By Tom Klocek

There are some who say that if they did something without intending to do evil, but were trying to do something good, then they are not responsible for the evil that may occur. In order to do this, they have to make all evils equivalent (“equity of evil,” in DEI terms).

“The wicked fear the good, because the good are a constant reproach to their consciences. The ungodly like religion in the same way that they like lions, either dead or behind bars; they fear religion when it breaks loose and begins to challenge their consciences.” —Fulton J. Sheen, The Life of Christ

The Catholic Church is under attack by the U.S. government, the mainstream media, and numerous secular organizations (Planned Parenthood, the Democrat Party, etc.). And while they don’t like what the church says and teaches, it seems that they hang on the words of the pope whenever he makes some public statement.

Often it is to look for topics or statements that they can attack, but they also recognize that his words still have great influence — not just among Catholics, but also among other religions, even non-Christian ones. And so it got people’s attention when recently he said, speaking mainly to Catholics, that it was important for one to vote, and in this election, Catholics should vote for the lesser of two evils. In the process, it seemed that he was equating issues of immigration with the evil of abortion, calling the position of both parties “anti-life.”

However, Pope Francis did not provide greater explanation of this statement, although church teaching does. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) notes that the gravity of some sins is greater than of others: “murder is greater than theft” (CCC 1858). Similarly, the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), in their document entitled “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship,” points out that there are actions so deeply flawed as to be intrinsically evil, and these include abortion and euthanasia.

The two dioceses in Virginia (Arlington and Richmond) make up the Virginia Catholic Conference (VCC) and have put out their voting guidelines that reiterate Catholic teaching: “… these teachings tell us that three principles must guide how we vote:

• Many issues are important.

• Not all issues have equal moral weight.

• Protecting life is paramount.”

“Moral principles do not depend on a majority vote. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is wrong. Right is right, even if nobody is right.” —Fulton J. Sheen

It would seem then that Catholic teaching, which holds many truths for other religions, actually makes the selection of the lesser of two evils straightforward. The evil of abortion is graver than the evil of restricting immigration. This is also backed up by the Catechism in another article (2241) which states that, in support of the common good (for which they are responsible), nations can put conditions on immigrants including “to respect … the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.” People who break the law or are criminals (or both) who enter the country are not contributing to the greater good, nor is the government that allows such people into the country.

And yet there are some, even Catholics, who try to say that voting for an abortion candidate is okay because their primary intention is to vote against one candidate rather than “for” abortion, even though they know their vote ultimately supports abortion. In other words, they are trying to use “intent” as a cop out even though they know the result is an evil one. Hence the admonition of the Catechism, “One may not do evil that good may come of it” (CCC, 1756, 1761, 1789).

It is hard to believe that anyone, especially a Catholic in today’s United States, doesn’t know which party is the party of death, and that a vote for that party, however one wants to couch the intent, is a vote for the intrinsic evil of abortion. The Catechism points out, based on the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas, that the morality of an issue depends not only on intent but on the known outcome of an action. Article 1756 (CCC) states, “It is therefore an error to judge morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context.” (Emphasis added.)

The Catechism adds that one must consider the outcome of an act when judging its morality. Article 1755 states, “A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action…”

This, in my eyes, is just another attempt at calling evil good — or at least confusing the two in an effort at self-deception. “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight!” (Isaiah 5:20-21)

“We allow the good but tolerate the evil that undermines it and call it ‘broad-mindedness.’” —Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, Declaration of Dependence

C.S. Lewis recognized that the devil plays off of such situations. In The Screwtape Letters, Lewis has the experienced deceiver (Screwtape) advising his charge (Wormwood) about their targeted human, “Your man is accustomed to having a dozen incompatible philosophies dancing about together inside his head.” In other words, keep him from the truth or else you won’t be able to capture his soul. Lewis also notes that, for the demons, “Everything has to be twisted before it’s any use to us [demons].”

Nevertheless, intended or not, the outcome is still evil, and knowingly so. Vote against one party or individual if you must, but don’t make your vote for evil. As Pope Francis said, vote for the lesser of two evils, the priority of which, according to church teaching and the USCCB, seems fairly evident.

In the end, life must always take precedence. This is truly a binary choice. Don’t deceive yourself into withholding your vote. Withholding your vote only benefits the party of death.

“The end justifies the means is the method of Satan.” —Fr. Mitch Pacwa, EWTN