Would you care to expand that and explain why you think that way?
Yes. Here's my thinking. First in my mind is the left would love to politicize the church and have us fight and split. Second, the Church teaches spiritual truth and organizes for this purpose rather than political action.
She can and should be active in all areas of our lives, of course. But there is a line that we should be careful of. Teaching about abortion and relativism, for example, is a good and necessary thing. Applying that to this bill or that particular amendment risks fracturing the church and playing into the hands of our opponents.
For an extreme example, if the Church supports legislator X on legislation A, our opponents will organize for legislator Y and legislation B and work to split the congregation into warring camps. It's obvious to me this is their strategy, it would be foolish to play into their hands.
The closer the Church can stick to the clear teaching of on the sanctity of life, the better. This is safe and solid Truth. It gives the foundation for those who wish to be active politically without embroiling the Church and risking splitting it with political debate.
I left out an important point. For those within the Church who are in error on these issues, the proper approach is to their spirit not their politics. And this is the proper mission of the Church.
I think he probably just said it wrong. What I think is the "right" people need to state the church position. When someone such as Father Phlager saddles up with Reverend Wright and Louis Farakkan, the Church should discipline them because they aren't representing the real church. Are they getting permission to do and say these things? Maybe they should also be disciplined. With all these church "spokesmen" talking, it's hard to control your message. Kinda like Pelosi saying abortion isn't settled yet in the church right before meeting the pope.