BALTIMORE -- The U.S. Catholic bishops have adopted moral guidelines for 2008 voters, saying that opposition to abortion is crucial, but that Catholics cannot be single-issue voters.

They mustn't use concern about poverty or war as an excuse to support the intentional killing of embryonic humans, but neither may their opposition to abortion permit them to treat other human rights issues as trivial, the bishops wrote.

"Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture, war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act," the bishops wrote in Faithful Citizenship. "These are not optional concerns which can be dismissed.

"As Catholics we are not single-issue voters. A candidate's position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee 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 the promotion of racism, may legitimately lead a voter to disqualify a candidate from receiving support."

Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn, who chaired the drafting committee, said the guidelines were not "a voter's guide."

"It seeks to help form consciences for political life, not to tell people how to vote," he said.

After the election of Pope Benedict XVI in 2005, many observers expected the aggressive culture warriors among the U.S. bishops to gain ascendancy over their more diplomatic or centrist brethren. But Faithful Citizenship, which passed 221-4 at their meeting in Baltimore, reflected a determined effort by the bishops to achieve consensus. Their office has published moral guidelines for every presidential election year since 1976, but this was the first to be debated and voted on by all the bishops.

In an effort to achieve consensus between bishops whose primary interest was ending abortion and those who gravitated more toward other issues, such as ending poverty and promoting universal health care, Faithful Citizenship was drafted by a broad committee of bishops who chair committees on topics ranging from abortion to doctrine to immigration.

The most heavily honed passage addressed circumstances in which a voter might, reluctantly, support a candidate who supported something that the church deems "intrinsic evil."

"A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter's intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. ... At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate's opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity," they wrote.

"There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate's unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil."

If all candidates in a race hold positions that are morally unacceptable, "the voter may decide to take the extraordinary step of not voting for any candidate or, after careful deliberation, may decide to vote for the candidate deemed less likely to advance such a morally flawed position and more likely to pursue other authentic human goods," they wrote.

The document is not directed at legislators, and does not address whether those who support abortion rights should be denied communion. However, it warns voters and legislators that their decisions can have eternal consequences.

"It is important to be clear that the political choices faced by citizens not only have an impact on the general peace and prosperity but also may affect the individual's salvation," they wrote. "Similarly, the kinds of laws and policies supported by public officials affect their spiritual well-being."

It says that Catholics "may feel politically disenfranchised" because each major political party advocates some of their concerns but rejects others.

"As Catholics we should be guided more by our moral convictions than by our attachment to a political party or interest group," the bishops wrote. "When necessary, our participation should help transform the party to which we belong; we should not let the party transform us in such a way that we neglect or deny fundamental moral truths."

The Rev. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life, said the bishops "have made it clear that abortion is not just one among many issues."

Bishop David Zubik was making plans to promote the document in the Diocese of Pittsburgh. He served on the committee that made the decision to have all the bishops vote on it.

"This is one of those documents that everybody has to own, because it is so important," he said.

"Abortion and euthanasia are primary issues. ... We need to be careful, though, that some people don't relegate those as being the only issues."

John Allen, who analyzes church issues for the independent, liberal National Catholic Reporter, believes the process of drafting Faithful Citizenship was as important for the church as its content.

"In the Catholic Church for a long time there has been a split between the pro-life constituency, which works on abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research and the peace and justice people who work on Iraq and the death penalty and poverty," he said. "What is going on with this document is that they are trying to bring those constituencies back together.

"They took groups that typically don't work together, threw them in a room, threw away the key and said, 'You guys have to learn how to play well with one another.' "