Faith in … ?
The front page headline of my local newspaper (Northside Courier, 24 October 2007) caught my eye the other day: ‘Reilly to put faith in voters’. Here's an extract:
Willoughby Mayor Pat Reilly says he will vote according to the majority's view—even if it flies in the face of his staunch Catholicism—if he is elected as senator next month.
The long-time councillor, who said he still plans to run for re-election as mayor in 2008, was announced as the first candidate for the Senator OnLine (SOL) Party last week. SOL is the country's first internet-based party, which will make its decisions based purely on the results of online polls.
As part of SOL's constitution, Cr Reilly has undertaken to vote according to the majority result of the party's web-based opinion polls and abstain when there is no clear result ...
Asked if he would be willing to vote for the majority even if it went against his Catholic beliefs, Cr Reilly said that while it could be with regret that he would have to step away from his “core beliefs”, he would because he “has faith in Australians”.
But what if the majority's view is, for example, for the decriminalisation of drugs?
“God help us if that's the case. But at least it encourages people to get into the line of debate,” he said.
No doubt you can anticipate some of the questions I want to raise in response.
Firstly, why is Reilly referred to as a “staunch Catholic”? (Why—apart from the fact that “staunch Catholic” is such a standard journalistic expression!) My dictionary defines ‘staunch’ as “loyal and committed in attitude”, so using the adjective ‘staunch’ in this situation seems somewhat inaccurate.
Secondly, can any lawyers out there tell me the answer to the following question: isn't it illegal for a person or organization to seek to bond an elected parliamentarian to vote a particular way as the SOL are seeking to do? (Remember the fuss caused in the NSW Parliament when some thought that Archbishop Pell was trying to influence the vote of MPs.)
Thirdly, Reilly's attitude seems a long way removed from the example of the Apostle Peter, upon whom his Catholic Church was founded. When faced with a similar choice in Acts 5:29, Peter says simply: “We must obey God rather than men”.
Finally, does not Reilly's response seem strange, considering the position he has put himself into? Having committed himself to a course of ignoring God's divine wisdom, it does seem slightly problematic to cry “God help us”!