Guest Post: A Catholic Case for the Voice

NB: This is a guest post written my lovely husband Callum. 

I've always tended to steer clear of politics here on Ardent Devotion (mostly because the internet terrifies me) and chiefly written on matters of the heart. However, Australia's upcoming Voice referendum is something our little family feels passionately about from a Catholic perspective. 

"If you don't know then vote no" just isn't good enough. Christians have a duty to form their minds and consciences in order to promote a just and equitable society for all. Callum's article is a great starting point for understanding why voting 'Yes' to the Voice is an action deeply rooted in Church tradition, orthodox faithfulness, and true justice. We hope that if you're still on the fence, it can help to form your head and heart in approaching this referendum. 

Love and goodwill always, 

Kate 

~~~

A Catholic Case for the Voice

This Saturday, Australians will be asked to vote on a proposed change to the Constitution that would create an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament, ‘the Voice’.

Some Catholics have expressed concern about the proposal. The Voice is supported by the progressive mainstream, and can appear as yet another radical change to a society which has changed so much in recent decades.

In this article I aim to set out reasons why Catholics, in particular, should vote ‘Yes’ for the Voice. My aim is not to set out a legal or constitutional argument - that has been done ably elsewhere - but to set out a Catholic argument, based on the teachings of the Church, in support of the proposal.

Catholics should support the Voice for three reasons. Firstly, the problems that have necessitated the Voice - indigenous dispossession and its consequences - have been decried by the Church for centuries. Secondly, the Voice aligns with principles of Catholic social theology. Finally, and most importantly, the consistent teaching of Australia’s bishops should lead the faithful to support the Voice.

The Problem

In 1537, at the dawn of the colonial age, Pope Paul III issued a papal bull to combat the serious errors which he saw taking place in the new Spanish colonies in the Americas. The Spanish colonists had enslaved the local indigenous people, and deprived them of their land and possessions, using the excuse that they were not “true men”. Incensed by these errors, Pope Paul III taught that the Native Americans “are truly men” and went on to say that they, “and all other people who may later be discovered by Christians, are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be the outside the faith of Jesus Christ.”

Pope Paul’s teaching, almost half a millennium ago, was ignored in the centuries that followed. In the late 18th Century, colonists from Britain established new colonies in Australia, and continued the pattern of depriving the Aboriginal people of their land and possessions. 

The Catholic Church in Australia raised an early, prophetic voice against these crimes. In 1869 Archbishop Bede Polding, along with Bishop Daniel Murphy of Hobart and the other Australian bishops, issued a joint pastoral letter as part of the Second Provincial Synod of Australia. In that pastoral letter, they taught all Australian Catholics:

“We have dispossessed the aboriginals of the soil, at least we have deprived them of the use of it from which they gained a subsistence…In natural justice then, we are held to compensation. 

The stain of blood is upon us - blood has been shed otherwise than in self-defence - blood, in needless and wanton cruelty…Shall we not protest against this?”

Archbishop Polding was not personally responsible for the dispossession of Australia’s Aboriginal peoples. Indeed, it is likely that most of the Catholics who the bishops addressed in their letter were not personally responsible. But the first bishops of Australia recognised that “we” as a society owe a duty to compensate Aboriginal people for what they were deprived of, and the evils that have come from that dispossession.

Like Paul III centuries earlier, the Australian bishops’ protests were largely ignored. The decades following the 1869 pastoral letter saw further dispossession of Aboriginal people by colonial governments and settlers, and even by the Church. The 20th Century saw the continuation of discriminatory policies against Aboriginal people which perpetuated their dispossession and tore families apart. The Church has acknowledged, and apologised, for its own part in those practices, and particularly for its role in the Stolen Generations.

While the second half of last century saw some improvements in government policies, all sides of politics agree that the situation for Australia’s Aboriginal people is still dire. The consequences of dispossession remain with us. The “gap” between health outcomes and standards of living between Aboriginal communities and the rest of Australia remains.

The Proposal

Against this backdrop, Australia’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples engaged in a lengthy consultation process that culminated in the 2017 Uluru Statement from the Heart. The statement’s signatories “call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution.” The Government has decided to advance this element of the Uluru Statement by setting in motion the referendum process. The Voice would be able to make representations to the Federal Parliament and Government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

A key principle of Catholic political theology is that the purpose of government is to govern for the welfare of the governed. Pope Leo XIII, echoing St Thomas Aquinas (De Regno [13]) taught that “the administration of the State must be carried on to the profit of those who have been committed to their care,” (Diuturnum [16]). Within that broad purpose, “the poor, the marginalised and in all cases those whose living conditions interfere with their proper growth should be the focus of particular concern,” (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church [182]).

If a government is to adequately govern for the benefit of those in its care, and in particular marginalised groups, then the government needs to understand the problems, needs, and aspirations of those groups. The Voice would assist with this. By making recommendations to Government and to Parliament, it would allow the needs and proposals of Aboriginal communities to be heard. By enshrining the Voice in the Constitution, future governments could not choose to abolish it. Instead, Aboriginal communities would have a guaranteed platform to advise the government on the needs of their people. At its best, this could lead Australian governments to work “for the profit” of Aboriginal communities by improving them in the ways those communities think best. At its worst, the Voice’s advice could be ignored, but that is no worse than the situation today.

What the Church has Said

On 11 May 2023, the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference issued a Statement Regarding An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament. The bishops state that the omission of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples from the Australian Constitution is “an omission which needs to be rectified. A constitutionally enshrined Indigenous Voice to Parliament is proposed as a way to achieve this.” 

The bishops acknowledge that “people may, in good faith, have differing concerns and perspectives,” and do not formally instruct Catholics to vote in favour of the Voice. However, they state that the referendum “can help us to move towards a deep and just reconciliation” and “offers a mechanism to help improve the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples”.

This is consistent with the teaching of the Church over the past thirty-five years, and should lead faithful Catholics to support the Voice.

On 29 November 1986 Pope St John Paul II gave a speech to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in Alice Springs. The pontiff, speaking of the need for resolutions to problems like land rights, said that “The establishment of a new society for Aboriginal people cannot go forward without just and mutually recognised agreements with regard to these human problems, even though their causes lie in the past.”

Following the pope’s lead, Australia’s Catholic bishops’ pastoral letters of 1988 and 1990 called for all governments to “involve Aboriginals in all decisions that affect them.” In their 1990 pastoral letter they endorsed Cardinal Clancy’s statement that there should be “an assured place” for Aboriginal people in Australia’s political processes, including provision for Aboriginal councils at local, state, and federal levels (Sharing the Country through Understanding and Respect). 

In 2001, after a synod involving the bishops of Oceania, Pope St John Paul II issued the apostolic exhortation Ecclesia in Oceania. In it, the pope stated: “The Church will support the cause of all indigenous peoples who seek a just and equitable recognition of their identity and their rights; and the Synod Fathers expressed support for the aspirations of indigenous people for a just solution to the complex question of the alienation of their lands,” ([28]).

The “aspirations” of Australia’s Aboriginal peoples were made manifest in 2017 with the issuing of the Uluru Statement, which called for the establishment of a Voice.

Making good on Pope St John Paul II’s words, the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference endorsed the Uluru Statement in 2021. In 2022, the Fifth Plenary Council, the highest ecclesiastical authority in Australia, also endorsed the Uluru Statement, with all the bishops unanimously voting in favour of the motion.

Australia’s bishops have therefore been emphatic in indicating their support for an Aboriginal role in Australia’s political process, and their support for the Uluru Statement, which calls for such a role through the Voice.

Why that matters

Some Catholics say that the bishops’ statements on these issues are irrelevant to them. They say the Voice is a political issue, and the bishops should stick to religious or moral matters.

This is not a Catholic response.

The Church has always held that in all things, even ‘secular’ issues, the faithful must be guided by the teaching office of the Church. As Pope St Pius X taught in 1912, “No matter what the Christian does, even in the realm of temporal goods, he cannot ignore the supernatural good…All his actions, insofar as they are morally either good or bad…are subject to the judgment and judicial office of the Church,” (Singulari Quadam, [3]). Pope Pius XII, speaking in 1954, also criticised those who would limit the teaching power of the Church to “matters strictly religious”. He emphasised that “Many and serious are the problems in the social field. Whether they be merely social or socio-political, they pertain to the moral order, are of concern to the conscience and salvation of men, and thus they cannot be declared outside the authority and care of the Church.”

Lest anyone think this is old pre-conciliar thinking, the Second Vatican Council itself taught that “in every temporal affair [the laity] must be guided by a Christian conscience, since even in secular business there is no human activity which can be withdrawn from God’s dominion,” (Lumen Gentium [36]). A truly Christian conscience must be formed by the teaching of the Church, in particularly the teaching of the Pope and the bishops. The Council continued by saying that “The laity should, as all Christians, promptly accept in Christian obedience decisions of their spiritual shepherds, since they are representatives of Christ as well as teachers and rulers in the Church,” (Lumen Gentium [37]).

The question of whether to change the Constitution to create the Voice is a socio-political question, and as such is ultimately a moral question. In all such questions the Catholic faithful should follow, not the dictates of politicians and commentators of one political side or another, but the teachings of their bishops. 

Our bishops have called for a place for Aboriginal people in the political process. They have endorsed the Uluru Statement, which calls for a Voice to Parliament. And in their Statement Regarding An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament, they have said that the Voice “could be a significant step towards a more just and equitable Australia”. 

Come referendum day, how you vote will ultimately be your choice to make. My hope is that Catholics will make that choice guided by a truly Christian conscience, so that we may start to right the wrongs committed by past generations against Aboriginal Australians. 

As Pope St John Paul II said in 1986, “what can now be done to remedy the deeds of yesterday must not be put off to tomorrow."

~~~

AMDG