Can religion and politics go together?

On a recent trip to Rome I revisited one of my favourite basilicas in the heart of the Eternal City. As I admired the historical, artistic and devotional riches of the basilica of Saints Ambrose and Charles I came across a very interesting pamphlet entitled How Could Christians Be Involved In Politics? penned by Mgr Raffaello Martinelli.

The Bishop of Frascati has endeavoured to answer relevant questions in many of his publications pertaining to modern life challenges within the context of Christian theology from artificial insemination to the role of capitalism, and the role of the Christian in the modern world.

As the debate on sustainable families rages on, many confusing signals have increasingly drowned the various important aspects that exist in our society. Throughout the debate, religious belief and political affiliation have been bandied about, sometimes unclearly or unfairly. The questions are becoming increasingly political, attempting to divorce them from their moral context. While some take a stand, others would rather not.

In this context I would like to share with readers some of Mgr Martinelli’s ideas and observations as to our role as believers and our active and important role in the political choices for our society in the hope his ideas will best serve us in these debates.

Firstly, I must make it clear Mgr Martinelli’s work is not a theological tome. His ideas are clear, simple and aimed for the general understanding of the lay person. Relying on recent sources, he tries to explain the role of the Christian in a genuine attempt to reveal a Christian’s relationship between his beliefs and current political stands.

Mgr Martinelli admits the relationship between Christians and politics, between the state and the Church have gone through a complex evolution at the levels of principles and at the level of implementation practices over centuries and in different countries. In this sense, these relationships can be understood only in the context of diverse historical frameworks. Mgr Martinelli believes politics and one’s participation are essential elements for a thriving and nurturing society.

He underlines the requirements of this common good. Quoting from the encyclical Gaudium et Spes, he says common good “is realised in the sum of all social conditions, which permit and encourage in human beings, in families and associations the fullest and fastest attainment of their perfection”. Hence, the common good involves the responsibility of each and everyone, despite the diversity of forms, tasks and responsibilities.

Mgr Martinelli believes a legitimately constituted state must have law as its basis, free elections and a coherent vision of the common good. In this sense, It is when the issue of “moral order” and legitimate laws conflict that obligations collide. The writer is explicit. One is to allow oneself to be guided by moral order “which has its foundations in God who is its first principle and ultimate end.” Therefore, I am to understand that what Mgr Martinelli is saying is that a Christian is bound by his conscience in matters of civil law, especially if a law is against the requirements of moral order, the fundamental rights of persons or against Gospel teachings.

Mgr Martinelli shows his preoccupation about what is understood by secularity in today’s world. He observes “hostility towards every form of political and cultural significance of religion”. Although he makes it clear the Church should not interfere in matters of state, Mgr Martinelli believes that before Christian values the Church is promoting human values that safeguard the dignity of each of us.

This brings us to the thorny issue of Church involvement in politics. The Church is not to be involved, linked or identified with any one political party or system. Although the Church should not propose decisions or programmes that are matters of the state, it is also true the Church is bound to “evangelise the political order” and “judge political actions”.

The other questions relevant to this debate in the pamphlet are the duties of a Christian with regard to politics and what are the requisites of a Christian elected to a party.

These are very relevant questions as it appears to me that as the divorce debate heats up some of our politicians are attempting to neatly partition the moral from the political and social arguments. This I find very disturbing!

Again, Mgr Martinelli’s observations are clearly stated. A Christian should not despise but rather be interested in politics. S/he must offer coherent Christian testimony and seek to promote the defence of Christian unity, the defence of specific values and the common good. “Nevertheless, it could actually happen that one has to either accept a lesser good or tolerate a lesser evil with respect to a greater evil.”

A Christian involved in party politics should respect and promote basic Christian values, exercise political commitment as a service, listen to the healthy and just demands of the people before, during and after an election and, importantly, uphold an inseparable connection between a “good life” and “good governance”.

Clearly, the arguments for Christian participation in politics are exceedingly and positively in favour. It is also evident Christians should not abstain from full participation in political decisions, yet they are bound by their beliefs. In this sense, what I find worrying is the continued disconnect between the moral and political implications on divorce legislation held by some throughout this national debate. Hence, the question: Can a vote for or against divorce be considered before one’s faith or can a decision be taken concurrently?

(Mgr Martinelli’s publications may be accessed online: www.sancarlo.pcn.net/argomenti_nuovo/pagina0.html)

The author is a member of the Nationalist Party’s executive committee.