[Question:]{.underline} Is it a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate?
[Answer:]{.underline} The casting of a vote can be a virtuous act, even in our modern liberal democracies, in which so much of the system is not only opposed to our holy religion, but even to the natural law itself. However, for a vote to be a virtuous act, it must necessary be directed towards its end, namely the common good. Consequently, it is in itself a grave sin to vote for a unworthy candidate, for the choice of a candidate whose life or policies are immoral is an illicit cooperation in bringing about a grave evil on society. There can be no doubt that abortion, the murder of the innocent, is one of the greatest evils afflicting modern society, and that it is crying out to heaven for vengeance. Consequently, there can not in itself be any justification for voting for any candidate who is pro-abortion, or in any way tolerant of abortion.
The question arises, however, as to whether there could be sufficient reason for vote for a candidate who might consent to some abortions, for example to avoid a more serious evil, such as to defeat a candidate who might be in favor of homosexual marriages or who might actively promote abortions or some other great evil, such as unjust wars.
The theologians answer that the act of casting a vote is a material cooperation in the evil that that candidate might cause, and not necessarily a formal cooperation (Cf. Prummer, III, §604). This means that the person who casts the vote is not necessarily directly responsible for what a bad candidate might do once elected, even if he foresaw that he would perform some evil deeds. In such cases of material cooperation, the Church allows the application of the principles of the indirect voluntary. It is permissible, since the act of casting a vote is not in itself bad, and the end is good, namely to avoid a greater evil. However, there must a very grave reason to justify such material cooperation, and all scandal would have to be avoided. This could be the case, for example, if a person were to vote for a Protestant whose platform was in general in accordance with the natural law, but who might have some false principles concerning divorce or the funding of Catholic schools, or on some environmental issue. In such a case, it would be permissible to chose the lesser evil, and to vote for a candidate who is not entirely good, on the condition that there is a very grave reason, namely to avoid a much greater evil.
The question here as to whether there could ever possibly be such a grave reason that could justify a person voting for a pro-abortion candidate. Is it possible for there to be a greater evil that could justify such a participation in this evil of abortion, even only a material participation? I cannot conceive that this could be possible, for abortion is such a perverse and horrible crime.
It is be possible to conceive of a greater evil that would allow one to vote for a candidate who would accept (unwillingly) abortions under certain exceptional circumstances such as rape, for this is frequently done in order to prevent the election of a candidate who is positively pro-abortion. This is a frequent occurrence, and is certainly permissible. However, it is inconceivable that a Catholic would vote for a politician who is positively pro-abortion simply because he likes his tax scheme or his social policies. In such an instant there would be no proportion at all, and it would certainly be a grave sin, even if the intention were only for a material cooperation.
If in general it is narrow-minded to be a single issue voter, this certainly does not apply to the abortion question. The common good absolutely and necessary requires the abolition of abortions from public life, and it is of such overwhelming importance for the good of society, that no person could be considered imprudent for voting on the basis of this question alone.
Answered by Father Peter Scott, SSPX.