bishops who taught that making specific political choices is the task of a well-formed laity, the election of Obama (or McCain, had it turned out that way) could not be a victory or a defeat.”
He explained that the Church now faces the challenge of establishing a relationship with the Obama administration that isn’t “exclusively one of chronic opposition.” Allen suggested the bishops study the work of Vatican diplomacy, which has “centuries of experience” in dealing with regimes that are “in one way or another are hostile to some aspect of Church teaching.”
Allen stated that the prospects for an outright reversal of Roe v. Wade are “extremely limited” under an Obama administration.
(Story continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
“Perhaps the challenge is therefore to shift gears a bit, investing greater resources in winning the argument for life at the cultural level. In other words, perhaps we should rely less on the coercive power of the state, and more on the disposition of the human heart to respond to the truth,” Allen wrote.
George Weigel, political commentator and biographer of Pope John Paul II, said serious Catholics should focus on trying to protect pro-life legal gains over the past thirty years from “President Obama and a radically pro-abortion Congress led by a self-described ‘ardent Catholic’.”
Weigel reiterated the necessity of defeating the federal Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which would eliminate abortion restrictions and could remove protections for pro-life conscientious objection.
The Catholic vote also needed to be studied, he told CNA:
“It will be interesting to see how the ‘Catholic vote’ finally broke, but it will be essential to pick that vote apart and look at how regular-Mass-going Catholics voted as distinguished from occasional church-goers and other ‘tribal’ Catholics.”
Weigel argued that the bishops can “no longer ignore” the question of the reception of Holy Communion by national leaders “who persistently and willfully advance the culture of death.”