That’s the provocative question at the heart of this essay by Robert Stackpole, STD, from Catholic Online:

Catholic voters find themselves just as bewildered as other Americans this election year.

Faced with a more colourful line-up of candidates touting a wider array of viewpoints than ever before, an unprecedented number of voters remain undecided.

On the Democratic side, the race for the White House pits the first viable African-American candidate against the first viable female candidate, while the Republican field includes a bona-fide war hero running against a former Baptist preacher, a multi-millionaire business executive, a prime-time TV actor, and a guy who likes to be called “America’s Mayor.”

This time around, however, Catholics have been given extra-help in making wise choices at the ballot box. In a recent document entitled “Forming Consciences for Faithful citizenship” (2007), the US Conference of Catholic Bishops provided the faithful with a voter’s guide that can help them exercise their democratic responsibilities in accordance with the Church’s social teachings.

Of course, the Bishops of the Church offer no detailed social program; they claim no expertise in the finer points of economics or foreign policy. What they do provide, however, is an outline of general moral and social principles, clearly laid out and prioritized in a way that can enable Catholics — and, indeed, all people of good will—to apply those principles to the great issues of the day.

Here is a salutary exercise for every Catholic who wants to cast a well-informed vote this year: go to each candidate’s website, and read over their public statements of where they stand on the issues. Then, immediately after that, read the Bishops’ statement on “Faithful Citizenship.” Compare and contrast what you find.

When this exercise is done fairly and without prejudice, many Catholics will be surprised to discover that the presidential candidate whose viewpoints seem most “in sync” with the Church’s guidance is none other than the most devout Evangelical in the race: Mike Huckabee.

Huckabee has advertised himself during this presidential election as a “Christian [that is, Evangelical Christian] leader,” whose faith “not only informs me, it defines me.”

Then how could he be the most “Catholic” candidate on the ballot?

If this comes as a shock to many Catholics, it probably says more about our lack of knowledge of our own heritage of social teaching, and more about our ignorance of the depth and breadth of American Evangelicalism, than it does about Gov. Huckabee himself.

The Catholic Bishops make it very clear in “Faithful Citizenship” that not all issues facing Americans today are of equal value. In section 37 of their document they write: “In making decisions, it is essential for Catholics to be guided by a well-formed conscience that recognizes that all issues do not carry the same moral weight,” and they specifically emphasize “the special claim on our consciences and actions” of “the moral obligation to oppose intrinsically evil acts.” Section 42 is particularly striking:

As Catholics, we are not single issue voters. A candidate’s position on a single issue is not sufficient grounds for a voter’s support. Yet a candidate’s position on a single issue that involves an intrinsic evil such as support for legal abortion or racism may legitimately lead a voter to disqualify a candidate from receiving support.

The Bishops ask us above all to apply a “consistent ethic of life” to our voting decisions. First of all, they highlight ‘The Right to Life and the Dignity of the Human Person,” and second, the “Call to Family, Community, and Participation: “The family–based on a marriage between a man and a woman–is the first and fundamental unit of society … It should be defended and strengthened, not redefined or undermined by permitting same sex unions or other distortions of marriage.”

How do the candidates’ websites and public statements stack up against these principles and priorities?

Check out the rest for the answer to that and other questions. It’s food for thought during this sometimes confusing and confounding election cycle.