Transcript MORAL RELATIVISM & CONTEMPORARY CONSECRATED LIFE …

MORAL RELATIVISM &
CONTEMPORARY
CONSECRATED LIFE
The Da Vinci Code
Dan Brown based himself on a non-canonical
“Gnostic gospel” and on a fiction [The Holy
Blood and the Holy Grail]
This story of Jesus was according to Brown’s
sheer imagination….and so, is very far from the
recognized four canonical gospels!
Such fictitious efforts make the objective truth
about Jesus get distorted in the long run
Relativism
Often, in today’s world the objective truth about things have been
diluted or even completely distorted by the subjective opinions of
individuals and groups
This, in fact, is a direct result of personal experiences acquiring the
status of a ‘source of knowledge’
Of course, personal experience has its own place in the acquiring of
knowledge, but it surely does not give the entire picture of things,
the whole truth
Unfortunately, today, all such individual-personal relationships are
granted an equal status of truth. “Your opinion is true, and so, also is
my opinion”!
Relativism
When each and every opinion is granted equal status,
then, relativism simply follows!
Relativism is when all points of view are accorded equal
status and value.
It is when a point of view lacks a common reference
point. It is exclusive subjectivism. It excludes any link
with other views
Giuseppe di Rosa: The individual becomes the measure,
the standard of everything
Relativism
When each and every exclusive individual point
of view [that is cut off from a common reference
to reality] is assigned an equal value, then, each
and every such individual point of view
automatically acquires a relative, “true”
representation of reality.
Thus, all points of view become “relatively true”!
Every opinion acquires the status of “truth”!
Moral Relativism
Every community/society has its own accumulated
‘wisdom’ [eg., fire will burn; better to store food for the
off-season,…etc.]
Every community/society has also its own accumulated
‘moral wisdom’, i.e., of what is right and what is wrong
[eg.,respecting elders is praiseworthy; killing is
wrong,….etc]
But if and when the individual person/group becomes the
unique arbiter/judge of what is right and what is wrong
[without any reference to the accumulated moral wisdom
of the community/society], then, we have moral
relativism.
Moral Relativism
We as human persons, do not live in isolated ‘monads’!
We live in society with other persons. Thus, morality or
moral truths cannot be reached except in and through
others and with others.
The individual person is not the creator of what is right
and what is wrong, or of moral truth.
What is right and what is wrong exist independent of
human subjects, and so, we need those ‘others’ in
reaching those moral truths. For simply as individuals cut
off from others, we just cannot reach them at all!
Moral Relativism
Moral and immoral acts: three criteria for judging
[the act-in-itself, the circumstances and the
intention]. All three criteria are essential in order
not to fall into moral extremisms [Thomas
Aquinas]
Those who judge the morality using only the actin-itself, fall into the error of objective absolutism!
Those who judge the morality using only the
intention, fall into the error of subjective
relativism!
Moral Relativism & CL
Along with materialism and hedonism,
another serious ‘ism’ which the CL has
been attacked with today is surely moral
relativism. In fact, the latter can be held
responsible for the former two, also!
In what follows, I will try to highlight just
eight concrete areas of CL where moral
relativism has had negative effects
1.The Meaning of a life-long
Commitment
“Is it humanly possible to make life-long
commitments?”
“How can we make a commitment for life when
we do not know what is to come tomorrow?”
They forget our human history and also the life
of Jesus Christ who never wavered in his
commitment in spite of the ever-changing
circumstances!
2. Individual over/above the
Community
For a relativist community and others are of least
importance, because only what he/she holds
and does, matters.
In this way of thinking, the individual person is
said to have individual rights over and above the
community and community obligations.
The main error here is to forget that whether in
CL or anywhere, we, human beings, live with
others, in society/community
2. Individual over/above the
Community
Some even go to the extent of invoking the sacred
Catholic principle of ‘conscience’, to justify their
relativistic positions!
But the cherished Catholic teaching on conscience has
always upheld the right of every human person to
uphold, follow and live according to his/her conscience
that is properly formed [GS 16; DH 2,3,14; VS
54,58,59,64].
It is surely not an individualistic, isolated conscience that
the Church upholds as sacred [the Latin etymology: ‘con’
+ ‘scientia’, together would mean: “to know with”]
2. Individual over/above the
Community
Pope Benedict XVI at Regensburg
Some religious even daring to talk of individual,
personal rights! [Timothy Radcliffe: “on the day
of his/her profession, a religious relativizes
his/her individual rights in order to absolutize the
institute’s common projects”]
Legitimate authority of a superior, too, is often
diluted, as a result of relativism! [VC 43]
3. Commitment VS Job
Since a life-long commitment is perceived as
impossible, any task is seen as a job [“lack of job
satisfaction” for some religious!]
Tasks of Religious Life are often paralleled with
secular jobs [talk of ‘retirement’ even before a
person gets old or incapable!]
Sandra Schneiders: tasks of CL are seen as
“just one aspect of life” – CL itself becomes just
relative to their other commitments, which at
times may have priority!
4. Being VS Doing
A necessary logical consequence of regarding
CL as a mere job, is the prevalent craze to be
‘work-oholics’, to be “achievers”, to be “doers” of
things!
Doing becomes more important than being
Activity has become so important that being or
spirituality for doing those acts become
irrelevant [T.S. Elliot: to do the right thing for the
wrong reasons!]
5. The Meaning of Religious Vows
The 3 vows of CL are ‘counter-signs’ to the
prevailing secular trends.
They imply a swimming against the secular
currents of Hedonism, Materialism and a
Distortion of the concept of Freedom [VC 87].
The vows relativize these currents and
absolutize God and his Kingdom.
But, today, Relativism, has reversed this order in
most of our CL!
6. The Interpretation of Charisms
Relativism goes by each and every individual
whims and fancies!
In its legitimate evolution, CL has gone through
many changes, but there are also certain
essential elements like the basic charism and
other essential traditions which are peculiar to a
congregation/order [VC 3, 37]
The recent lament of a Superior General of a
well-known male clerical Congregation
7. Erroneous Comparisons of CL
with Marriage
CL has a special place in the Church and the
world.
Both Marriage and CL have their own unique
dignity, and so, they cannot be compared and
contrasted, whenever it suits us!
“CL is not natural”, “CL is an abnormal
life”,….etc.!!!
8. Aberrations in Formation
Haphazard programs of formation, influenced
not by a spirit of CL, but purely by individual
whims & fancies of formators, based mostly on
modern psychology, sociology,…etc.
Some formators subjectively interpreting the
charism of a congregation, and passing it on to
future generations!
The importance of the ratio of formation for
every congregation: an anti-dote to relativistic
tendencies of some formators [VC 68]
Conclusion
Today, moral relativism is a given, and it has come to
stay!
The Church’s remedy to this is to emphasize the need to
put our individual subjective moral judgments into an ongoing dialogue with the objective moral norms/practices
[a common reference point] of the Church and the
Congregation.
The Church invites us in CL to follow a via media
between the two dangerous extremes of subjective
Relativism and Objective absolutism in CL. In fact, CL
has a duty to lead the way in this respect for the other
followers of Christ.