Moral Principles or Moral Relativism

    In a recent Denver Post YourHub article, Sexual morality is seldom simple,” Jack Van Ens criticizes the Roman Catholic Church for its “anti-contraceptive morality,”  “ideological purity,” and its ethics which should all be “mothballed” like an old battleship because they are out of date.   These comments reflect a growing trend of Secularism which has recently left religious citizens constantly on the defense against attacks on their faith.    Catholicism in particular is often seen by secularists as an outdated relic of history.  The Catholic Bishops are under attack as medieval artifacts sticking to their stodgy religion which stubbornly refuses to progress with the times.  Van Ens falls in line with the mainstream media coverage of the contraception mandate debate: that this is all about those antediluvian bishops trying to impose on the entire country a morality their own people reject.   “Politically incorrect” beliefs like those on abortion, gay rights, divorce and contraception can help to confirm this myth.

    It is important to remember that the Church’s beliefs in these areas are based on the morals that western civilization held for over 2000 years.  The morals of the Church are based on natural laws as confirmed by Aristotle, Augustine and reaffirmed by Aquinas.  These views on moral issues are not outdated, because natural law cannot become ‘outdated; rather, society has changed.  This does not make the Church’s morals wrong; but it can make them unpopular.  It would be irrational of the Church to change its moral code of over 2000 years purely because some of its beliefs are unpopular.  If this were the Church’s policy, then it never would have lasted into the modern secular age.   Respect, not ridicule, would seem to be in order for the Church’s moral precepts. 

     It is easy for secular progressives such as Van Ens and a whole troupe of others, especially in the news media, to point out the ‘politically incorrect’ beliefs of the Church.   Secularists believe that moral rules must evolve with the times while many Christians will say that natural law and eternal truths don’t change.  Van Ens calls for the Church’s morality to be mothballed because he believes it’s out of date and was replaced when the birth control pill arrived in the 1960s.  However, just because morals are not popular doesn’t make them wrong.  

    Van Ens refers to the 1968 papal encyclical, Humanae Vitae, and perhaps it should actually be read by its critics to discover what it warned would happened with birth control:  infidelity, moral decline, lost respect for women, sterilization and euthanasia.  It also describes how birth control could be a dangerous weapon in the hands of those public authorities who take no heed of others moral beliefs.   The prophetic warnings of this encyclical have come to pass especially the warning about the danger of this power passing into the hands of those government authorities who care little for the precepts of moral law. 

     Lurking behind most of the progressive rhetoric in America today is moral relativism, the belief that there are no objective moral values that transcend culture or the individual.  Moral relativism holds that morality is in the eyes of the beholder and no one can claim the moral high ground.    The relativist believes that ethics is established by what most people believe.  Simply because most people think something is right does not thereby make it right. Simply because most people think a statement is true does not make that statement true. Should all values and opinions be accorded equal moral weight?  Should the beliefs and values of a church be decided by majority vote? 

    Van Ens criticizes the Catholic Church for its “ideological purity.”  It is very popular and sophisticated to espouse this view in many of our secularized cultural institutions such as the entertainment industry.  It is thought to be more tolerant, more open, and more intellectually respectable than the old-fashioned "absolutism" as decreed by the Catholic Church.   However, moral relativism is inconsistent with tolerance because it is closed off to the possibility of moral truth; therefore, it is an intellectual failure.  There are basic or fundamental ethical principles which are true without qualification or exception as to time, condition, or circumstance.  Many of the main criticisms of moral relativism by the Catholic Church relate largely to modern controversies, such as elective abortion.  The most authoritative response to moral relativism from the Roman Catholic perspective can be found in Veritatis Splendor, an encyclical by Blessed Pope John Paul II that should be read to gain insight into the fallacy of moral relativism.

    Today’s western civilization, inspired by intellectual thought of leftist secularists, is now steeped in moral relativism.  Notions like tolerance, diversity, multi-culturalism, and political correctness give secularists a blank check when it comes to making the most important decisions in life.  The secularist position is summed in our wide-spread cultural belief that "each person's values are his or her own, and we should not judge."  Pope Benedict XVI recently warned about the growing threat of secularism in the United States when he said that "powerful new cultural currents" have worn away the country's traditional moral consensus which was originally based on religious faith as well as ethical principles derived from natural law.  Whether they claim the authority of science or democracy, the pope said, militant secularists seek to stifle the church's proclamation of these "unchanging moral truths."  The pontiff has warned of the “dictatorship of relativism" which marches under the banner of “tolerance.”

    If you're a Christian with staunch morals who’s not in favor of abortion, gay marriage, or banning schools from mentioning Christ during the Christmas season, you're in conflict with secularism.   Secular progressives believe Christians should be mocked for their old fashioned beliefs, impugned for their conservatism, and driven from the public square at every opportunity.  They believe that a high wall exists that prevents those with religious beliefs from participating in discussions about the role of government.  Secularists hide behind this wall in an effort to control the discussion and coerce the religious into silence in the public square.  The good Christian, so this perspective has it, must compartmentalize his or her faith, keeping it a personal, private affair.  Secular progressives believe that issues of public policy and morality are best left to the secular powers, and this was very evident when the Obama Administration recently told the Catholic Bishops to listen to the “enlightened” voices of accommodation.  Secularists are engaged in a war against the religious, and it's time for people of faith to call out these secularists and speak up for their moral beliefs.

    People who take God seriously should not remain silent about their faith when confronted by secularists and anti-religious bigots.  The common good can never mean muting oneself in public debate on foundational issues of human dignity. Christian faith is always personal but never private. This is why any notion of tolerance that tries to reduce faith to private worship, or a set of opinions that we can indulge at home but need to be quiet about in public, will always fail.

   People of faith are part of a struggle for our nation’s future and have a right to speak up about their values.  We can’t claim to personally believe in the sanctity of the human person, and then act in our public policies as if we don’t. We can’t separate our private convictions from our public actions without diminishing both.  Pope Benedict has recently reminded the Catholic Bishops that they have a duty to defend ageless moral precepts.  All people of faith must head this reminder and take an active, vocal, and morally consistent role in public debate.