If the duties incumbent on me as a citizen are to be accepted as a Christian obligation which I owe my fellows and by the fulfillment of which I pay a debt to God, what am I to think of any arrangement of parties in the State? I may object in theory or in practice to the whole party system, and may quite carefully have matured schemes of my own which would make things more efficient and more free: or, on the other hand, I may consider that on the whole, taking everything into consideration, the disadvantages of the party system in actual fact are much less than those which other systems would introduce. In either case I may do what I can to promote my own particular political aspirations, denounce or uphold the constitution of my country, take my side and persistently work for it. All these courses are perfectly open to me. As a Catholic I have to start from certain definite ethical principles about justice, truth, the values of the supernatural world, the sacredness of conscience, etc.; but once I have acknowledged these as having controlling influence over all departments of human life, I am perfectly free to choose that particular band of politicians in the State whom I consider to be, on the whole, likely to benefit my country best politically and spiritually. It is obvious that to neither side shall I be able to give unqualified support; it may even be necessary for me to declare publicly wherein I part company from those to whose support I have devoted myself; but for all that, it is probable that one or other of the chief political parties will appear to me to be deserving of my allegiance. Indeed, should the need arise, perhaps the joint protests of Catholics of all political creeds, or their solidarity on any one point, is far more effective than the protest of a Catholic party.
So far, then, my faith leaves me free. Does it, however, in any way conflict with political practice? It need not indeed, but there are certain ways in which quite considerably it may. For even in my political life I must still remember that I am a Christian, and that charitable judgements are still required of me. I cannot cut up my life into separate compartments and look upon religion as having no concern with my soul outside the hours dedicated to the direct worship of God. All the teaching of my faith and the whole detailed doctrine of the commandments have to be applied as rigorously to my political discussions as to anything else. What 1 have learnt about rash judgements (the duty of restoring the good name of an opponent I have wantonly defamed), about the truth alone being expected of me as a child of God - all holds good even in these affairs, since they concern so very much of my time and my interests. Much of the invective that is to be read in the political press is obviously untrue and not intended to be taken seriously; the rhodomontade in which one leading statesman declares his rival to be devoid of all truth, to be willing to hand over his country to the enemy, to be the most dangerous foe that the nation has to fear, cannot be really meant; and if it be not meant, it is utterly un christian. No doubt I may be so interested in politics that my temper is much harder to keep under control, my feelings are so keen; but boisterous personal attacks are either true or untrue: if the former, why is my action so very inadequate to the gravity of the situation; if the latter, am I a follower of Christ?
It will be seen, therefore, that a Christian must still remember the preaching of his faith even when he is engaged in political controversy; and it is this disregard for religion which so generally takes place in political warfare, that has degraded the whole trade of politics. Just because of its heated accusations and irresponsible criticisms, no one can help suspecting leading politicians of insincerity: if they only believed one half of what they said in their speeches, party politics should become at once civil war. May I, then, never denounce a measure as unfair, unjust, or wicked? By all means. Let me be as forcible as I like in criticizing measures, only let me remember not to treat motives in the same way. I may say that a certain bill before the House, or a detail in some politician's platform, violates the principles of justice, but I have no means of knowing that he intends to be unjust. I have no right to drag up a man's past, or expatiate on his meanness or his ambitions, or to accuse him of being bought by a foreign power. But surely it will sometimes be necessary for the public good that these facts should be mentioned, and even motives exposed? That is true; but only on the supposition that I can offer real proofs. It is criminal of me to denounce on pure suspicion, to bandy charges which I cannot substantiate, to add to the circle of some flying rumour, to mention transactions, unless I can bring forward reasonable evidence for what I say. I must do all to make public life clean and wholesome; but in so doing I must not transgress the laws of charity, justice, or truth. By becoming a political partisan, I have all the greater need to remember that I do not cease to be a Christian.
- text taken from Meditations for Layfolk by Father Bede Jarrett, O.P.