Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Faith, Democracy, and the Catholic Duty To Stay Involved

Faith, Democracy, and the Catholic Duty To Stay Involved

Christian cross necklace on American flag.

Getty Images/Stock Photo

The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists. To learn about the many NextGen initiatives we are leading, click HERE.

We asked Angeles Ponpa, a graduate student at Northwestern Medill in the Politics, Policy, and Foreign Affairs specialization, and a Fulcrum summer intern, to share her thoughts on what democracy means to her and her perspective on its current health.


Here’s her insight on the topic.

"Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God." This verse from Matthew 22:21 has long echoed in Catholic political thought. Once a response to a Pharisaical trap about taxation, it is now often invoked by religious leaders urging the faithful to take civic responsibility seriously, not despite their faith but because of it.

I did not always understand this balance. I grew up the child of undocumented immigrants who came to the United States from Michoacán, Mexico, as teenagers fleeing poverty. Their legal status was never justified in my eyes, but it taught me that politics was not abstract. It was personal. I watched political debates over immigration in the early 2000s shape how families like mine were treated. It made me pay attention.

That early curiosity led me to the high school debate club, then to campus activism in college, and eventually to a career in politics. I worked on campaigns and later served in the Illinois State Senate. I believed I was contributing to something greater, a better public future. But over time, I began to feel I was living a double life.

Catholics, after all, are not strangers to political engagement, although they differ in their leanings. A 2024 Pew Research Center survey found that 52 percent of U.S. Catholics identify or lean Republican, while 44 percent identify or lean Democratic. It is a near-even split that reflects the diversity of the Church’s laity in political thought. Yet political affiliation alone cannot define Catholic civic responsibility, which must first be rooted in faith and moral conscience.

Working in Springfield, Illinois, brought that contradiction into focus. I was excited to begin my role, but quickly realized that being a legislative assistant often meant doing whatever was asked, organizing offices, running errands, or defending decisions that conflicted with my Catholic beliefs. The Eighth Commandment instructs Catholics not to bear false witness against their neighbor. Yet, I felt I was doing exactly that when justifying policies I knew were morally flawed but were labeled as good politics.

When budget season arrived, I found myself facilitating tens of thousands of dollars in taxpayer spending on mailers and office supplies while struggling to afford rent and working a second job. My conscience was unsettled.

At the same time, I began reconnecting deeply with my faith.

During the pandemic, Catholic voices on social media sparked something in me. Though I had grown up a "cultural Catholic," I had never opened the Bible. As I leaned into prayer and study, I sought out a spiritual director, Father Brendan, who helped me process the conflict between my beliefs and my work. He introduced me to A Man for All Seasons, a film about St. Thomas More, an English statesman who was executed for refusing to acknowledge King Henry VIII as the head of the Church of England. He remained loyal to the pope and was later canonized as a saint in the Catholic Church.

If you think you have gone through something difficult, there is likely a saint who has experienced a similar challenge. For me, that saint is Thomas More. His unwavering loyalty to the Church made him the patron saint of statesmen and politicians, and a model of moral integrity and conscience in public life.

As I was discerning the tension, Pope Francis gave this moral clarity: "A good Catholic meddles in politics, offering the best of himself, so that those who govern can govern." He emphasized that politics is "one of the highest forms of charity because it serves the common good," and that prayer and active participation are central.

I also found resonance in the experience of former Congressman Dan Lipinski, a devout Catholic who remained pro-life in a largely pro-choice party. He criticized partisanship as a "sectarian divide" and warned that "people are making their political party their religion," adding that he believed Catholics could help bridge that gap. He lost his seat in a 2020 primary in part because he refused to compromise on conscience, a reminder that moral consistency often comes at a cost.

Sen. Marco Rubio, also a practicing Catholic, has echoed similar struggles from the right. "Faith shapes my values. It influences the dignity of life, the importance of marriage, and the obligation to help those in need," he said during a 2015 presidential debate. Rubio has often spoken about how his faith informs his policy decisions and how that same faith draws skepticism in a political climate that frequently treats conviction as extremism. He continues to reference his faith publicly, including during his Senate confirmation hearing for Secretary of State five months ago.

Like Lipinski, he illustrates how Catholics in public life face pressure from both sides of the aisle when their values challenge the party line.

After months of discernment, I left the Senate and the political career I had worked so hard to build. I chose journalism instead, a field where I could still engage with public life but with truth, not spin, at the center.

This decision was mine alone, but it was informed by Catholic teaching. The Catechism is clear: "Those subject to authority should regard those in authority as representatives of God" (CCC 2238), and "co-responsibility for the common good makes it morally obligatory to pay taxes, exercise the right to vote and to defend one's country" (CCC 2240).

Voting is not optional for Catholics. Civic participation is not just a right. It is a duty. Yet today, many young Catholics opt out. Some refuse to vote because they believe neither party reflects their values. Others, disillusioned by corruption or moral compromise, think political involvement is inherently dirty. But inaction is not a virtue. The Gospel calls us to be salt and light, to engage the world, not retreat from it.

Here is what should be happening: Catholics, especially young ones, need to renew their civic engagement in a way that resists polarization. We must form our conscience, speak out even against our own party, and participate consistently even when options are imperfect. Withdrawal is not moral purity. It is a failure of duty.

To be clear, the Church does not demand blind allegiance to any party or politician. Catholics are called to speak out when policies violate human dignity. But choosing not to vote or to disengage is a failure to contribute to the common good.

Much of this confusion stems from misreading "separation of church and state." That phrase is not in the Constitution. It came from Thomas Jefferson in a letter reassuring Baptists that the government would not interfere with their religious practice. The First Amendment protects the free exercise of religion and prohibits the establishment of religion. It does not ask the faithful to leave their values at the door of public life.

The Church reaffirmed this in the Second Vatican Council's Dignitatis Humanae, which emphasized religious liberty and action under the Gospel Law. Catholics can and must participate in political life while remaining faithful to the Church's teachings.

In 1 Timothy 2:2, St. Paul urges prayers "for kings and all in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness." Every Sunday, we pray for our elected leaders and ask that they govern wisely. But prayer must be paired with action. Catholics are not passive observers. We are citizens.

In a moment of polarization and despair, opting out may feel easier. However, democracy depends on those willing to participate. My choice to leave politics was an act of conscience. But my continued engagement through journalism is my way of staying in the arena and encouraging others to do the same.

Please help the Fulcrum in its mission of nurturing the next generation of journalists by donating HERE!

.

Read More

Beyond Party Lines
An illustration to symbolize two divided groups.
Getty Images / Andrii Yalanskyi

Beyond Party Lines

The American Experiment tested whether groups with diverse interests could unite under a declaration of common principles. In this moment, we face a critical juncture that tests whether distrust and political fervor could drive Americans to abandon or deny everything that unites us.

Henry Bolingbroke contends that party spirit inspires “Animosity and breeds Rancor.” Talking of his countrymen, he wrote, “We likewise derive, not our Privileges (for they were always ours) but a more full and explicit Declaration”; Whigs and Tories can unite on this alone. That Declaration of Ours was penned by Thomas Jefferson when his colonists repelled the redcoats at the Siege of Charleston and when Washington’s troops were awaiting battle in Manhattan. The American Declaration set out those principles, which united the diverse colonies. And the party system, as Bolingbroke said, brought animosity and weakened the Union. Critics disputed these claims. William Warburton attacked Bolingbroke as an evil-speaker with “dog-eloquence”—claimed his calls for party reform were an aristocratic conspiracy to cement the power of elites. An anonymous critic argued that the government is a union of unrelated people where laws supplant the natural bonds between families. Then, the government of the United States would not exist, or would not exist long.

Keep ReadingShow less
From Vision to Action: Remaking the World Through Social Entrepreneurship
assorted notepads

From Vision to Action: Remaking the World Through Social Entrepreneurship

Social entrepreneur John Marks developed a set of eleven working principles that have become his modus operandi and provide the basic framework for his new book, “From Vision to Action: Remaking the World Through Social Entrepreneurship," from which a series of three articles is adapted. While Marks applied these principles in nonprofit work, he says they are also applicable to social enterprisesand to life, in general.

PART TWO

PRINCIPLE #4: KEEP SHOWING UP. It has been said that 80 percent of success in life is showing up. For social entrepreneurs, this means continuing to stay engaged without dabbling or parachuting. Like a child’s toy windup truck that moves forward until it hits an obstacle and then backs off and finds another way forward, social entrepreneurs should be persistent—and adept at finding work-arounds. They must be willing to commit for the long term. I found that this was particularly important when working with Iranians, who tend to view the world in terms of centuries and millennia.

Keep ReadingShow less
Similarity Hub Shows >700 Instances of Cross-Partisan Common Ground

Two coloured pencils one red and one blue drawing a reef knot on a white paper background.

Getty Images, David Malan

Similarity Hub Shows >700 Instances of Cross-Partisan Common Ground

It is a common refrain to say that Americans need to find common ground across the political spectrum.

Over the past year, AllSides and More Like US found >700 instances of common ground on political topics, revealed in Similarity Hub. It highlights public opinion data from Gallup, Pew Research, YouGov, and many other reputable polling firms.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Responsibility of the First Vote

Primary voting, Michigan

Elaine Cromie/Getty Images

The Responsibility of the First Vote

The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists. To learn about the many NextGen initiatives we are leading, click HERE.

We asked Nathaly Suquinagua, a bilingual multimedia journalist with a B.A. in Journalism and a minor in Dance from Temple University, and a cohort member with the Fulcrum Fellowship, to share her thoughts on what democracy means to her and her perspective on its current health.

Keep ReadingShow less