Sound shocking? It’s not. It is simply the only conclusion one comes to when one looks at the principles and moral laws involved. As a guide, we will be quoting from ‘The Moral Obligation of Voting” written by the Rev. Titus Cranny, S.A, M.A, S.T.L in 1952. As Fr. Cranny states:

But even more important… were [the elections] of 1948 in Italy when the Communists, bolder than before, openly vowed to gain control of the government and threatened to harm the Church. As Vicar of Christ and defender of the faith, Pope Pius XII again stressed the Pastors and Lenten Preachers of Rome on the solemn obligation of the citizen to use the vote in such grave circumstances.

“It is your right and duty to draw the attention of the faithful to the extraordinary importance of the coming elections, and to the moral responsibility which follows from it for all those who have the right to vote. Without doubt the Church intends to remain outside and above all political parties, but how could it be possible to remain indifferent to the composition of a parliament to which the Constitution gives the power to legislate in matters which concern so directly the highest religious interest, and the condition of the life of the Church in Italy itself?…Consequently it follows: – That in the present circumstances it is strictly obligatory for whoever has the right, man or woman, to take part in the elections. He who abstains, particularly through indolence or from cowardice, thereby commits a grave sin, a mortal offense. [69]”

Everyone has to vote according to the dictates of his own conscience. Now it is evident that the voice of conscience imposes on every sincere Catholic the necessity of giving his own vote to those candidates or to those lists of candidates, which offer them truly adequate guarantees for the protection of the rights of God and of souls, for the true good of individuals, of families, and of society, according to the laws of God and the Church’s moral teaching. [70]

Thus, Pius XII eloquently points out that it would be a mortal sin for one to abstain from voting under circumstances where a party hostile to the Faith, in this case clearly Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party, wish to gain control of government and harm the Church. As proof Hillary has already publicly stated her view that religion, including Catholicism, must change it’s views on abortion.

In addition Mrs. Clinton also fully supports Obamacare’s mandate which forces catholic institutions to violate the moral law and fund abortifacients. As Life News reported:

 This mandate, issued in August, includes drugs that work after conception to destroy life rather than prevent it. The statement included a postponement of one year for religious groups that do not already carry contraceptives and additionally would not be exempted under last year’s narrow definition of “religious employer.”
The mandate not only violates such existing conscience protections on abortion such as the Hyde/Weldon Amendment (in so far as Plan B and Ella are covered), but also violates the principles of the Church Amendments which protects conscience rights for those who object to contraceptives and other services on moral or religious grounds. Additionally, the U.S. government already funds domestic family planning at a level of $1.9 billion annually.

Hillary wants to impose this vision of America on Catholics in the future by stacking the Supreme Court with avowed pro-abortion anti-religious liberty judges. These judges will persecute Catholics and the Church for not supporting abortion, same sex marriage, and transgenderism. Catholic Charities has already been forced to abandon adoption services due to religious discrimination in major cities. Hillary wants to make this a national policy. She will support closing down catholic adoption agencies if they do not place children with same-sex or transgender couples. See the history below:

In 2006, Catholic Charities of Boston, which had been one of the nation’s oldest adoption agencies, faced a very difficult choice: violate its conscience, or close its doors.In order to be licensed by the state, Catholic Charities of Boston would have to obey state laws barring “sexual orientation discrimination.” And because marriage had been redefined in Massachusetts, Catholic Charities could not simply limit its placements to married couples.Catholic leaders asked the state legislature for a religious exemption but were refused.As a result, Catholic Charities of Boston was forced to shut down its adoption services.

Later that year, Catholic Charities San Francisco faced a similar untenable choice and was forced to end its adoption services as well.

In Washington, DC, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington—which has provided support to children and families for over eighty years—had a partnership with the District of Columbia for its foster care and public adoption program. However, in 2010, a law redefining legal marriage to include two people of the same sex took effect in the District.The District then informed Catholic Charities that it would no longer be an eligible foster care and adoption partner.Why?Because, as a Catholic organization, Catholic Charities was committed to placing children with married couples so that each child would have the experience of a mother and a father.

In 2011, Catholic Charities affiliates in Illinois closed down instead of complying with a new requirement that they can no longer receive state money if they refuse to place children with persons in same-sex relationships as foster or adoptive parents.”In the name of tolerance, we’re not being tolerated,” said Bishop Thomas J. Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois, a civil and canon lawyer who fought for Catholic Charities to retain its religious freedom.

Thus, it is indisputable that we are in a situation precisely analogous to the Italian elections of 1948 of which Pius XII was speaking. Therefore all Catholics have a grave moral obligation to vote against Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party in November. The ONLY effective way to do this is to vote for Donald Trump as he is her only viable opposition and his positions are the opposite of hers on all of the issues posed above. In fact, Trump wants to EXPAND religious freedom for the Church by repealing the Johnson amendment and letting our priests clearly tell Catholics from the pulpit that they cannot support Hillary Clinton by name and not lose the Church’s tax exempt status. This is huge:

As Fr. Cranny reiterates:

In given instances, the obligation to vote may be grave, that is, binding under pain of mortal sin, when there is danger that evil forces may gain control of the government and this danger can be averted or lessened by an election. The vote obliges all citizens, both men and women; it is a trust by which they can promote good or evil; it is an obligation binding in the sight of God. The voter must follow the dictates of his conscience, but refuse his vote to any forces that would bring evil to the Church or to his country. He must give his vote so as to work effectively for the good of the people, as a loyal defender of God and of the Church.

Thus have the Popes stressed the importance of the vote in the social, political, economic, and religious life of a country. Hence the faithful have the additional responsibility of obeying the counsels and commands of the Vicar of Christ as well as promoting the common good of Church and state.

For those stubborn Catholics wanting to throw away their vote on a third party (as if any third party candidate upheld Catholic principles in the election) the moral answer is that you are forbidden. As Fr. Cranny points out:

In 1921 Cardinal Amette, Archbishop of Paris, addressed a pastoral to his flock on this duty. Later, in a joint letter to all French Catholics, the hierarchy gave this message:

…It is your duty to vote wisely; that is to say, in such a way as not to waste your votes. It would be better to cast them for candidates who, although not giving complete satisfaction to all our legitimate demands, would lead us to expect from them a line of conduct useful to the country, rather than to keep your votes for others whose program indeed may be more perfect, but whose almost certain defeat might open the door to the enemies of religion and of the social order. [76]

In conclusion all Catholics have a grave moral obligation to vote in this election and vote for the only viable opposition to Hillary Clinton and her anti-Catholic agenda for the country: Donald Trump. In the words of Cardinal Costa of Florence from 1951:

Even township elections can cause enormous damage to our institutions. To realize the importance of this it is enough to observe that whoever abstains from voting, or who votes for individuals who oppose Christian faith and morals, automatically makes himself responsible for all the damages that come after that to souls and to consciences. He thus makes himself guilty of a sin much greater than missing Mass on Sunday or not making the Easter Duty. The latter are individual sins, whereas a badly given vote or a neglected vote is a social sin which damages – and oh how gravely it damages – the community, the countryside and the very state itself.