MORAL RELATIVISM AND ‘GOOD CATHOLICS’

 

By Bill Dunn

 

Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., has been engaged in a public feud in recent months with the Catholic bishop in Providence. Kennedy asserted he is pro-choice, but he is still a “good Catholic.” Bishop Thomas Tobin responded, in effect: “Um, not quite.”

Traditional pro-life Catholics are supporting the bishop, while liberal Catholics and much of the mainstream media (suddenly showing a deep reverence toward matters of faith, who knew?) are claiming Bishop Tobin is out of line.

A Providence newspaper printed various opinions of citizens. Regarding politicians who are pro-abortion and yet claim to be good Catholics, one resident was quoted as saying, “If they believe they’re a true Catholic, who’s to say that they’re not?”

That captures the spirit of our age: moral relativism. If someone believes something is true, then it must be true for him, the facts be damned. Even if a person profoundly opposes the fundamental moral teachings of the Church, he must be considered a member in good standing as long as he sincerely believes he is.

What other core principles of Catholicism can be rejected and still allow a person to be a “good Catholic”? If someone rejects the authority of the pope, can he be a good Catholic? (These people typically are known as “Protestants.”) What about someone who does not believe in Jesus’ divinity? (These people usually are called “Unitarians.”) What if someone does not believe Jesus actually, physically rose from the dead? (These people usually are called “United Church of Christ ministers.”) What if someone does not even believe God exists? (These people usually are called “talk-show hosts on MSNBC.”)

According to moral relativism, the answer to all these questions is a resounding yes. It doesn’t matter if you believe all or some or none of the doctrines of the Church. As long as you feel you're a good Catholic, you are.

Mike Adams is a conservative college professor (the ultimate oxymoron). Adams reports the diversity movement took over higher education in earnest in the 1990s, with students being taught the joys of multiculturalism and the notion it is absolutely true there is no absolute truth.

But now, according to Adams, liberal professors complain constantly about student behavior. When they taught students to “question authority,” they didn't mean their authority. When they said people are not responsible for their bad behavior, they did not mean the students should behave badly toward their instructors. Professors didn’t realize the morally relative chickens were certain to come home to roost.

“When we replace belief in objective truth with moral relativism, we are telling people they are the one true source of morality,” Adams said. “And that leads them to believe they are all, in a sense, little gods and goddesses who should not be told what to do. Pretty soon, we are spending all of our time dealing with little sociopaths who believe they are the center of the universe.”

Whether someone is a college student or a congressman, moral relativism ultimately will lead that person to be convinced he or she is the center of the universe. So despite skipping every class, the student feels she deserves an “A.” Despite promoting the slaughter of innocent babies, the congressman feels he is a “good Catholic.”

We really should pity and pray for these misguided souls.