In a forthcoming column for a national magazine intended for Catholic priests, I discuss the participation of deacons (and in particular, those commonly referred to as "permanent" deacons) in politics, based on the provisions of canon (universal) and particular law. This question is made especially important given the growing presence of deacons and priests in the blogosphere and in other social media, such as Facebook and Twitter. So, I thought I would put the substance of what I wrote here as well.
As the political primary season continues,
nothing could be more current than a review of the rather unique situation of
the deacon in the political life of a nation, with a particular view of the
deacon in American politics. This seems
especially appropriate since increasingly deacons are joining millions of other
Americans in their use of social media and are blogging, tweeting, writing,
speaking and teaching at every conceivable level, and even venues formerly
considered more informal, such as Facebook, have become sources of public
discourse on the political process. It
is important to reflect on our own participation in such exchanges in light of
our responsibilities as clergy. It is
often not what we say, or don’t say, from the pulpit that can influence others,
but our casual “status update” on Facebook, a blog entry or even a tweet can
have far-reaching effects.
Canon 285
directs that “clerics are to refrain completely from all those things which are
unbecoming to their state, according to the prescripts of particular law.” The canon continues in §3: “Clerics are
forbidden to assume public offices which entail a participation in the exercise
of civil power,” and §4 forbids clerics from “secular offices which entail an
obligation of rendering accounts. . . .”
Canon 287, §1 reminds all clerics that “most especially, [they] are
always to foster the peace and harmony based on justice which are to be
observed among people,” and §2 directs that “they are not to have an active
part in political parties and in governing labor unions unless, in the judgment
of competent ecclesiastical authority, the protection of the rights of the
Church or the promotion of the common good requires it.”
However,
c. 288 specifically relieves permanent deacons (transitional deacons would
still bound) of a number of the prior canons, including cc. 285 §§3 and 4, and
287 §2, “unless particular law establishes otherwise.” Particular law in this instance is provided
by the National Directory on the
Formation, Ministry and Life of Permanent Deacons in the United States,
which states at #91: “A permanent deacon may not present his name for election
to any public office or in any other general election, or accept a nomination
or an appointment to public office, without the prior written permission of the
diocesan bishop. A permanent deacon may
not actively and publicly participate in another’s political campaign without
the prior written permission of the diocesan bishop.” The diocesan bishop may also create
particular law within his own diocese on such matters. In one case, a diocesan bishop notified his
clergy that if anyone could even infer, through their speech, manner or
demeanor, which political party or candidate the cleric was supporting, then
that cleric had gone too far. While we
are each entitled to form our own political decisions for ourselves, we must
always be aware of the political lines we must not cross.
Let’s
put this all together. Deacons, although
clerics, may participate in political life to a degree not permitted other
clerics under the law. However, they are
required by particular law in the United States to obtain the prior written
permission of their diocesan bishop to do so.
I find that two other aspects of this matter are too often
overlooked. First, is the requirement
under the law that all clerics (and, most significantly, permanent deacons are not relieved of this obligation) are
bound by c. 287 always “to foster peace and harmony based on justice.” This is such a critical point for reflection
for all clerics: How do my actions, words, and insinuations foster such peace
and harmony, or are my actions serving to sow discord and disharmony? Since permanent deacons may become more
engaged in the political sphere than presbyters (with the permission of their
bishop), this will take on particular relevance for deacons. Second is the whole area of participation in
political campaigns. Deacons may only
participate in their own or someone
else’s political campaign with the prior written permission of their
bishop. Today, when political support is
often reflected through the social media, all of us might well reflect on how
our opinions stated via these media constitute active participation in someone’s
political campaign.
All of
us, lay and cleric, are obliged to participate appropriately in the political
process. However, as clerics – and in a
particularly challenging way, deacons – we must walk a fine moral tightrope in
doing so.
