His article seems to be an attempt to rebut an article written by a Christian pastor that urges a vote for Trump. Take a look at the first paragraph as he quotes a statement from Mr. Gallup's that questions how a Christian can in good conscience allow Hillary to take the White House. Keyes then tries to put words in Gallup's mouth by suggesting that Gallup was advocating fear. No, Gallup was not advocating fear; he was questioning the workings of the consciences who would allow a Trump vote.
I don't have time to go through the whole mess, but I will focus on this question that he asks in the middle of the article: "So God will hold us responsible for Clinton's evil because we refused to embrace Trump's?" There are some key problems with this question.
- There is a tacit assumption that the evil of a Clinton presidency would be no worse than that of Trump. Anyone who believes that hasn't been paying attention to events of the past several years, or even of the past several weeks as Clinton's body count seems to be increasing. It's either that or they are engaging in intellectual dishonesty to justify their own irrational animosity towards Trump.
- In terms of Catholic moral theology, the question might be more accurately rendered, "Will God hold us responsible for Clinton's evil because we refused to do what we could to prevent it?" The answer is a resounding "YES".
- The question is followed by Jesus' admonition to "be perfect". That is one of many non sequiturs. "Being perfect" means, among other things, dealing realistically with situations that don't always offer clear black-vs-white options. It doesn't mean refusing to deal with these situations while attempting to absolve oneself of responsibility for the consequences of such abdication of Christian duty.
The Roman Catholic Church, in her wisdom, has always recognized that there are situations in which we must ponder carefully our choices. That is why she has given us guidelines to assist us in so doing, as I have attempted to do in recent posts. Keyes is Catholic, yet nowhere in his article do I see any reference to the principles on which I touched, or any other reference to Catholic moral theology for that matter.
Then there is another Catholic, news commentator Cokie Roberts. During an episode of "Morning Joe" this past Tuesday, she opined that those supporting Trump are "morally tainted". She said nary a peep about Hillary, save to warn that she might commit an error (like Bengazi, or the email deletions, support for baby-murder and sexual immorality, etc) and Trump achieve victory as a result. Some of my friends believe that Cokie Roberts is pro-life. I had my doubts then and now I'm left with no doubt that the unborn don't rate a blip on her radar screen.
Roberts' screed was none too surprising, but Keyes' was. I don't know how he jumped the tracks but I sure hope he corrects that.
