EWTN News reports on a Colombian priest, Father Duberley Salazar, who has developed a “Discern” method for Catholic voting, presented via Instagram videos through his “Clínica del Alma” account. The method claims to guide Catholics in making “responsible political decisions” based on “Scripture and the social doctrine of the Church.” Salazar frames this as addressing “moral confusion” and “social polarization,” asserting that Christianity possesses “an inescapable social and political dimension.” The method proceeds through steps including prayer, informed analysis of candidates and platforms, reflection on service, consistency with “Christian values,” conscience, virtue, and resilience. Crucially, Salazar explicitly endorses the “lesser evil” principle for situations where no “ideal” candidate exists, and even suggests casting a blank ballot as a “legitimate” option if no candidate respects “fundamental values.” This entire framework, dressed in the language of Catholic piety, is in reality a sophisticated instrument for the complete abdication of Catholic political responsibility and the enthronement of secular democracy as the ultimate arbiter of the common good.
The Abdication of Christ the King: Democracy as the New Deus Ex Machina
The very premise of Father Salazar’s “Discern” method reveals the foundational rot of post-conciliar political theology: the total capitulation to the liberal democratic order as the sole legitimate framework for Catholic political action. The priest speaks of “respect for the rule of law, the constitution, and democratic norms” as self-evident goods, without a single syllable acknowledging that these very norms are the fruit of the Revolution, Masonic ideology, and the explicit rejection of the Social Kingship of Christ. Pius XI, in his encyclical Quas Primas, unequivocally states: “His reign, namely, extends not only to Catholic nations or to those who, by receiving baptism according to law, belong to the Church, even though their erroneous opinions have led them astray or discord has separated them from love, but His reign encompasses also all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ.” And further: “The state is happy not by one means, and man by another; for the state is nothing else than a harmonious association of men.” To speak of “democratic norms” as a criterion for Catholic action, without first demanding that these norms conform to the Law of Christ the King, is to place the creature above the Creator, and the will of the fallen human mob above the immutable divine order. It is the very error condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors, Proposition 39: “The State, as being the origin and source of all rights, is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits.” Salazar’s method implicitly accepts the state as the source of its own authority, rather than acknowledging that all authority comes from God, and that the state’s legitimacy is contingent upon its submission to the divine and natural law.
The “Lesser Evil”: A License for Perpetual Compromise with Iniquity
The explicit endorsement of the “lesser evil” principle by Father Salazar is perhaps the most damning evidence of this method’s theological bankruptcy. He states: “This principle teaches that, in situations where no option is ideal, it is licit to choose the least harmful one or the one that offers greater consistency with Christian values, thereby avoiding contribution to a greater evil or to the deterioration of society.” While the concept of choosing the lesser evil in a complex situation has a basis in moral theology, its application here is perverted. It is used to legitimize perpetual voting for candidates or platforms that actively promote intrinsic evils, such as abortion, euthanasia, or the homosexual agenda, simply because they are deemed “less bad” than others. This is not prudence; it is moral cowardice and a betrayal of the prophetic mission of the Church. The Church, before the conciliar revolution, never taught that Catholics could licitly support those who advocate for the destruction of innocent life or the subversion of the natural order, merely because an alternative was deemed “worse.” The duty of a Catholic is to promote the good and combat evil, not to endlessly choose between varying degrees of evil. St. Thomas Aquinas, whom Salazar invokes, also taught that “the good of the many is more divine than the good of the individual” (Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 58, a. 9), implying that the common good, as defined by divine law, must always take precedence over individual preferences or pragmatic calculations within a flawed system. Furthermore, the suggestion of a “blank ballot” as a “legitimate” expression of dissatisfaction is a further admission of defeat, a tacit acknowledgment that the entire political arena is so corrupt that no Catholic choice can be made within it, thereby abandoning the field entirely to the enemies of Christ.
The Illusion of “Formed Conscience” in a Vacuum of Doctrine
Salazar speaks of “forming one’s conscience” and addressing a “disconnect between the faith they profess and the decisions they make in public life.” Yet, his method provides no substantive doctrinal content for this formation beyond vague appeals to “Christian values” and “common good.” What are these “Christian values” if not the specific, unyielding demands of the Gospel and the social teaching of the pre-conciliar Magisterium? Where is the explicit condemnation of liberalism, socialism, and religious indifferentism as taught by Pius IX? Where is the demand for the Social Reign of Christ the King, as taught by Pius XI? Where is the condemnation of the separation of Church and State, and the assertion of the Church’s exclusive right to teach, govern, and lead souls to eternal happiness? The silence on these fundamental points is deafening. A “formed conscience” in the modernist mold is one that is “informed” by the spirit of the age, by “dialogue,” and by “tolerance,” rather than by the immutable truths of revelation. It is a conscience that seeks “consistency with Christian values” as defined by the prevailing secular morality, rather than by the Church’s infallible Magisterium. This is precisely the “weak, disembodied faith incapable of transforming history” that Salazar himself laments, yet his method actively perpetuates it by refusing to provide the only true foundation for such transformation: the integral, unadulterated Catholic Faith.
The Omission of the Supernatural: A Purely Naturalistic Framework
The entire “Discern” method operates on a purely naturalistic plane. It speaks of “prayer” as a preliminary step, but this prayer is divorced from any supernatural understanding of the Church’s mission or the ultimate end of human society. There is no mention of the necessity of grace, the state of mortal sin, the eternal destiny of souls, or the ultimate judgment of God. The “common good” is conceived solely in terms of temporal prosperity, social harmony, and “human dignity” as defined by secular humanism, rather than the salvation of souls and the glorification of God. This is a direct consequence of the modernist error condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu, Proposition 20: “Revelation was merely man’s self-awareness of his relationship to God,” and Proposition 26: “The dogmas of faith
Source:
How to vote based on Catholic doctrine: A priest’s method of discernment (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 19.05.2026