Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
in a
Secular Age
By
1
Contents
Introduction.........................................................................................4
I............................................................................................................6
Defining secularism.............................................................................6
2........................................................................................................20
3........................................................................................................26
4........................................................................................................35
Introduction...................................................................................35
Secularism as an ideology.............................................................42
2
The new situation..........................................................................52
5........................................................................................................55
Introduction...................................................................................55
A political agenda..........................................................................67
Conclusion.........................................................................................74
Signs of hope.................................................................................74
Political implications......................................................................77
3
In the world, for the world but
not of the worldIntroduction
And this is what this booklet is about. It is based on the belief that
there is something akin to a virus that is threatening our spiritual
health as Catholics. It is not materialism, though that is related to it,
but goes much deeper. It is more insidious than materialism and is
affecting us at our very core. This booklet is an attempt to identify that
virus and so understand better its danger to our spiritual health.
4
I want to concentrate on this virus because recent Popes have
themselves identified this as the cultural virus debilitating our spiritual
lives as Catholics and, if we are to appreciate their concerns and
pastoral programs at this time, we need to grasp more deeply what
this concern is.
This virus has been termed ‘secularism’, and both John Paul II and
Benedict XVI have tried to warn the Church worldwide as to its nature
and dangers. But how many of us really understand to what they are
referring? I suspect not many. It is not that we are not listening but
many of us are not sure to what they are referring.
We know the evils that result from it in general1 and, on the whole
Catholics will side with the official Church in opposing them, but until
we can identify the root we will not really know what it is we are really
opposing or know how to avoid being influenced by it.
1
I say ‘generally’ because a good many Catholics do support aspects of the progressive agenda. This
was evident in the last election.
5
It is also based on the belief that we do have many resources for
combating this sickness. There is vigor to the Catholic body, both here
and in the West generally, that is underappreciated, and it needs to be
aroused. It is already beginning to show that vigor but it needs
nurturing and encouraging.
Defining secularism
Viruses are notorious difficult to identify. They are so small and yet so
powerful and they come very often masquerading as something
positive. And this is true of the virus of secularism. Hence, identifying it
is not going to be easy, especially for us, living in our American culture.
Not only has this virus entered into our body through the very culture
within which we ‘live and move and have our very existence’ but it has
come to us disguised in ways that really do appeal to us.
6
confused by this and what it means. It has to do with morality, but
they are not quite sure how.
Perhaps the greatest sign of the trouble we are in is simply the split
that has occurred among us in defining what it means to be an
American. We would still like to think that there is something that
unites us, some set of values that define what it means to be American
and that these are good and wholesome. We want to believe that
American values are important to the welfare of the world, and,
therefore, values that we should promote, but we are no longer sure of
what these are.
The fact is, and recent elections have all borne this out, we are split as
to what it means to be American, and this split seems to run
throughout the country. The country is split almost 50/50 along a
particular fault line – commonly referred to as the divide between
conservative and progressive. It showed itself most recently in the
protests against the Health Care Bill. The vigor of this opposition from
so many quarters is deeply troubling and we do not know quite what it
means.
The uneasy feeling is arising that we really are a divided nation and
our division goes to the heart of what it means to be ‘American’. It
means we have lost any common understanding of what is good or
bad, right or wrong, and, when a nation loses that, it is inevitably on
the verge of disintegrating. The Manhattan Declaration issued in
November of 2009, by a body of prominent religious leaders has said
simply: ‘If you proceed with certain provisions, know that we will not go
along with them or implement them. We will become civilly
disobedient. And the country will lose a good portion of its health
providers”. When we get to a situation where the churches wholesale
and across the aisle threaten civil disobedience, we are in a very new
and very sorry state. It is an indication that the situation is reaching
crisis point.
7
change does it require of us if we are to put this situation right? How
can we be part of God’s purposes for this world if we are too sick to
function as a united society with a set of values that are good for
humanity as a whole?
Whether one agrees with his analysis or not, it is clear that we are
becoming an increasingly violent society in which minor disputes are
resolved by killing others. Much of the violence is related to drug
abuse, and we are fueling the world trade in drugs. We seem to have
an insatiable appetite for ‘getting high’. Drugs are rampant among us,
fueling a massive, worldwide underground of criminal activity and the
use of guns and violence. The family structure is breaking down and
violence is rampant in its ranks. Reports come in daily of mothers
killing their children, of men killing their wives and their children and
then committing suicide, of children murdering their parents in order to
get their hands on an inheritance. Is this evidence of a disturbingly
new tend or just the result of better reporting? It is not clear, but it is
8
clear that it is a sign of a society that is breaking down morally, and
that is of great concern to all.
Whatever the cause, it is widely agreed that ‘trust’, the very cement of
social life, is fading among us. That much is clear to many
commentators today. It is fueled by the growth in child sexual abuse
among close relatives, educators, politicians and clergy, in short, those
whom we need to trust most. Pornography of all sorts with its radical
sexual exploitation for money is increasing and is now offered by hotel
chains as part of their service to their guests. Prostitution is being
increasingly treated as a legitimate business and we, members of an
affluent society, are fueling a worldwide trade in the sexual
exploitation and slavery of vast numbers of women and children. The
Far East is complicit in this thirst for sexual sensation and is supplying
the demand. All this is working to create a fear of each other that is
new and frightening in its pervasiveness.
There is something very sick about our very culture and at its core it is
a moral issue: we are losing any common sense as to what morality is
or means. We are becoming in the words of one article ‘morally
illiterate’ and are raising a generation of ‘moral illiterates’2. What is
causing this? Can we trace it all to one source, or is there a major
player on the scene that we need to be aware of, as Pope John Paul II
suggested? We need to know.
And we need to know especially as Catholics, since, not only does our
taken-for-granted culture influence us, molding and forming us in ways
of which we are not really aware, but we may actually be promoting
cultural values that are destructive of humanity. We may not be
actively promoting them, but we are allowing their growth among us
because we seem too bemused by these developments to confront and
denounce them. The sleeping giant might be waking up but it is as
gradual awakening. At the moment he is merely grumbling about being
disturbed.
The sleeping giant would like to get back to sleep but is not is not
being allowed to. More and more, we are being disturbed by a variety
2
Decadence. The Social Affairs Unit. London.
9
of questions and these questions are daily being set before us, not just
by the authorities in the Church but by the television with its daily
catalogue of horrors. These are facing us with a question: are there
attitudes and values being promoted by our culture that we are
imbibing that are destroying us a Catholic people called to serve the
purposes of God in this world? How are these values related to creating
a culture of life, one in which human life is respected, sustained and
promoted? Are we not really committed to this? How did we get into
this situation?
10
However, one can in fact overcome the more selfish tendencies of
materialism and be committed to creating a ‘good life’ for all by
charity towards others in need and traditionally, this is what we have
done. We have sort to overcome the inadequacies of worldliness by
being a very generous people, always there to aid in disasters no
matter to whom they come, friend or foe. We try to use our wealth to
help others less fortunate than ourselves and this is certainly a positive
way of integrating the search for ‘the good life’ and being good to our
neighbor in need. It is a way to redeem materialism.
There is now a very strong secularist agenda working its way through our
public authorities. There is even a group of militant secularists
preposterously called “Brights” who want to drive religion out of the public
square. Already you see it in rows about a nurse who prays with a patient,
or about sex education, or even about what to call Christmas3.
3
Dec.23rd 2009
4
This was the thesis of a recent book by Phil Zuckerman called ‘Society without God” New York
University Press. 2008
11
Defining secularism
What then is this secularism if it is different from simple materialism or
worldliness? In an address to the Australian bishops, John Paul II
outlined what it is. He suggested to them that
These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person
may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy,
are central to the liberty protected by the fourteenth amendment. At the
heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of
meaning, of the universe and of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about
these matters could not define the attitudes of person were they formed
under the compulsion of the State.
This spells the end of any common morality and for any public role for
religion.. Each individual in our society has the right to define moral
principles and practices for themselves. This effectively divorces all law
from common morality and makes the law simply the imposition of one
person’s or group’s ideas of morality on the rest of the populous.
5
See Calma and Gershevitch “Freedom of Religion and belief in a multi-cultural Democracy, Paper
presented t the Unity in Diversity Conference, Townsville August 2009
12
For secularism there is, at least overtly, no ‘objective’ truth and hence
is overtly committed to ‘moral relativism, and this is term that Pope
Benedict uses a great deal to describe secularism. Moral relativism is
committed to the creation of a world in which God and religion as the
objective foundation of morality are absent.
13
birth, no less than does the artistic style or the social institutions of the age.
Yet so long as they are dominant, their unique and original character is
never fully recognized, since they are accepted as principles of absolute
truth and universal validity. They are looked on not as the popular ideas of
the moment, but as eternal truths implanted in the nature of things, and as
self-evident in any kind of rational thinking. 7
For him, this notion of progress was one such idea and this, I suggest,
is a manifestation of the virus that is infecting all of us and which we
simply take it for granted. We automatically believe that humanity has
progressed in its history, and that our own liberal democratic society
stands at the peak of that development. We have realized the human
dream of ‘the good life’. Therefore progress in our society should not
be opposed. To oppose it is to take a step backwards. It is, as it is
becoming increasingly common to say, to be on the wrong side of
history.
Secularists believe that their liberal agenda is simply the wave of the
future and should be allowed to flourish that way. In law, for instance,
it has given rise to what is termed ‘settled precedent’. That means
laws passed in the past should not be altered. What this is meant to
protect is the Roe v. Wade decision that introduced and legalized
abortion. It would not affect, for instance, the Dred Scott decision by
the Supreme Court in 1857 that made it illegal for blacks to own
property on the grounds that they were property. The contradiction
involved here is ignored. It simply shows that the notion of ‘settled
precedent’ is a legal fiction used to support a liberal agenda.
7
Progress and Religion. Sherwood Sugden and Co. Peru, ILL. P3
14
Still, in the face of this evidence, we cling to the belief that we have
‘progressed’, that we are better off now, more intelligent now, better
people now than people of long ago. This notion of ‘progress’ remains
inviolate for most of us, including Catholics. It determines in a very
fundamental way our view of life and its meaning and the significance
of what we experience, yet we are hardly aware of it. And, because it
is largely unconscious, we as Catholics are inevitably influenced by it in
the way in which we view our faith. We have adopted this key plank in
the secularist philosophy as a simple fact.
I think that part of the paralysis that Catholics are experiencing in the
West in the face of many of its developments today is precisely
because the influence of this understanding of ‘progress’. We
inevitably ask ourselves: is our faith in line with the dynamic of
progress or is behind the times; is it still reactionary and childish or
courageously and maturely forward-looking?
For many, it is reactionary and they wish to bring the faith into line
with progressive thinking as that is found in the general culture. They
actively wish to re-interpret Catholic faith in the light of what they
take-for-granted are the progressive thinking of secular society. It is
characteristic of the liberal/ progressive wing of the Church and they
are still in the ascendency in the Church, both in academia and in
diocesan offices.
While others are not so swept along by this, in the face of social
criticism that tells us that we are behind the times, they simply back
off in confusion and either do nothing or protest weakly. At the
moment it seems that as a Church we are just trying to find ways of
surviving in this society rather than reaching out to challenge it to
change and change radically. We are betwixt and between on the
issues because it puts us out of harmony with our society and we do
not wish to be out of harmony with it. We want to be part of it. We
believe that we have progressed and we wish to be part of that
progress.
15
tackling its ills. Yet it is a notion that is utterly foreign to our faith. It is
a perversion of a very core Christian belief that history is linear with a
beginning, middle and an expected end. But, in Catholic faith, there is
no notion that this entails in human society any automatic progress
towards perfection or fulfillment. Human development is marked at its
deepest level by the distortion of’ sin’ and it is ‘sin’ that prevents us
from ever progressing automatically towards the kingdom.
May be we can see the influence of secularism on our faith in the very
simple fact that we have lost the consciousness of what sin is and how
it distorts our thinking and valuing? We have been to influenced by our
culture to think that we, as a modern age, have progressed beyond the
past, that even though the last century was filled with the devastation
of wars and the horrors of several holocausts to a degree never before
seen in human history. None of this has seemingly penetrated our
consciousness and we cling to the naïve belief that somehow we have
progressed and that our modern age is a better one than those that
preceded it.
But there was nothing accidental about the crisis. From the late 1970's on,
the American financial system, freed by deregulation and a political climate
in which greed was presumed to be good, spun even further out of control.
There were ever greater rewards --bonuses beyond the dreams of avarice --
for bankers who could generate big, short-term profits...Sooner or later this
runaways system was bound to crash8.
Greed is endemic in our society, and always has been, and greed is a
matter of individual and societal moral character. What we are really
suffering from is a radical selfishness and callousness to the good of
others, uncontrolled or uninhibited by any social moral ideals.
8
Article Bankers without a clue. P A21 Friday January 15th. 2010
16
Even with the sense that greed needs regulation by societal and
cultural expectations, we naively cling to the notion that humanity is,
at heart, good and that all we have to do to make things better is to
tinker with the mechanics of our economic and financial systems.
But, I think that it is this very ‘worldliness ‘ that has enabled the virus
of secularism to gain such a grip on us. The hierarchy may preach
against the effects of secularism among us, but the faithful are not
listening, or are not listening too closely because, with the generality of
Americans, they too are generally committed to ‘worldliness’ and see
worldly comfort and prosperity as evidence of social progress. They
are consequently allowing the virus of secularism to grow and flourish
among us. In the process however, they are, unintentionally to be
sure, weakening and destroying the faith.
17
contours and detect its influence on us. But, we need to do so if we
value our faith. We need to reflect on our culture to see how it might
be influencing us negatively in our spiritual growth and development.
Both these issues flow from the same secularist principle: morality is a
matter of human determination. It is determined by man not
discovered by him. Ultimately the morality that should prevail in any
society is set by democratic vote. This s secularism. It is a deliberate
repudiation of the notion that morality comes form the way we have
been created by God.
18
From a secularist perspective, there is no created nature that we need
to respect as objectively given. Man determines what is good or bad,
right or wrong. It is the individual ‘person’ who determines who or what
they should be. They can change sex if they want to. The only issue is
a political one: who has the social power to determine these things.
We are afraid of opposing the state in this because we are infected by
the virus of secularism that tells us that man is the source of what is
right and wrong, not God. Because of the influence of secularist
principles on our minds and hearts, we have granted the state
authority to tell us what marriage is or what it means to have a sexual
identity.
19
It was by one, Harry Blamires, an Anglican writer9. He prophetically
highlighted this pathology of secularism and pointed out its insidious
influence on Christian faith and life. Speaking from within the
Anglican tradition, he complained with some sadness that Christians in
his own communion were no longer united in a common culture
determined by their faith; rather that their thinking and acting was
determined by what he called the secular mind. He wrote:
9
An Anglican is the English equivalent of an Episcopalian here
10
The Christian Mind Servant Publications. Ann Arbor Michigan 1963 P4
20
Catholics and, in doing so, revealed his concern about the influence of
this secular mentality within which we lived:
What concerned him was his observation that it was not the faith that
was the source and ground of a Catholic perspective on life but, rather,
the attitudes and values that flowed from secularism. As he saw it, we
were in danger of becoming secularist almost by default.
In the light of this concern, which has been taken up by Benedict XVI
and is a recurrent theme in all his talks, we need to explore more fully
the nature and influence of this spiritual virus on us as Catholics
Unless we grasp better what it is he is concerned about and why he is
so concerned, we will not be able to join him in his efforts to combat
the influence of secularism on us and on our times, and this is
something that we need to do if we wish to be redemptive of our world.
The issue involves distinguishing secularism, not just from worldliness
11
Par 21
A recent survey of students commissioned by the Cardinal Newman Society is just the latest
12
indication of this.
13
Par 4
21
or materialism but also from what it means to be genuinely secular.
The Church is committed to this and sees secularism as a radical
danger to it. We need to see why.
22
a way of harmonizing these different factors in human life. The
opponents of the regime are opposing it in the name of creating a
genuinely secular state. What the opposition has yet to do is to come
to terms with the essential role that religion has in forming and
creating a genuinely secular state.
The political and the ecclesiological are distinct realms and, as distinct,
from a Catholic perspective are best understood as being in necessary
tension with each other. For both to remain healthy they need this
tension. When one is absorbed by the other, then, trouble ensues.
Because of this, both Church and state are now paying the price. The
result has been disastrous. The state ended up collaborating with the
Church to cover up terrible sexual abuse of children by clergy and
religious. Some clergy and religious seem to have thought they were
immune from moral critique and could do as they wished, and their
wishes were psychologically, socially and spiritually perverse. The
same sort of disaster results when the Church is absorbed by the state
and no longer functions as a moral critique of its policies and
programs. Where this happens, the State takes over functions of
religion and become tyrannical as it did with Communism.
Communism devastated the mental and spiritual health of its
populations and eventually had to fall and decay. It could not cope with
the reality of human being and becoming. It had to fail, but not before
inflicting untold mental, emotional and spiritual devastation on its
populations.
23
achieve this as against the overtly totalitarian ones employed by
Communism, but it is seeking the same dominance over the minds and
hearts of people. Secularism is posing as the only way in which the
genuinely secular can be lived. It is suggesting that anyone who wants
to create a genuinely secular world must necessarily adopt secularist
ideas and values and relegate their religious perspectives and values
to the backburner of their own private lives. They too wish, at least
overtly, to marginalize both religion and morality14.
And many Catholics are ‘buying into’ this. They are simply pleading for
the room to live their own lives within the state. They have in effect
lost the sense that their faith is of real significance for human well-
being and flourishing and therefore needs to influence the way the
public sector functions. They are intent on protecting attitudes and
values that they believe in but as something that is good for them
alone rather than as something of grave importance to humanity at
large.
This is a dichotomy that the Church now officially disputes and rejects.
This it has come to believe is not the way to deal with what is a
necessary and essential tension between the religious and the secular.
The Church has officially accepted that the development of the secular
as such is a very legitimate development in human consciousness and
something to be encouraged. There is such a realm as the genuinely
secular that comes from God not from the Church, and the Church is
there to serve the birth of a genuinely secular world.
But, to do so, she has to deny that the genuinely secular has to be
understood in secularist terms. Secularism is a philosophy of life, an
ideology, a new form of religion in fact, that, as a basis for
understanding human reality and its functioning, is radically defective.
It is in fact destroying our humanity rather than enabling it to flourish
and out of concern for humanity the Church has to speak against it,
much to the discomfort of many otherwise committed Catholics. If
secularism is allowed to continue its parasitic influence, it will pervert
human growth and development, and already we are seeing the results
of that perversion. We are already sinking into what can only be called
14
We will see later why I use the term ‘overtly’ here.
24
a new barbarism. We are in the process of destroying ourselves as
human beings.
25
But, it denies this in theory. It has become and is in the process of
becoming tyrannical, and all in the name of increased tolerance.
William D. Watkin has outlined some of these new moral absolutes that
have been developed since the sixties under the inspiration of
secularism as being:
Relativism, which is the starting point of all this, thus becomes a dogmatism
which believes itself to be in possession of the definitive scope of reason,
and with the right to regard all the rest only as a stage of humanity16.
They are absolutist precisely because those who hold them believe
they have reached the most reasonable of positions. These absolutes
15
The New Absolutes Bethany House Publishers Minneapolis 1996 P 43op.cit P45
Zenit 8/14/05
16
26
flow from an overall perspective that can only be termed ‘religious’,
but religious without any overt transcendental reference and that is
what we now call an ideology.
Secularism as an ideology
An ideology is a perverted form of religion. It is an religious system
masquerading as set of intellectual beliefs that are self-evident. As
such it is a rival religion and is itself evidence that religion is a crucial
dimension of human reality and always has been. As Christopher
Dawson showed in his book, ‘Religion and Progress’, all great
civilizations have had a religious base. Religion can be and ought to be
the foundation of any genuine civilization. Ideology is what results
when religion is overtly denied and the ideas that we live by are not
given any transcendent justification but are seen or believed to be
their own justification. This gives those who hold them the right to
impose them on others. What results is social and political tyranny
which is the condition that we are approaching now.
The Catholic position is that a religion will provide as secure basis for a
civilization to the degree to which it actually serves human flourishing.
Every particular form of religion requires purification from this
perspective: how well does it account for human being and its need to
realize fulfillment?
27
Politics needs to take the exercise and influence of religion into
account and, not only allow for it, but take active steps to see that it
can flourish. It needs to make room for its legitimate expression and
be prepared to critique it as to how well it enables human beings to
flourish simply as human beings. And specific religions need to be open
to that critique.
28
The danger is that people are just assuming the identification of
religion with particular ecclesial communities and, while not wanting to
give any one community a privileged place in political and social life,
are acquiescing in the marginalization of what is central to human
being: the existence of the religious instinct. As a result they are
rending it impossible to purify religion. They are making it impossible
to recognize, critique and purify secularism itself as a religion. This is
leading to increased pathology in human life.
The reason for this is that a genuinely secular state needs continual
moral critique, and religions are the primary sources of such critique.
29
Religion, per se, as distinct from an ideology, looks at life from a
transcendent moral and spiritual perspective, and looking at life in this
way is essential to human growth and development. It is intrinsic to
being a rational person, and what a genuinely secular state has to
promote is rational people, people that is who are able to dialog with
one another as to ultimate issues in human growth and development.
Perhaps this lack of awareness is due to the fact that secularism has
become the dominant perspective among those in government,
education and legislatures throughout the Western world and we still
trust them to do what is best for us. It is still difficult us to realize that
we now live in a secularized world, one in which Christian perspectives
and values are no longer dominant. The recent financial crisis has
awakened us to some degree to which the sense of morality among
30
our business and political leaders has already died. We have difficulty,
however, coming to terms with the moral callousness that they have
betrayed. We some- how wish to believe in good secularist fashion
that it is simply a question of correcting the system and creating more
laws.
It is here that Catholics are most challenged. The whole of our faith is
based on the belief that sin has been defeated in Christ and we have
the possibility through faith in him to overcome sin in ourselves. Our
central concern is with the defeat of sin. Perhaps one reason that we
as Catholics are so weak at the moment in confronting secularism and
its effects because we have lost the sense of what sin is and just to
what degree they are committed to defeating it both in themselves
and in our world.
Instead of holiness being a concern for us, we are now concerned more
with success and personal satisfaction. And here we can see the
31
influence of the secularist ideology. An instance of just how subtle a
negative influence secularism can be was given by an Italian
immigrant to America. Speaking to Robert Cole, she made the point
that when she was a girl in Italy, she prayed that she would be able to
do God’s will. Now after a few years in America she found herself
praying that God would do her will17. Very astutely she was able to
recognize that the focus had shifted: it was concern about the quality
of her life in this world that was now central and God had shifted to
being a possible ally in this project. Now she called upon God to help
her in that life in different ways. It was not the will of God for this world
that was central for her but her will, and that concerned the quality of
her secular life in the here-an-now. God was appealed to for help in
this. She could still believe herself religious and Catholic when in fact
she had abandoned the fundamental premise of Catholic faith: that we
are here to follow the will of God who is holy and that our happiness
depends on this. Fortunately she was still aware of the difference.
Many Catholics are not.
In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with
loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to save him from death, and he
was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a Son, he
learned obedience through what he suffered; and having been made perfect,
he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him, having
been designated by God a high priest according to the order of
Melchizedek. (Heb. 5:7-10 )
Jesus wanted salvation from death, especially the sort of death that he
was facing. The scene in the Garden of Gethsemane testifies to this,
and, the writer, say: he was heard, but it was His Father’s will that he
17
The Secular mind
32
undergo that death first. Then he would be saved. Jesus served his
Father’s will and so entered into salvation.
We are here to serve God, not God serve us. Such a way of viewing
God is utterly inappropriate. It reduces God to the human and, in doing
so, vitiates any saving relationship with Him. God is not just a resource
that we can draw on in order to create the sort of world that we want.
God is. God is the fullness of personal existence and the origin of our
existence and its destiny. He is the perfection of what it means to be
personal, and that is a good definition of what it means to be holy.
This means that the proper, the only true way to relate to God is by
faith. We grow in being human by becoming like God and doing His
will, not the other way around and we can tread that path only in faith.
Under the influence of secularism that focus, however, which has
always been weak among us simply because we are human, has faded
even as a background to our religious lives. How many Christians today
no longer worship God or seek His will in faith but seek the help of God
to help them live their secular lives. Success in this life has become
their main concern.
Their faith is that God will give them what they want to make them
happy. As with many others in our culture, they at best see God as
one possible powerful resource in enabling them to get what they want
in order to be happy. Their concern is with what they see as their
welfare in this world, with God as a useful resource for achieving that.
The worship of God and the desire to be part of His purposes for the
world and a concern as to how to be part of those purposes is no
longer central, even theoretically. Rather, it is secular purposes,
comfort, health, happiness and that of our children, family friends and
neighbors, even others in the world at large that are central.
33
De facto, for many Catholics, the faith has sunk into the background. It
has become peripheral to life. We have bought into its marginalization
because that marginalization is now so much part of our culture. Our
faith is no longer the source of our way of seeing and evaluating our
experience, rather this secularism is. Hence, as Blamires noted, we do
not talk together about what our experience in the world means from
within the faith, nor what it means for our faith and how we might deal
with the issues it raises. It is secular pursuits and making our lives
good within this world that provides the language of our discourse
together, not how, in this world, we might be doing the will of God or
what that might demand of us.
It is this fading of the sense of God as the source of holiness that most
concerns Pope Benedict. Now people do not think to acknowledge the
moral reality of God even in a minimal way: God has faded from
consciousness pretty much entirely.
34
are willing to pay thousands of dollars to find ways of tapping into this
divine power. They do so under the notion of ‘spirituality’ and, even
many who reject organized religion, or even belief in God as personal,
seek to harmonize with this divine power that they believe resides in
nature.
However, there is now this difference from the past: people have
become irreligious because in a real sense, they no longer see being
religious as being in any way necessary to human wellbeing. They are
radically encouraged in this worldliness today by the development and
promotion of ideological secularism.
35
itself in a very troubling lack of concern for the future. Attention is
fixed on individual satisfaction and pleasure in the here-and-now, not
on any belief in the future.
Europe is infected by a strange lack of desire for the future. Children, our
future, are perceived as a threat to the present, as if they were taking
something away from our lives. Children are seen as a liability rather than
as a source of hope18.
This is being promoted in the silly and highly dangerous belief that the
only right children have to exist is if they are ’wanted’, and that means
if they are seen to contribute in some way to the happiness and
fulfillment of their parents. If taken seriously, this is a monstrous
doctrine and one that inevitably results in abortion. This practice is
based on the notion that, for the sake of the happiness of those living,
women should be allowed to get rid of their conceived children if, in
some way, they are not wanted at that time. Only those that are
wanted should be allowed to come to term. There are many reasons
for abortion but among the most acceptable are that these children
might be defective and require special medical attention and concern.
They become simply a financial and emotional burden and children
should not be that. Therefore, because they are unwanted, they are
better off dead.
18
Catholic Social Science Review 13 P91
36
For more and more couples today children are brought into existence
because they in some way serve their parent’s satisfaction. If they do
not, then they are seen as inimical to their well-being and can be
legitimately aborted. Peter Singer, a Princeton professor of Ethics, has
even suggested19 that people should be granted a period of grace to
determine whether or not they should keep the children they have
already generated. They may not turn out to be quite what we wanted
and should therefore be capable of being disposed of legally.
The existence and legal sanction for partial birth abortion is a major
step in this direction. Singer is only extending secularist logic. What he
is openly advocating is in fact the extension of abortion to explicit
infanticide. Whether or not the abortion mentality that has already
legitimized partial-birth abortion will lead us to this horrible end, we
have yet to see, but, the fact is, and it is revealed in surveys in our
own culture, children are increasingly being seen as a burden and a
constriction on personal happiness and fulfillment and there does not
seem to be too much justification any more for taking on that burden,
simply from a secularist perspective at any rate.
And now with all the pharmaceutical aids available there is less and
less reason for accepting that conceiving children can or should be
linked to sexual intimacy and pleasure. These dimensions of the act
can now be separated. At one time it was seen as a normal dimension
of human growth and development, but it is no longer seen that way.
Through the development of ‘reproductive medicine’ and conception
control technologies, having children has now become an optional
extra to what has become its primary purpose – the physical and
emotional satisfaction of individuals. If babies are conceived within a
relationship, it should be for personal satisfaction, not because they
have any importance for society and its continued existence.
19
The New York Times
37
controversy over Catholic politicians who support abortion receiving
communion. The Church has said that receiving communion indicates a
public acceptance of and witness to the faith of the Church. If one’s
moral and spiritual stance is radically at odds with that then one should
not receive communion. But, many Catholics, including prominent
politicians, continue to do so, refusing to accept that taking up certain
moral positions puts them directly out of harmony with the Church, and
many Catholics agree with them in that.
What the Pope and many bishops are concerned about, and are
challenging us to reflect on, is that, under the influence of a secularist
culture, we are in danger of losing, if we have not already lost it, the
belief that our faith in God as the Ultimate Personal Being and the
source of all life, who in Jesus Christ incarnated Himself in human
reality for its redemption and continues His presence among us in His
Spirit, is absolutely essential to our personal well-being and that of
humanity and that that faith is necessarily expressed in some moral
behaviors and violated in others, abortion or the promotion of abortion,
stem-cell research and same-sex marriage being but two of them.
38
world the intrinsic human value in thinking and acting as a Catholic.
We are being challenged to show how being Catholic means growing
and developing as a human being.
39
Secularists abhor the pathological effects of ‘religion’ and are quick to
point out its negative dimensions, at the same time, by relegating it to
the peripheral and to the emotional, they are actually contributing to
religion become more and more pathological. And a good many
Catholics are practically supporting this by confining the practice of
their faith to ‘going to church on Sundays’ rather than seeing their
Catholic faith as a way of life that permeates the whole of their
existence. They too have marginalized their religion. De facto, they do
not see the faith as having any real value for the world. They do not
see it as salvific of humanity and therefore essential human wellbeing.
It may have personal and social value to them as individuals but is not
necessarily of value to anyone else.
Introduction
It is important in fighting off the evil influence of a virus that we
distinguish it from surrounding healthy tissue. The many tests that are
40
employed today in medicine are often aimed precisely at
differentiating healthy bodies from the unhealthy. It is not always easy
to do. Hence it is not always easy to combat the influence of these
invaders without destroying good cells in the process and, in treating
any disease it is important that we adopt means that safeguard
healthy cells and destroy the unhealthy
41
need to see better what this relationship is. We especially need to
disentangle the difference between a genuinely secular world and the
sort of world which is being promoted by secularism.
42
agents personally responsible for creating the world in which we want
to live. We no longer refer events in our world to supernatural agencies
that are beyond our control but rather look to those causes within
nature that we can control and alter to fit what we deem necessary for
our welfare. While this in itself is not necessarily anti-religious, what
has resulted is a general loss of concern about fulfillment in a life
beyond this to one in which human fulfillment is seen possible within
the boundaries of space and time, and the belief that this should be
the proper object of human concern and interest. Because of this
development, there has been a fading of religious consciousness
generally such that the emphasis now is on the personal possibilities of
life within this realm of existence only. It is this that made it possible
for secularism to emerge as the dominant modern social and political
ideology.
It is the emergence of this primary concern for the secular, then, that
has given rise to what can be termed ‘the secularist mentality’. This
secularist mind is, at best, indifferent to any understanding of human
life that refers it to a Transcendent origin and destiny. At its worst,
however, it has generated forces and agendas that are actively
antagonistic towards any reference to the supernatural. It sees God as
a divisive and destructive concept that is best left behind if we wish to
create a better human world. This has turned the new awareness of
our capacity to understand and manipulate natural forces for our own
ends into an ideological dogma: this is all there is so make the best of
it. It has de facto created a new but secularized religion21. In this new
dogmatic system, the world explains itself; man has to understand
himself only from within the categories of this life; everything can be
explained from within this world. Man in his ability to know and control
natural forces is now at the center of existence. He and he alone can
give it significance by his desires and projects. Outside of this it has no
meaning or significance.
21
By religion here is meant a set of beliefs about reality that have the character
of being ultimate and the source of a way of living. I intend it as the equivalent
of an ideology. And ideology is reign without the transcendent reference. It is a
set of intellectual beliefs about reality as a whole that seeks no rational
justification but simply acceptance. Proof of its value comes only through living it.
Then it becomes self-justifying.
43
This secularism, however, is parasitic. It is feeding off the very genuine
development in human consciousness that the secular world, as
secular, is an autonomous realm of human concern. It has its own
rationale and structure that we have to respect. There is a realm of the
secular that has its own reality and autonomy that renders it distinct
from the ecclesiastical. Secularism, however, is not in any way intrinsic
and essential to this respect and affirmation. In fact it is destructive of
the creation of a genuinely secular world. In its dogmatism it is just as
fundamentalist as any religion. It shares in its pathological dimensions
and seeks acceptance by all whether they believe it or not. It is using
all the forces of law and education to enforce its perspectives and
values. And make them the taken-for-granted perspective of all people
and they are succeeding. What secularists are actively engaged in is
creating a world in which its principles will be placed beyond critique.
44
At the same time, She has accepted that particular religious groupings,
or organizations, what I have termed the ecclesiastical have to be seen
as distinct from the state. For the sake of the health of both religion
and the state, there cannot, and should not, be any easy identification
of the state with any one ecclesiastical structure. Theocratic states are
extremely dangerous to the health and wellbeing of their members.
We are currently seeing this in the crisis of sexual abuse in the Irish
Church. What we are seeing is in effect the result of a theocratic state
in which the secular authorities were subservient to the ecclesiastical
authorities and thereby allowed large numbers of children to be
abused at the hands of a clergy that, in many instances, had lost any
real sense of what it meant to be Christian. Their moral outlook had
become corrupt with devastating consequences for many young
people. It needed confrontation over this from the state, but it was not
there: the Church had become too dominant in society. It was in need
of purification and there was no agency that could provide it or
challenge it to that purification. Instead, for the sake of its position in
society, it simply covered up the abuse, and secular authorities, for
fear of the Church, aided and abetted this cover-up. It was a radically
unhealthy situation and made possible the persistence of radical
abuses.
At the moment, the Church, under the leadership of Pope Benedict XVI
recognizes this necessary tension and is attempting to initiate and
maintain such a dialog. She has come to this position after many
centuries of conflict. As it emerged in the late Middle Ages, the Church
45
and the State had to work out a new form of relationship. It has been in
the process of doing that ever since.
What has emerged is that there is a real tension between the secular
and the spiritual realms, the former now represented by the State, the
latter by the Church. What the Church is seeking, and Pope Benedict is
promoting, is dialog about what sort of society really does serve
human flourishing in this world. This is ultimately a moral issue and
She wishes to explore the morality of various secular programs. She
wishes to open up morality to rational discussion. The rationality of
morality has been degraded since the Enlightenment period of
European history and the emergence of secularism by its relegation to
the emotional, the merely subjective and the irrational.
This has been disastrous. It is a disaster that even some who consider
themselves secularist are now willing to recognize. Austin Darcey,
himself a secularist, has pointed to the disastrous results for secular
thinking of the privatization of morality. He writes:
It [secular liberalism] has been undone by its own ideas. The first idea is
that matters of conscience – religion, ethics, and values – are private
matters. The privatization of conscience started with two important
principles: religion should be separate from the state and people should not
be forced to believe one way or another. But it went further and said that
belief should have no place in the public square. Conscience belongs in
homes and houses of worship, not in the market place22.
He calls this the privacy fallacy and rightly points out that this prevents
secularism and religion from dialoguing as to how to create the
conditions for human flourishing.
As Darcey rightly recognizes, the Church has the right to insist that as
a body of citizens, in line with what other citizens are entitled to, She
has the right and responsibility to pass judgment on various moral
positions in society. She has the right and responsibility to live by Her
moral positions23 as do all citizens. She is insisting that any state that
wishes to be genuinely secular has the duty to respect that.
22
The Secular Conscience. Prometheus Books, New York 2008 P14.
23
Op.cit P14
46
At the same time, the State has the right to critique the Church as to
how ell Her moral positions and way of life actually enables the
development of a genuinely secular state. The Church Herself now
insists on this. The primary responsibility of the State is for the
common good. It has to work to create a society in which all human
beings can flourish, simply as human beings.
No doubt there will always be a tension between the state and the
Church over what constitutes the best structures for enabling human
beings to flourish. But it is a tension with which we have to live and
find ways of dealing. It does not necessarily have to be simply one of
conflict, something that needs to be eliminated by the victory of one
over the other? The choice before us is not between a totally and
irreligious state with the Church of minor interest only to individuals,
neither is it t one in which the Church is dominant and every state is
subordinated to the perspectives and values of one particular religious
community? It can and should be one in which the Church or various
religious groups within the state and state authorities are able to enter
into a debate as to what will truly help its citizens to flourish.
47
Secularism as an ideology
While the Church considers it to be a situation of tension and is seeking
a viable relationship between Herself and the State in which neither is
absorbed by the other, secularism says it is the latter: it is a matter of
conflict and religion must go. It must be totally marginalized if man is
to grow to maturity. And this is what it is intent on doing.
48
life. It, therefore, programmatically and deliberately, seeks to remove
any reference to the Transcendent from public life and its affairs so as
to eliminate this sense of Transcendence from human consciousness,
at least when it comes to the public realm.
24
Not everyone understands ‘secularization’ in this way. For some it simply mean the process
whereby the Church and State sort out what properly belongs to each. This could be termed positive
secularization. I take it more to mean the effort on the part of secularists to marginalize all religion
from public life. This would be negative secularization.
25
The Post-Christian Mind. Servant Publications. Ann Arbor Michigan 1999. P9.
49
punishments beyond this life that leaves us victims of suffering in this
life instead of being actively engaged to relieve it.
Just as man has become more and more enamored of his own
godlikeness, he has also discovered the world as a realm of
possibilities for creating for himself an ever better life. He knows he
can create a world of greater comfort, one more pleasurable, more
luxurious than ever known before. He can attain a level of material
prosperity that will ensure his satisfaction and happiness and has no
need to look beyond it. He now takes for granted that life in the here-
and-now is the place and the time in which he can find the satisfaction
of his desires, and he can rely on scientific knowledge and
technological know-how to accomplish it.
50
And now, at least since the sixties, this has become a universal
aspiration. The ‘good life’, once the realm only of the powerful and the
rich, is now open to the common man, the ordinary person, given the
right education, a modicum of good fortune and a willingness to work
hard. No one, especially one who is poor, has any need of a 'pie in the
sky’ reward beyond this life.
Especially in the sixties, the common man has come to believe that the
world is open to him and there is nothing that he or she cannot do or
be, given the right education, training and hard work. Socially and
politically, we have generally moved from aristocracy to meritocracy.
The ‘elite’ in this world are now those with the drive, know-how and
ruthlessness to create their own world according to their desires and
ideals. They are habitually measured by their monetary worth, as is
everything else. The elite are now not the aristocracy but the ones who
have 'succeeded' in amassing wealth, and, consequently, social and
political status and influence --- a new aristocracy!
51
Tuskegee and the fake (and coercive) South Korean stem cell research is
hard to fathom.26
We can see the influence of this rather blind pie-eyed view of science
as somehow above morality, not only with regards to stem-cell
research but also in the development of cloning and in the ability to
harvest and transplant organs; and in the desire to augment physical
capabilities with artificial aids – creating the bionic man.
Opposing scientists, then, in what they want to do, is difficult for us. It
is part of our take-for-granted way of thinking that progress as
determined by scientific and technological developments cannot and
should not be stopped. It is self-evidently a good thing. One should not
stand in the way of progress. That is the mortal sin of our times and
progress is overwhelming the responsibility of scientists. Hence,
modern man generally applauds the ability to create hybrid beings
never before seen in nature, providing they are useful. These can be
hybrids of flesh and machine. New bacteria and viruses created for
specific purposes are now possible because of his cleverness and he is
open to their development.
26
The Arizona Republic Sunday March 15th 2009.
52
artificially conceived or implanted. If unable to bear it themselves, they
can pay another to bear it for them.
All this now seem to be within his reach and, for many today, it is
simply obvious advance over what went before. It is evidence of what
is essentially a natural process --‘progress’. Modern man sees himself
as allied with this ‘progressive’ movement. He serves it. It is the
guiding impetus of nature, and those who oppose it are going to find
themselves on the ‘wrong side of history’. They are opposing what is
an inexorable force. In effect it has connotations of a divine force,
operating in human dynamics, leading it forward to a better future. In
effect, it is a secularized form of the Holy Spirit.
Through cooperation with this divine power, man has achieved the
status of absolute 'manufacturer' of life. He can create any sort of
world he wishes, one manufactured to satisfy his desires, and this is
seen as progress. And there does not seem to be any limit on what he
can do, and so he is intent on experimenting and discovering just what
he can do with life. He rejoices in his own cleverness in manipulating
and utilizing it for his own ends. He no longer feels any overt need to
refer his life or its fulfillment to God’s purposes or providence.
53
rationalist imperative, which is inseparable from the assertion of the
autonomy of individuals in their beliefs and actions in regard to any
exteriority or otherness prescribing their beliefs and actions, has gradually
deprived reference to supernatural powers of plausibility27.
Even his very self, bodily and emotionally, has become something to
be used. It is the means to an end, not an end in itself. This is showing
itself especially in matters sexual. One’s sexuality, particularly female
sexuality, has become a means to an end, something to be used to
achieve something else. It is not something to be lived into and
developed in its own intrinsic, actual life-giving potential, something to
be discovered with fascination and joy in the company of and through
relationship with another, but merely something to be used to achieve
other goals, usually wealth, luxury and power, all of which we usually
sum up in the term ‘success’.
The Western world today no longer possesses this principle of moral order.
It has become so deeply secularized that it no longer recognizes any
common system of spiritual values, while its philosophers have tended to
isolate the moral concept from its cultural context and have attempted to
Religion as a chain of memory. Daniele Hervieu-Leger. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick,
27
54
create an abstract subjective system of pure ethics. If this were all, we
should be forced to conclude that modern Western society does not possess
a civilization, but only a technological order resting on a moral vacuum28.
They are moral illiterates because they see their own whims and
wishes as the locus of what is right and wrong. What they want to do is
right. There is no higher source of morality. Of course there are laws
that try to curtail their desires and their actions and agencies to
enforce them, but these are the creation of others. They are not
necessarily the laws of the individual. They belong to someone else
and are imposed on him. It is their own desires that are paramount.
The constrictions on them are barriers to be surmounted, worked
around, fooled even in the pursuit of their own whims and wishes.
28
.Christianity and the New Age. Sophia Institute Press, Manchester, New
Hampshire.
29
Decadence The Social Affairs Unit. London.
55
religious context. Reality had a unity to it because it all flowed from
one source and was destined to find its fulfillment in that source and
through its power. And that source was a moral one. Life had come
from a moral ground and was being called to a moral destiny.
Happiness lay only in realizing that destiny. To live by idiosyncratic
whim and wish was simply to court disaster. To live well one had to e in
harmony with the objective moral law and that law extended to every
area of human existence, including the economic and political.
In the medieval world each level of reality had its own rationality and
each level was related to the higher level and could only be understood
properly from within it. There was a hierarchy of being with the
physical as the substrate and the spiritual at the top. Man was at the
peak of this hierarchy of being and revealed the ultimately moral
nature of the universe. In him, the moral nature of reality as a whole
was revealed. Man could therefore legitimately relate one level to a
higher one and the whole to a higher source totally. And that higher
source was ultimately personal. It was the perfection of moral being
and purpose and the source of the objective moral dimension of the
whole of reality, now revealed through human consciousness.
56
according to their own specific laws and purposes. They have lost their
moral unity. The tendency has been to ever-increasingly disparate
areas of specialization. So economics, politics, social relationships are
understood as operating by their own internal laws and purposes.
There is no overarching moral meaning that would integrate these
areas of experience. They function as separate areas and are in
themselves quite devoid of any moral character. Dawson has
summarized this development thus:
The Western mind has turned away from the contemplation of the absolute
and eternal to the knowledge of the particular and contingent. It has made
man the measure of all things and has sought to emancipate human life from
its dependence on the supernatural. Instead of the whole intellectual and
social order being subordinated to spiritual principles, every activity has
declared its independence, and we see politics, economics, science and art
organizing themselves as autonomous kingdoms which owe no allegiance to
any higher power. (op.cit. P59-60.)
57
Currently, secularism is leading to what has been called the
demographic winter, and that demographic winter is simply to a future
in which there are no children.. In a presentation to a Business
conference in Davos, Switzerland, Herbert Meyer of Fortune magazine
said of this:
58
This is too much for many. They cannot cope, especially when that in
which they have placed their faith begins to collapse as it is at the
moment with the meltdown of the capitalist economic structure. The
foundations of a good many people’s hopes and dreams are being
dashed and they have nothing to enable them to find meaning and
significance in their lives.
Secular affairs came under the same ethical principles as all other
aspects of life and the Church stood for and enforced those principles
through Her teaching, spiritual disciplines and social influence.
Although the difference between religious and secular affairs was
always known, the context within which both saw themselves was a
sacred one. There was an underlying unity between them. This life
served to prepare one for a life beyond this.
31
The Economic effects of the Reformation. HIS Press. Norfolk VG. 1923
59
Rights and morality
This is currently expressed in the notion of ‘rights’. These are no longer
ways of curtailing the tyranny of the State over the individual, as they
were in Medieval times, rather, they have become justifications for
individual actions or life-styles whether or not these are good for the
community or not. “I have a right to…” is now a frequently heard
refrain.
Rights, then, in contradictory fashion flow from the people. There is,
after all an objective and ultimate source of morality: it is the will of
the majority as carried out by the state. If this extension of rights then
has any ultimate justification, we refer it back to the democratic
process. “The voice of the people” –ie. those in government alone has
the right to determine who is even human. The source of morality lies
in the will of the people as interpreted by those in power. If these
decide that there are humans that are not persons and only persons
have rights, then, it is morally justified to destroy a ‘fetus’ and fetal
tissue can be harvested for human use. Those defined as non-human
can be destroyed, incinerated after abortions or flushed down a toilet
after a successful infertility procedure.
32
In Switzerland tomatoes have been given ‘rights’.
60
and stemming from some transcendent source that we believe stands
in judgment on us. The solution to debilitating experience of guilt and
shame is to get rid of that transcendent source.
Since who is nominated to the Supreme Court can change with each
election, however, this reinforces the notion that morality is only
relative value, and being of relative value is there to serve what we
want of others and life. It has nothing actually to do with any objective
moral claim on our minds and hearts. It then becomes possible to
assert positions tyrannically. There is a radical divorce that takes
place between morality and law.
This loosening of morality from the law means that our primary
concern is not with morality but with not stepping outside the law and
incurring punishment. Legality as a source of shame and guilt is
likewise weakened. These are the expression of other people’s ideas of
right and wrong, not our own. Breaking the law is no longer a source of
shame or guilt, just regret that one has gotten caught.
61
freedom have in fact become radically tyrannical33. A genuinely
secular state, by contrast will support that which enables morally
sensitive people to emerge. It will enable the religious instinct to find
expression while challenging those bodies that are explicit
expressions of that instinct to see how they support and encourage
human flourishing.
33
What Price Liberty Ben Wilson
The Tyrranny of Liberalism.
62
That is the task facing us with the virus of secularism. We may not be
able to get rid of it from our culture entirely, and should not try. It is a
stance that one can, and has a right to take, no matter how irrational it
might be. But, how do we deal with it so that it does not weaken us as
a body, that is the question.
To live the life of the kingdom and promote its development means
developing the notion of the common good. We have to bring to the
fore the fact that the kingdom is a community, a community in which
human beings can find the fulfillment of their humanity.
This takes us beyond the Church to the wider society of humanity and
links the mission of the Church to the work of the Spirit of God present
in the history of humanity as a whole. Developing this can help us to
63
see the profound importance that the gospel has to developing
community in this world, community based on our fundamental
humanity.
In other words it does not adequately account for the reality of human
nature as both individual and communal. As such, while overtly
committed to individual moral freedom, it is radically tyrannical in the
way it treats the individual, pressuring him or her to moral conformity.
64
This emphasis on the common good and its development flows from an
understanding of the human person as intrinsically part of the whole of
humanity. Man is an individual-in-community with others and to
develop well as an individual needs a good communal environment
within which to live. It is concerned with how such a society may be
created and what has to be done morally to realize it.
This social doctrine has been in the process of development since the
end of the Nineteenth century, but the basis of it re-existed that era. It
was developed in the Medieval world. Its development was bound up
with a gradual recognition of the legitimacy of the development of the
genuinely secular state.
This change in attitude was the outcome of many factors, not the least
of which was the interest that Church had come to have in social
justice, beginning with Leo XIII encyclical, Rerum Novarum, at the end
of the nineteenth century through Pacem in terris of Pope John XXII.
65
The Church realized in a new way that She had an obligation to
consider the most just way to organize human affairs. She had to be
concerned with the development of humanity as such. She could not
simply be concerned with 'getting people to heaven'.
But, again, the roots of this concern are not new. She had always seen
the care of the poor as being an obligation on Her. It flows from Her
inner sense that She is the locus of the life of the kingdom. She is
called to witness to the love of God – the Spirit of God – who is the life
of the Trinity. She is to reflect to the world the love that is God.
So, from the very beginning of Her existence, the Church has lived the
challenge to love the poor and the needy. This was unique in the world
of the Roman Empire and drew from the Emporer eventually the funds
it needed to carry out this new expression of love. It has continued
ever since. It found expression in the Middle Ages in monastic
hospitality and feeding of the poor, in the creation of hospitals and in
the creation of feast-days to give the poor laborers relief from work.
Economic theory in the Middle Ages was an aspect of ethics. It was
subject to moral assessment. There was no thought that it might be an
independent discipline.
Finally, throughout its history, individual saints have emerged from the
heart of the Church to enable the needy to sharing in the blessings of
this life and give witness to the love of God for all. One of the most
influential has been St. Vincent De Paul and the expression of his
perspectives and values through the work of Frederick Ozenam and
the organization he founded – the Society of St. Vincent De Paul.
Today, the Catholic Church is the major provider of care for the poor
and the sick throughout the world.
But, now, a new twist has been added. What has developed from the
reflection on the secularization process in the late nineteenth century
is a more definite realization that there is an intrinsic link between
entry into the kingdom of God and the way in which we relate to this
world and that this is very much influenced by the culture within which
we live. The very Catholic link between salvation and moral activity has
been reaffirmed, but together with a new realization of the degree to
66
which culture determines character and the need to reach out into the
world to change that culture.
We are now much more aware that the world is replete with sinful
structures that needed to be changed if the individual person is to
flourish. If man, as an individual person, is to realize his own moral
perfection, the culture in which he lives needs to be changed. What
has been developing in the Church, then, is a new willingness to work
to transform the political and social structures of this world and to see
that this is intrinsic to the mission of the Church.
67
laity at the outer edges most in contact with the secular world and
alone in a position to transform it. The Pope is the hub of the Church. It
is he that keeps the Universal Church united in its faith and life. He
articulates the mind and heart of the Church in important areas,
strengthening the faith of those on the outer edge, commissioned to
evangelize our world. And that means the laity. It is the laity that is
most in contact with the real parameters of the secular world. It is lay-
people who have the most expertise in dealing with it. It is they alone
who are most able to evangelize our world and transform its culture
into one that promotes a genuinely secular world.
The question facing the Church at the present time is how to educate
the laity in the faith such that they can both reach out to our modern
world in appreciation of its secular tasks, and be at the service of
developing them, and to do so in a way that affirms and challenges the
world to recognize the importance of the transcendent dimension of
human reality and the need to support the religious instinct and its
development. It is in this that the Church counteracts the influence of
secularism.
This is a difficult task. Their involvement with the affairs of the world,
places the laity directly in the path of being seduced away from seeing
life through the lens of faith to seeing it purely in secular terms. It is
they who have to live daily in a secularist culture. They need to be
continually challenged to relate their lives and work to the love and
providence of God and see their secular concerns from within the
context of the Gospel. Such is the work and mission of the hierarchical
priesthood – within the parish, the priest, within the diocese, the
bishop, and within the Church universal, the Pope. All are especially
called to witness directly to the transcendent source and character of
the Church’s life and mission.
And they do so for the sake of the laity. It is the laity that is most in
contact with the real parameters of the secular world. It is they who
are most at risk of being seduced away from their faith. How to
educate the laity in the faith such that they can both reach out to our
modern world in appreciation of its secular tasks, and at the service of
developing them, and to do so in a way that affirms and challenges
that world to recognize the importance of the transcendent dimension
68
of human reality and the need to support the religious instinct and its
development? That is the question facing the Church at the moment.
But, how do we define the culture of death? The best way to describe
John Paul's understanding of the culture of death is as a culture that
sees human fulfillment as bound up with the ability to kill others. In a
culture of death, killing others is seen as the way to create a better life
for all and this is the supreme characteristic of the secularist agenda:
death is seen as a rational tool for human improvement.
It makes some sort of sense, if this life is all that the individual can
expect, to suggest that, in order to create a better world for existing
individuals, 'unwanted' children should be aborted. Who wants a world
full of unwanted children? Why burden oneself with children that
prevent one’s personal self-realization now? It makes some sort of
sense to abort defective children. They cannot experience the fullness
of life and are better off dead. They constitute a real burden on the
living, especially on their parents and siblings. It is an unfair burden
and it makes sense to prevent that happening if this life is all that one
has. Infirm and demented elderly should be euthanized. They are a
drain on human resources and for no good end. They are no longer of
any value to the living, vibrant members of society and take away
precious resources that could be used to make a better life for them.
Suicide should be a legitimate option under medical supervision for
those who desire it because of some debilitating illness of some sort.
That is compassionate. It enables people to be in control of their own
destiny and to exit life with dignity, among friends and loved ones.
That makes sense. It likewise ‘makes sense’ to execute very 'bad'
people. Not only do they take up precious resources but they
constitute a radical threat to the well-being of ‘good’, law-abiding
people. It is only a matter of justice that those who have taken the
lives of others be executed themselves. And military action should be
69
seen as a noble activity to rid the world of rogue rulers and countries.
Its technology should and needs to be developed to become a surgical
tool ridding the world of evil societies and enabling good ones to
develop. What can be more sensible than that?
70
doorway to eternal life. In being willing to sacrifice his life that His
Father might reveal to us where our ultimate fulfillment lies, Jesus has
released us from the fear of death and constrictions on the human
spirit that that creates. We can now think of our lives in a context that
takes us beyond this world and its limitations. We are able to make the
same sacrifice of ourselves that Jesus made: a sacrifice of our lives for
the sake of the good of others. This was captured in the early Church
by the writer of the letter to the Hebrews when he said:
Now since the children share in blood and flesh, he likewise shared in them,
that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death,
that is, the devil, and free those who through fear of death had been subject
to slavery all their life. (Heb 2:14-15)
71
conformist society based on its own ideology backed up by political
power. The premises on which the secularist wishes to build a common
world are not allowed to be questioned. They have simply to be
accepted. The intellectual rationale for the world they wish to create is
no longer based on dialog and reason but on dogmas, placed beyond
the reach of human questions. What secularism ultimately creates is a
tyrannical society based on personal preferences, or the preferences of
those in power.
But, She also need to make it clear that, while human fulfillment lies
beyond this world and is attained by the grace of God alone,
nevertheless our entry into it is linked with the quality of our lives in
this world. She has to show how the two are intrinsically linked
together.
72
beyond this. We come to understand what the kingdom is and prepare
ourselves for live in it by the way in which we seek to transform this
world into a place of justice and peace. We must seek to live now the
attitudes and values of the kingdom if we are to be able to live in the
world beyond. It is essentially that we seek to transform the world so
that it mirrors the kingdom if we are to learn what it means to be a
kingdom person. So we are taught to pray: They kingdom come on
earth as it is in heaven”.
This core belief flows from its faith in the crucified and resurrected
Christ. He has revealed to us that it is not possible to attain a life of
fulfillment in the here-and-now. This world, ever since the fall of man,
has lost any ability to satisfy the human desire for fulfillment. It is a
world permeated by the tragic. The highest level that natural life is
capable of attaining is that of being a sacrament of the world beyond
this in which alone man can find his fulfillment. It can and does yield
moments of experienced pleasure, joy and satisfaction that do intimate
the fullness of life that lies beyond it, but it is not and cannot of itself
be the locus of that fulfillment.
The secularist abuses the world, and life in this world, by expecting too
much of it. Secularism leads to expecting too much from the goods of
this life and in promoting unrealistic expectations helps to turn the
goods of this life into addictions. Modern society can be properly
characterized as an addictive society in that it chronically and
neurotically tries to find total fulfillment in the pleasures and
experiences of this world.
73
world for its fulfillment. This conflict was brought to the surface when
John Paul defined the secularist mentality as issuing in the culture of
death and threw the weight of the Church behind the creation of a
culture of life. The two cultures are diametrically opposed. The
secularist- dominated world recognized the challenge and ever since
has been engaged in a wholesale effort to stifle the voice of the Church
in matters of public policy. It is currently attempting to have the
Church expelled from its position in the United Nations because it is
the center of opposition to the secularist programs, particularly those it
has labeled 'reproductive rights'. Within the United Nations there are
massive attempts to impose these on whole nations, often using
economic blackmail to do it.
74
in which the true goods of humanity are served, even in this world. It
was John Paul’s conviction that only the humanism that flows from the
Gospel with its uncompromising emphasis on the priority of the
Transcendent, the kingdom of God, is actually capable of this. It alone
gives justification for that commitment to human welfare that is
essential to creating a better world.
The urgency of the task flows from the fact that we now live in the
‘end-times’ in which whether or not we share in that fulfillment is being
determined. Those end-times began with the birth of Jesus, his
sacrifice on the cross and his resurrection from the dead. Whether we
share in that fulfillment is dependent on our willingness to serve the
extension of God’s reign over all aspects of human life. Whether or not
we are fit for entry into the kingdom depends on the way we relate to
humanity, and all that underpins the existence and flourishing of
humanity -- the natural realm itself.
75
A political agenda
What might the Church do to translate this deeper understanding of
Her mission into a practical agenda? However we might determine the
practical steps that this might require, intrinsic to this agenda is the
involvement of Catholics as Catholics in political life at all levels. They
need to be well informed as to the principles of social justice as
developed by the Church and able to promote social justice based on a
firm sense of the objectivity of moral law, grounded in the existence
and presence of God. Catholics are bound to seek, on the basis of
reason and in concert with others of whatever religion, to find those
laws and social structures that really do enhance the lives of all human
beings.
But, it must do so in a way that shows that life in this world really is
good, and that the development of science and the secular, including
the freedom of the individual to choose his or her own religious stance,
is of positive value for human spiritual growth and development. It
must show how pursuing and enjoying the good things of this life are
legitimate and necessary goods and must be made available to all.
Creating a secular world means making them available to all, no
matter what their race, color or creed.
76
strongest opponent. Secularists will find all sorts of ways to punish it
and those who promote its agenda. It will mean for Catholics a more
deliberate commitment to following in the footsteps of Jesus in the
conviction that in following him to the cross we will also follow him into
the resurrected life. Catholics have got to bring back into focus the
essential nature of Catholicism as a following of Jesus to the cross.
Jesus staked His life on a fundamental principle: that His Father would
give Him eternal life if He was willing to follow His will and be true to
His vocation to be the savior of humanity through his dreadful
crucifixion. It was this that was so effectively portrayed in Mel Gibson's
movie, ‘The Passion of the Christ’. And it was probably this that caused
so much offense. In that movie Jesus posed to modernity the radical
question as to where our true fulfillment lies, and how to attain it. Is
the way to life really through the cross of self-sacrifice for the good of
others? Does fulfillment really mean being willing to give up one’s life
in this world? Is this what love really means?
For Catholics that means sharing in the cross of Christ. Grasping this
was central to the challenge John Paul issued to the Church when he
placed the church squarely behind the promotion of a culture of life. He
was, and following him Benedict XVI is doing the same, challenging the
Church to witness to the validity of that overall perspective by the
quality of its own life. Catholics must show that the Christian way of
viewing life and its meaning and significance does lead to greater
human development. It must show that it leads to a greater maturity of
character and a greater capacity for service to others for their good
77
even in this life. This may, given the power that secularist have today,
involve much persecution.
It also means that they will have to accept and understand that to
integrate their lives with the divine purposes, as those have been
revealed to us in Christ, will inevitably lead them in one way or another
to the cross. They are called to follow Jesus Christ in his mission and
will have, in one way or another, to share in the consequences. This
was seen as intrinsic to the Christian life from the very beginning. The
New Testament witnesses to this indispensable dimension to the
Christian vocation. Christians were from the beginning understood as
continuing the mission of Jesus to witness to a way of life that
challenged people to repentance and conversion.
78
That quality of life involves growth in the capacity for and expression
of self-sacrificing love, a love that is willing to sacrifice personal
potential in this life for the good of others. It is the good of others that
must motivate their witness and their mission. They answer the
challenge to be 'good people' so that others may experience what it
means to be loved and so be challenged to love others. And that
means accepting a task in this world, given him by God, and seeking to
fulfill that task, even if it demands the loss of his or her own life in this.
He seeks for a way of living and working that will contribute to the
welfare of others.
This is different from a secular outlook that looks out into this life to
see how to be successful and so gain its pleasures and satisfactions. It
looks out on this life from the perspective of how their way of life and
the manner in which they live it might be of benefit to others. It issues
in a characteristic Catholic moral stance: how might I be so that I am
good for others? It invites to a deep moral sensitivity as to the meaning
and significance of one's own life stance for the good of others. It
promotes the development of a virtuous character, something that is
coming to be increasingly promoted by the Church. The Catechism of
the Catholic Church now puts the development of a virtuous character
at the center of its moral teaching. Someone committed to loving
others will seek to become a particular type of person and undertake
the disciplines necessary to achieve that form of character which will
contribute to the manifestation of the kingdom of God among us.
To fulfill that task the Catholic looks to divine help, well aware that he
may not always be able to see value in the particular demands made
on him to love others. He lives in faith and hope that through his
efforts to become the sort of person capable of transforming this world
in such love, so that it reflects the ultimate kingdom of God, something
important is being achieved, even though he might not see what that
might be.
79
The Catholic then seeks to bring his mind and heart in line with that of
Christ, so as to integrate into that purpose. That mind and heart is
revealed most powerfully in the celebration of the Eucharist. In the
Eucharist, as The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches us, the
whole of Christian faith is expressed. It defines us as a community
committed to the realization of the kingdom of God.
80
merciful God. He is saved from any temptation to self-righteousness in
his witness.
81
in these days when Her failures are being paraded in every organ of
public media, a lot of shame and guilt besides.
This ambiguity cannot be resolved from within this world but awaits
still a trans-cendent resolution. It is this resolution that has been
realized in Christ and which we as Catholics are privileged to
experience within the Church even now. Through faith in Christ as
mediated to us through the Church, the Catholic is freed from the
existential despair that characterizes a purely secular existence.
Only the Catholic Church, within which the crucified and risen Lord is
still present, has the capacity to stand against the triumph of a purely
secular outlook with the despair it inevitably brings. Hence, Pope
Benedict has said that:
What we need most at this moment of history are men who make God
visible in this world through their enlightened and lived faith. The negative
witness of Christians who spoke of God but lived against him obscured his
image and opened the door to unbelief. We need men who have their eyes
fixed straight on God and who learn from him what true humanity is. We
need men whose intellects have been enlightened by the light of God and
whose hearts have been opened by God, so that their intellects can speak to
others’ intellects and their hearts can open to others hearts.34
34
Europe in the crisis of cultures. Communio Summer 2006 P355.
82
The world needs the Catholic for its salvation. The question is will the
Catholic step forward to meet this need?
Conclusion
Signs of hope
The evidence is that more and more that Catholics are in fact stepping
forward to take up the challenge. A revival is taking place in the
Church, even as it suffers through the revelations of widespread sexual
abuse on the part of clergy. This revival seeks an ever deeper grasp of
what it means to be and live the Catholic transcendent understanding
of human existence.
83
In the wake of the publication of the Catechism, strong voices are now
being raised, pointing out the seduction that secularism is exerting on
the Faith and calling Catholics to recognize its dangers and reverse its
influence. Bishops are now routinely exhorted to make sure that the
faithful are not confused as to what constitutes the Catholic mind and
heart. The issues are being discussed more and more in the Catholic
press. Books, articles and International Conferences dedicated to the
exploration of this influence and how to combat it show a world-wide
concern about it and dedication to meeting its challenge.
35
Catholic social thought and American Civilization. Joseph Varacalli. Homiletic and Pastoral
Review. Oct. 2002
84
generally for deeper spiritual values and a community context within
which to live them.
They are satisfying this need in many different ways, some of them
quite bizarre. Cults of one sort or another are flourishing as people look
to an experience of community life that overcomes the evils present in
our contemporary society. If the Church generally can renew itself and
develop its own intrinsic community life, there is no doubt that the field
is ripe once again to be harvested and the Church will once again
'gather-in' those destined to be saved, just as it did in its very early
days.
......in an age like ours where secularism is under assault from the claims of
faith, it is an interesting question.36
It is in the light of this on-going battle that the Church is asserting its
unique character as the supporter and enhancer of human reason and
of the legitimacy of the reasonableness of any section of human
existence. Pope John Paul II wrote an encyclical ‘Fides et Ratio’ to
defend human reason. In this it is asserting itself, not as an ideology
that closes off questioning, but as a framework of thinking that
supports all that renders a person increasingly reasonable.
85
Whether these various movements will be strong enough to turn the
tide of secularism in the Western world, especially within the Church,
may be uncertain, but they do promise to keep the radical difference in
perspectives between Catholicism and secularism clearly in focus, and
this itself is a positive force. It will keep the critique alive, will
undoubtedly provoke the anger of secularist forces, both within and
without, and evoke greater efforts to have the traditional voice of the
Church silenced. The battle is likely to get more vicious as the struggle
goes on.
86
In the process of doing this, he showed how the central quarrel of
Catholic faith is not with the genuinely secular but with the ideology of
‘secularism’. He proposed that there is a genuinely secular aspect to
life that must be respected if one is to be truly spiritual and he pointed
the way that the Church can do this by integrating its efforts around
the creation of a culture of life.
What he proposed, and this expresses the Catholic mind well, is that
the genuinely secular aspect to human life can only be sustained and
promoted, when it seeks to create a culture of life in this world yet
looks to the transcendent realm of the kingdom of God for its
fulfillment. The genuinely secular mindset can only emerge, and be
sustained, by a respect for life from conception to grave, and that
concern and respect only finds its ultimate justification within a
transcendent context of meaning and significance.
Political implications
This will inevitably and increasingly take Catholics into the realm of
politics and as it does so, so it will involve the Church in elucidating
anew the relationship between the Church and the State, between our
eternal happiness and the legitimate pursuit of the goods and
pleasures of this life. She has to elucidate how a genuinely secular
state can only rest upon acknowledgment of the reality of God as the
ground of human origin, destiny and continuing life.
87
to safeguard the freedom of the individual to pursue their own
happiness as they decide what that means in the vague and unrealistic
hope that this will itself benefit humanity as a whole. It is this that is
known as liberalism and, currently, it is this liberalism that defines
modernity. From the Catholic perspective, the State is there to
safeguard the common good of the community within which alone the
individual can find their personal fulfillment. The Catholic principle is
that of totality, by this is meant that the part only finds its own proper
fulfillment when it serves the whole. The good of the part is
subservient to the good of the whole. The individual, then, is bound to
serve the good of the whole body politic if he or she is to realize their
own fulfillment as individuals.
This also means, as the Church continually insists since Vatican II, the
body politic must serve especially the freedom of religion that is
essential to man seeking to be in harmony with the will of God and
realize their eternal fulfillment. This religious instinct is sui generis and
cannot be reduced to anything lower than itself. Its exercise is intrinsic
to human growth and development. The state has the responsibility to
safeguard that freedom and its expressions. It has the right to
intervene and control only when that freedom is exercised to the
detriment of the whole body and its peace.
88
the genuinely secular. The religious instinct to be truly humanizing
must respect and fulfill the genuinely human. The concern of all
religions must be the flourishing of all and they have the right and duty
to dialog both within and without their own communities as to what
this might be and how to inculcate it in their members and in society.
Any Catholic political agenda, then, will seek to keep in harmony the
two dimensions of individual fulfillment and the good of the community
as a whole and the relationship of secular life to the life of the Spirit.
The process of working for this touches all aspects of our personal
lives, home, business, politics, social and the intimately personal. It
impinges on that core sense of who we really are and raise very
personal questions about it, not just as modern men and women, but,
also, more sensitively, what we are as twenty-first century citizens of a
secularized society.
For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who
believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life. For God did
not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world
might be saved through him. ( John 3:16-17)
Jesus came for the salvation of the world. He came that the world
might have life and have it more abundantly (John 10:10). This life
begins in this world and finds its fulfillment in the world beyond this. In
the world to come all that is good and noble about life in this world will
be brought to its fulfillment and the good things of this life can be
sacramental of the life to come.
Catholics stand apart from their respective cultures, then, not for the
sake of condemning them, but in order to relate to them more
positively, and so seek their progress. They are called to become ever
89
more strongly for the world, and that means the particular world within
which they live, its racial and cultural uniqueness, and enable it to be
increasingly a place of life. It supports legitimate cultural and national
patriotism while not identifying any one political or social system with
the kingdom of God.
And that was John Paul's aim in his encyclical, Evangelium Vitae. He
challenged the Church to deepen its commitment to its faith so that it
might better promote life within this world. He called on Catholics to
stand against the culture of death and commit themselves to the
creation of a culture of life for the sake of the world. His critique of the
world as at the moment being permeated by a culture of death was
something he feels impelled to do, not just for the Church, but also for
the sake of the world.
This is something Catholics will do out of love for all men, no matter
their race, creed (and that includes secularism), culture or color. It
flows from the same love for humanity that God has shown us in
Christ and out of gratitude to God for actually giving us life. It seeks to
make of this world a true sacrament of the world to come through the
power and love of God and prepare people for entry into it. It is a
powerful and positive mission. It will require on the part of the
individual Catholic as well as those who represent the Church as a
whole as deep commitment and unfaltering courage as She has to
90
continue to battle the forces of secularism on behalf of birthing a
genuinely secular world.
Selected Bibliography
The Victory of Reason. Rodney Stark .Random House. New York. 2005
Decadence. ed. Digby Anderson. The Social Affairs Unit. London 2005
How the Catholic Church built Western Civilization. Thomas Woods
Regnery Publishing. Washington. 2005
Romero Guardini. The End of the Modern World. ISI Books Wilmington.
1998.
The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Liberia Editrice
Vaticana. Rome. 2005
Bright Promise, Failed Community. Joseph A.Varacalli. Lexington Books.
Lanham. 2000
Harrry Blamires. The Christian Mind. The Servant Publications. Ann
Arbor. Michigan. 1963
Harry Blamires. The Post-Christian Mind. Servant Publications. Ann
Arbor. Michigan 1999
Eric Voeglin. The New Science of Politics. University of Chicago Press.
Chicago. 1952
Science, Politics and Gnosticism. Henry regnery co. 1968
Gerald Delanty. Modernity and Post-Modernity. Sage Publications..
London. 2000
Owen Chadwick. The Secularization of the European Mind. Cambridge
Univeristy Press. 1973
Louis Dupre. Passage to Modernity .Yale University Press. 1993 New
Hampshire. 1931.P150
What is Secular Humanism? James Hitchcock. RC. Books. New York
1983
91