Always Advent

-
by Clare Siobhan

A few days before he was elected to the papacy, Benedict XVI (then known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger) delivered a homily now famous for his use of the phrase “the dictatorship of relativism.” (1) He referred to the letter of St. Paul to the Ephesians, in which Paul warns Christians that we must not be like children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness and deceitful wiles. Rather…we are to grow up… (Ephesians 4:14-15)

The cardinal said that “to have a clear faith according to the Creed of the Church is often labeled as fundamentalism, while relativism – that is, allowing oneself to be carried about with every wind of ‘doctrine’ – seems to be the only attitude that is fashionable. A dictatorship of relativism is being constituted that recognizes nothing as absolute and which only leaves the ‘I’ and its whims as the ultimate measure.”

He was referring mainly to moral and religious relativism, which wants to believe that there is no such thing as absolute right or wrong on any issue. Relativism is not only the opposite of certainty; it is against the very idea that certainty can exist. Relativism puts everything in the gray zone.

The cardinal’s homily generated a lot of interest and commentary, especially after he was elected pope. Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney, Australia, addressed his country’s National Press Club several months after Benedict’s election (2), and Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin spoke on the topic almost a year later at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast in Washington D.C. (3)

Both Morlino and Pell outlined some of the basic tenets of relativism, which are:

• Inconsistency and the application of double standards. In other words, relativists say that “everything is relative”, but only if they want it to be. For example, in the United States, if a pregnant woman is harmed by a third party in such a way that her unborn baby dies, the third party can be prosecuted for homicide. Yet that same woman, at any time during her pregnancy, can legally hire a doctor to take the life of her unborn baby by abortion.

• The manipulation of language. The use of the term “pro-choice” is a classic. It refers exclusively to the choice to abort a baby; no one ever suggests one can be pro-choice with regards to a person’s decision to rob a bank, or be a racist, or cause pollution.

• Secularism and scientism. Secularism is indifference to, rejection of or exclusion of religion and religious considerations. Scientism is regarding scientific methodology and thought as the only means to arrive at truth and puts itself at odds with religion and theology.

• Religion and religious people are to be tolerated only to the extent that they keep silent and keep the practice of their beliefs private. No religious debate or principles are allowed in the public square. Atheists and relativists cannot stand to see a cross on a hill or a nativity scene in a town center. Elected and appointed officials who try to live and vote their Christian faith are in big trouble from relativists.

• Distortion and misunderstanding of conscience. The Catholic understanding of conscience is that it seeks to learn what God wants and to do just that, to think and believe according to the natural moral law and the revealed truth given to the Church. Secularists and relativists think conscience is the right and the ability to define right and wrong for yourself. Basically, you’re allowed to do whatever you “feel” comfortable doing.

The best way to debunk the reasonableness of relativism is to think it through to its logical endpoint. Cardinal Pell points out that nobody actually lives as a full-blown, across-the-board relativist. Imagine a world in which everyone really believed that everything was relative:

No one would be safe on the streets or in their homes because there could be no law against assault, battery, breaking and entering, burglary, car jacking, child molesting, rape, murder, or any other crime against life, limb, or property. Everyone would have to be allowed to “choose” to do those things as long as they didn’t violate their personal “conscience”. The whole world would be as dangerous as the human womb is already is. Every military tyrant (Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussein) would have to be granted free reign to oppress his own citizenry and invade any other country at any time. Religions that demanded human sacrifice would have to be permitted. Drunk driving could not be outlawed. Even cannibalism, under the dictatorship of relativism, would have to be respected as a valid lifestyle choice.

And so on. The relativists don’t really believe what they’re saying. They only want Catholics to shut up and go away. (4)

(1) April 18, 2005 in St. Peter’s Basilica
(2) September 21, 2005
(3) April 7, 2006
(4) The complete texts of Bishop Morlino’s and Cardinal Pell’s talks are available online at Catholic Culture.org. Just type “dictatorship of relativism” into the search box.

(This article originally appeared in the Family Centered Faith Formation News, volume 4, issue 5, January 2007, produced by the Holy Trinity Office of Religious Education, Westmont IL)