Relativism’s aberrations often masquerade as a kind of good

In Mexico City in 1996 then Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, noted: “Relativism has thus become the central problem for the faith at the present time. . . . It is presented as a position defined positively by the concepts of tolerance and knowledge through dialogue and freedom, concepts which would be limited if the existence of one valid truth for all were affirmed.” In even stronger language he referred to this “central problem” as a “dictatorship of relativism.” In the system of thought referred to here as relativism, the concept of truth is rather fluid. Thus, in reference to moral teachings, we hear such absurdities as, “Well, that may be true for you, but it is not true for me.” For a relativist, there is no such thing as a categorical or intrinsic evil; everything “depends”; everything is “relative.” Thus, in that world, tolerance and mutual acceptance of divergent opinions is the rule, since there is no acceptance of a clear and universal category of the right, the true or the good. Everything depends on the individual’s decisions about what will be determined to be right, true or good for himself, since universal norms or standards, most notably in the moral sphere, are declared to be either non-existent or meaningless.

In 1986 Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future pope, recommended the establishment of “islands of spiritual concentration.” I believe he did this because of a recognition that the world had become a place where man no longer seeks to discover what is true but arrogates to himself the right to declare what is true. Pope John Paul, in The Splendor of Truth, described a world in which man does not judge what is right, wrong, true, or false in accord with some objective standard but rather one in which man arbitrarily decides what he deems to be good or bad in accord with his own personal whim or some relative standard. He saw a world in which man very gleefully heeded the temptation of the garden serpent, “You shall be as gods.” Being as gods means that man gets to declare what is true and what is not, what is right and what is not, what is good and what is not, what is just and what is not and to pretend that things are just as he declares them to be, precisely because he declares them to be. In this regard Pope John Paul wrote: “The individual conscience is accorded the status of a supreme tribunal of moral judgment, which hands down categorical and infallible decisions about good and evil. To the affirmation that one has a duty to follow one’s conscience is unduly added the affirmation that one’s moral judgment is true merely by the fact that it has its origin in conscience” (Veritatis Splendor, 32).

Consider this as it applies to the scientific and medical fields. There we find many developments masquerading as genuine, objective goods, as things truly beneficial for humanity. There we find a fascination with the cloning of human persons and a justification for embryonic stem cell research and assisted suicide and artificial insemination and contraception and surrogate motherhood and vaccines developed on embryonic cell lines and so-called therapeutic abortion. Each of these aberrations masquerades as some kind of good. From some very narrow and relativistic perspective, it is indeed possible to decide erroneously that these things are authentically good when they are good only in a very limited, pragmatic, individual, debauched sense and are not, in fact, morally or ultimately good at all. These things can only be seen as good if one’s perspective of man is limited to this world, if one’s perspective is literally hopeless and terminal. In a system that denies the reality of God, each of these false solutions of mankind makes rational and comprehensible sense. In a world without God, all things which are immediately pleasurable or beneficial seem good. If man is only the complex product of an even more incredibly complex genetic code, then it makes perfect sense to treat him ultimately like a computer-generated video game character. The truth of man, the truth that the Catholic Church holds and teaches, however, is that man is much more than the sum of his biological parts. His life, your life, is more than the metabolizing processes that are a sign of life. Human life is more than the firing of neural synapses, the generation of brain waves or the establishment of relationships. These things are often used as measures of life, but no one of them alone defines all of a man. In the face of these deceptions every fiber of our being cries out: We are more than this! We forget that we are “fearfully and wonderfully made” by God and for God.

I write this because I traveled this weekend to St. Thomas College in California for its commencement exercises and had the opportunity to reflect a bit on the nature of truth, the true meaning of the educational process and the necessity of clear moral teaching. I found there an energetic and enthusiastic body of young people devoted to discovering, not creating, truth. I found there refreshing young people who do not desire “to be as gods” but who definitely want to be Godly in thought, word and deed. I found there a program of education that accepts the concept of the existence of universal truths which are to be discovered and further explored in wholesome and productive dialogue.

Cardinal Francis George points out that the two tenets of this “dictatorship of relativism” are an exaggerated concern for personal freedom and an abandonment of objective truth. It is clear that the first, that misguided concern for an aberrant version of personal freedom, necessitates the abandonment of objective truth. Thus those committed to absolute relativism cannot stand by idly while the Church promotes the existence of objective truth. For those steeped in relativism, all things are to be tolerated except the possibility that there is a truth universally valid for all. St. Thomas College certainly recognizes the need for personal responsibility but does not cater to that exaggerated concern for personal freedom so adamantly promoted in the modern world. At the same time, acknowledging and accepting that there is a God who made us, they embrace and do not abandon the concept of objective truth. I believe I found at St. Thomas College a type of that “island of spiritual concentration” proposed by him who is now Pope Benedict XVI.