St. Ignatius Loyola explains the concept of “presupposition” near the beginning of his Spiritual Exercises. He writes that “every good Christian ought to be more eager to put a good interpretation on a neighbor’s statement than to condemn it.” If I cannot find a positive way to interpret a neighbor’s statement, I should ask the neighbor what it means.
Rather than a false optimism, as the editors of America recently explained, presupposition is “a way of proceeding that seeks to go deeper than suspicion or superficial rejection of the other in favor of honest, genuine dialogue.” I believe the principle is especially needed in our current political moment.
Last week, Vice President Kamala Harris announced that she would not be attending the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, a New York Catholic charities fundraiser. Attending the dinner has been a tradition for presidential nominees in election years since 1960. Only one presidential nominee, Walter Mondale, has chosen not to attend in the last 50 years.
Instead of attending, the vice president said she would spend her time campaigning elsewhere. This week, Cardinal Timothy Dolan expressed his disappointment that Ms. Harris would not be at the dinner, but said he hoped she would reconsider.
Ms. Harris’s supporters called it a wise choice, while her detractors claimed the decision reveals something negative. Mr. Trump, who will attend, took great liberties to interpret Ms. Harris’s decision for his followers on Truth Social.
“I don’t know what she has against our Catholic friends, Mr. Trump said, “but it must be a lot….”
I do not believe it is productive to make assumptions about why Ms. Harris made this decision. She has her reasons. And I don’t know of any Catholics who are being persecuted by the Biden administration. But I do know several who were dismayed by Ms. Harris’s decision to skip the Al Smith dinner. Some seem to view this as a small decision that only affects a small group of wealthy donors in New York, but I don’t think that’s true. In this short and unpredictable election, many Catholics are truly torn about their vote and are watching everything.
In this case, Ignatian presupposition would dictate that we give Ms. Harris the benefit of the doubt. She may feel the event’s levity is inappropriate given the seriousness of this election, or, based on Mr. Trump’s treatment of Hillary Clinton at the dinner in 2016, she may be concerned that insult is more likely than levity. Or perhaps she feels it is inappropriate to attend a social gathering with an opponent she and many Americans consider a threat to democracy.
That said, I believe not attending is a missed opportunity both for her campaign and our country. I can think of several reasons why Ms. Harris should reconsider. Here are three of them.
The Harris-Walz campaign still feels new.President Joe Biden announced he would be departing from the presidential race on July 21 and endorsed Ms. Harris as his replacement. That occurred the weekend after the Republican National Convention, and a week after an assassination attempt against Mr. Trump. Ms. Harris officially became her party’s nominee at the Democratic National Convention in August.
It’s true that Ms. Harris has been on the national stage throughout her time as vice president, as well as during her time as a U.S. Senator. But the campaign itself still feels as if it has just begun. A mother I recently interviewed described the campaign this way: “It feels like we’ve been dating for just a couple of months and now I have to decide whether I want to get married.”
The Harris-Walz campaign has had to compete with news of high-stakes national and international developments. The Al Smith Dinner would offer Ms. Harris yet another much-needed avenue to present herself to American voters, particularly Catholic voters. It is intended to be a light-hearted event, which would, at least in theory, resonate with the Harris-Walz campaign of joy.
Countering an anti-Catholic narrative about Ms. Harris. True or not, some Catholics have questioned Ms. Harris’s respect for religious liberty. These doubts stem in part from her questioning of Brian Bruescher during his confirmation hearings to be a U.S. District Court judge in Nebraska. She asked him, “Were you aware that the Knights of Columbus opposed a woman’s right to choose when you joined the organization?”
Others question Ms. Harris for sponsoring the “Do No Harm Act,” a measure that would have limited the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was passed in 1993.
Certainly having views that differ from the Catholic Church does not make a person “anti-Catholic.” And Ms. Harris’s role as vice president has meant she has worked closely with Mr. Biden, who often speaks of his Catholic faith.
Attending the Al Smith Dinner would be a way for Ms. Harris to counter this anti-Catholic narrative, which Mr. Trump is seeking to exploit.
Civility in our abortion debate post-Dobbs. Expanding access to abortion is central to Ms. Harris’s campaign, putting her at odds with Catholic teaching. Further, she said recently that she would support ending the filibuster to restore the access to abortion granted by Roe v. Wade.
Voters list abortion among their top concerns this election, and Ms. Harris is certainly aware that many Christians voters are conflicted about supporting her candidacy precisely because of this issue. During the recent debate, for example, she said, “...one does not have to abandon their faith or deeply held beliefs to agree: The government, and Donald Trump certainly, should not be telling a woman what to do with her body.”
Pro-life voters in particular may find her argument unconvincing, but it is clear that Ms. Harris is trying to reach voters who prioritize their faith. Attending the Al Smith Dinner would be yet another way to demonstrate that she can dialogue with people with whom she disagrees.
While she disagrees with church teaching on abortion, Ms. Harris holds positions on other issues—like the environment, immigration and health care—that are much more compatible with the Catholic faith. If she hopes to reach Catholic voters, she must also recognize that the Catholic vote is not a monolith. A recent Pew Research Center survey found mixed results among Catholic voters: 61 percent of white Catholics support Mr. Trump, while 65 percent of Hispanic Catholics support Ms. Harris.
If the polls are anything to go by, this election is going to be close. If my small group of friends and acquaintances is any indication, some Catholics are not engaging the presupposition and taking Ms. Harris’s decision to skip the fundraiser as a slight to their faith. Decisions like attending the Al Smith Dinner may seem minor, but they are amplified in a shorter campaign. And for undecided voters, decisions like these could make all the difference.
