[HaroTaure]

1) Could it be considered a sin if someone votes for a particular presidential candidate? For example, let's say someone is pro-life (as we hope all Orthodox Christians would be), but they vote for a pro-choice candidate because it seems that he might be better for the well-being of the country. Could the voter be sinning by voting for a "pro-choice" candidate?

2) Would it be considered inappropriate to ask a spiritual father who he thinks we should vote for?

[dremucha]

When some people went to visit Elder Paisios of the Holy Mountain just before an election, they asked who they should vote for. And he replied:
- Vote for the one you believe is best; the one who loves God and our countryThey always gave the same reply:
- They are all the same, Father.Then he added:
- Well, look here. All olive trees are the same; all of them are affected by the same disease called dakos. However, some are affected 100% by it, others 80% and others 50%. Since we are in need of olive trees, we have to look for the ones that are affected the least. When we go to vote, we should always bear in mind two things: a) how much the candidate loves God and is thus a conscious member of the Church, and b) how much he loves his country and look solely after its interests and not his own. If someone uses another criterion to vote, he is acting out of self-interrests and is not behaving like a true Christian. Later on, divine justice will allow him to pay for his mistake.Source: Elder Paisios of the Holy Mountain, p 123, hosted online here.

[andrekuper]

If I may truncate the first question, perhaps we should ask 'Could it be considered a sin if someone votes?' Is this not partaking in the current age where we should 'dwell in their [our] own countries, but simply as sojourners'? (Epistle to Diognetus)

I pose these questions in order to better understand how we should live in a world which is not Christian.

In Christ
Alexander

[liontutuxx]

'Could it be considered a sin if someone votes?' Living in a world which is "not Christian" is neither anything new, nor something which can be avoided. To me, not voting at all removes one's opportunity to make a difference. Those who choose not to vote should not complain if candidates are elected whose policies and philosophies are inimical to what they believe in.

[en-druzhba]

No political party will ever have a manifesto which fits Orthodox Christian principles. For example, the Church's position on homosexual relations would be (and probably is) denounced as 'homophobic' (strange word which is really meaningless - 'fear of same'). As Winston Churchill said, democracy is the worst form of government there is - apart from all the others. If we do not vote, we might end up with one of the others. We who are blessed to live in the world's few more or less well-organised democracies (notably the anglophone countries in which most here live) should remember that most people in the world live in circumstances we can scarcely imagine with constant fear, violence (including from the state), no rule of law, corruption, and ill-health, et al. No, thank you - I vote.

[sbrscnds]

I think that it is a serious error that arises from the modern sense of politics to search for a choice that sums up everything we want. This occurs because of the way in which individual choice is so highly prized in our society above everything else- and of course modern politics has become highly sophisticated in catering to this.

Instead I think it's best to look at past precedent when basic obedience to the ruling authority was asked for, and where the manner of this authority varied from ruler to ruler and often even amidst the rule of one authority. One certainly didn't approve of everything a ruler did- but one certainly did learn to be flexible. Something which in this age of choice we've largely lost hold of.

In this sphere then- which after all can only be limited in its scope or impact- one just learns to do make the best choice you can. The political sphere after all, only affects the degree of our lives that we want it to.

In Christ
-Fr Raphael

[buchmausar]

My last priest at our large cathedral parish told us he wasn't going to tell us whom to vote for, but that abortion was a superceding issue for Orthodox believers and that we ought to vote accordingly. As for it being a sin, if a kind of willful stupidity is a sin, then I would agree.

[duminyricky]

Aristotle once wrote that the end of politics ought to be the good of man. Of course, men disagree about what the good is. As Christians, we proclaim that the one thing needful is transformation in Christ. Thus, to my mind, we should be striving, so far as prudence dictates, to create a forum in which we can best work out our salvation in fear and trembling and proclaim the Gospel, knowing that politics is an inexact science, knowing that many do not share our faith or have faith of any kind and knowing that the “best regime” is a kingdom not of this world, though it is in it and affected by it. Sometimes, the best we can do is to choose the lesser evil, to avoid placing people in power who will make it more difficult to live and proclaim the Gospel than others. But we must be prepared to answer for our choices and we should inform ourselves as best we can.

In Christ,
Evan

[HarryMet]

To me voting is a waste of my time. Unless theres an Orthodox monarch on the ballot it makes little difference. Theres a constitution and theres a bill of rights, if politicians veer of the foundations of the country, its only because the majority voters want it and elected them to do so. And i also believe non-voters have more of a right in criticising politicians, How can a person who voted in his favorite candidate criticise him, he should criticise himself for being suckered by the politicians charm.

[Hofonom]

Most people in the world would give anything to be able to vote in free and fair elections, and they would find it incomprehensible that someone in a free, democratic country (more than most, anyhow) would think it was a waste of time. We can vote for a party and still criticise it. Orthodox monarchs have tended to have little to do with democracy and you wouldn't have got the chance to vote for one. An Orthodox monarch for the US - you could ask Prince Charles if he wants the job.

[Gymnfacymoota]

To me voting is a waste of my time.

This is the reason the "majority" wins and we get bad politicians. As a citizen of this country it is your duty and obligation to participate in the voting process. If your candidate loses, at least you had your "voice" heard. If we dont' ALL stand up and get out to vote this November, we will be the laughing stock of the planet when our great country falls due to this administration we have. Get out and vote!

[Acalsenunse]

I think the bigger problem is that to many unqualified people vote. Let me give you an example, for many years television stations like MTV, have campaigns for their young viewers to register and get the vote out during election season. Lets be honest with ourselves, the younger generation that watch mtv should not be voting.

Then theres the problems that occur in democracies when the entire voting nation is unqualified to vote. My parents country of Greece comes to mind. They excercise their democratic right to protest and burn and loot. Meanwhile all these protesters are the ones that voted in these politicians! They should be beating themselves up for knowingly and intentionally doing this to their country. If they were never given the right to vote the country would still be solvent and if not, then atleast they would be justified in rioting.

[searkibia]

I am part of the 'younger generation'. I like to think, often I am wrong, but I like to pretend, anyway, that I am an intelligent human being. I speak more than one language, can tell there from their and they're, qnd I know the differemce between chicken and tuna. I also know my own mind. I won't vote for someone because they make nice promises; that is just what gets them in office. I expect to see those promises carried out and thwir previously demonstrated values acted upon. I will not vote for someone because so-and-so said I should. There are a lot of 'older' people who cannot say that. I definitely agree on the 'unqualified to vote' front, but a lot of non-young citizens vote ridiculously. And then complain at what the politician they put there does (or does not) do. I think if there was a competency test for voting, it wouldn't't be nearly as huge a problem. (Think of 2004 and 2008...) Or at least that is how it seems to this young, sleep deprived student.
LORD have mercy on us all.
A.
(I will probably reread this after I've slept and ask myself what I was thinking, but until then...)
Ps: Please forgive any possible spelling errors. It is 3:51 AM where I am, I haven't slept, and my autocorrect is going nuts. Thanks.

[assonomaf]

I think the bigger problem is that to many unqualified people vote.

The problem is not with the age of the people voting. It is how they are being influenced by agenda driven educators. We can point to any amount of factors affecting why and how people vote. Our kids are being indoctrinated before they even get to kindergarten. Once there they are at the mercy of a union whose sole job is to keep their personal level of security. Retiring early and expecting the government to pay for the rest of our lives is just ridiculous. I may have the age wrong, but in Greece one can retire at 52 (?). that's crazy. people have another 30+ years to live and are then sucking the life out of the resources of their country (soon to be ours) and not giving anything back and then commit crimes to keep what they have not earned.

We should eat from the sweat of our brow. unless of course we are too old or infirm to do so. Voting age has noting to do with inexperience. It has to do with proper education.

Paul

[ansarigf]

I love the quotation of Elder Paisios. I think the Spirit-inspired holy fathers of our age have indicated that our forms of government are not inherently sinful, and that by voting for the people we believe to love God and our nation most, that we are serving Him Who is the source of all authority, be it "secular" or ecclesiastical.

On that note, I am usually quite ambivalent about the actual persons involved, especially at the Presidential level. For me most of the time, I hold my nose and vote for a conservative because of the pro-life issue. However, this year I'm wholeheartedly behind Ron Paul. Ron Paul has renewed my belief that the truly Christian stance is not only uncompromisingly pro-life, but also pro-peace/anti-war unless war is necessary to defend ourselves. Only Ron Paul is championing this principle.

If you listen to him, you will see that more than a decade ago he was talking about the coming collapse of the housing bubble, and the financial crisis of our nation through the Fed and fiat currency, which historically always tends towards the value of its production. Ron Paul is a champion of educational freedom, of religious freedom, and even of dietary freedom (like with the freedom to consume raw milk).

Just for me personally, Ron Paul is the candidate that I feel, using the criteria of Elder Paisios, is the best for our nation.

[Kissntell]

Moderator's comments

Please remember that this forum is not for political discussion - and so we have to be careful about not letting topics such as this which are important to slide away from the scope of the forum.

Secondly, let me also remind everyone that this forum is not "American" but spans many nations, cultures and ethnic groups. Thus a discussion about American presidential candidates is of interest only to a limited group.

Fr David

[Kolovorotkes]

Thank you, Fr. David. I am kind of a "returning member" and so I need a reminder of rules like this. Is there a place for (irenic) political discussion on Monachos?

[Peabelilt]

Thank you, Fr. David. I am kind of a "returning member" and so I need a reminder of rules like this. Is there a place for (irenic) political discussion on Monachos?

There is a Section on Monachos for "social groups" here. This is a place where a focused group could be started for those interested to discuss this matter. The "social groups" are not monitored as is the main forum and are open only to registered members; they are, of course, subject to the same standards of courtesy and polite discourse as is the main forum (infractions or abuse should be reported to one of the moderators).

Fr David Moser

[mirvokrug]

I have found this thread to be very enlightening. Thank you all for your responses. And Mr Niko - the quotation from Elder Paisios was golden! Thanks.

I just want to mention that if anyone does start a "social group" focused on political discussions, I (for one) would whole-heartedly follow it. I probably wouldn't participate much, because I am not educated enough in the topic, but I would find it interesting to read everyone else's point of views.

[Frogzlovzy]

Seconded, Christina!