Relativism

[Lisa44]

Hi everyone,

I’m new to the Catholic church. I was baptized last year.

I’d like to start a discussion on relativism because I’ve heard Pope Benedict talk about it and I’m very interested in this subject.

Perhaps the Catholics here could tell me what they think relativism is, or give references or links to provide information on it.

Why is this concept so important in our modern age?

Thanks, I very much look forward to learning about this.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

One view is presented here. It is an older article, written about a hundred years ago, but it lays out the Catholic position. newadvent.org/cathen/12731d.htm

Relativism has been gaining ground throughout the last century due to the rising influence of atheists and liberals, who as you know are famous for protesting objective norms for morality, unless it is their morality.

 

[Lisa44]

One view is presented here. It is an older article, written about a hundred years ago, but it lays out the Catholic position. newadvent.org/cathen/12731d.htm

Relativism has been gaining ground throughout the last century due to the rising influence of atheists and liberals, who as you know are famous for protesting objective norms for morality, unless it is their morality.

It is a very seductive idea. I remember the line in Hamlet “nothing is good or bad but thinking makes it so.”
This of course is the same sentiment as is found in Buddhism which is growing in popularity in the west.

I think relativism is seductive because the person is not required to act in any particular way. However, this will also be a person’s undoing.

Thank you for the link. I’m still trying to find a more pedestrian explanation, one my tiny brain can quickly absorb.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

I think that relativism is rooted in atheism … which is the belief that there is no absolute God, period. If there is no absolute God, then there is no reason to believe that there are any absolutes anywhere in the universe … no absolute truths, no absolute moral values, no absolute beauty, etc. This view is self-defeating, of course, since it follows that if there are no absolutes anywhere, then neither can it be absolutely true that there are no absolutes anywhere.

We should not be surprised to find that relativism is a prop for liberalism … the view that we are free to create our own moral values, and that all moral values are to be respected as of equal value, there being no absolute way to measure them. Likewise, relativism, liberalism, and atheism will generally be found in the same camp. Those who despise religion generally do so because they find it conflicts with their personal moral freedom to act without morals and with impunity.

Most people who end up in jail (because they put their personal morality desires before the law) were also not regular churchgoers, and continue not to be chapel goers when they get into prison.

 

[Pani_Rose]

Dr Francis Beckwith, who became a revert last year, writes a good bit on Relativism.

 

[WindyHair]

so what’s wrong with relativism when it comes to religion and morals? i think you guys got it all wrong. is there any scientific data showing religious people are more moral? whether you believe it or not, right and wrong is different for everybody, whether christian or not.

there are christians who don’t believe in dancing, interracial marriage, homosexuality, customs, interpretations of the bible, etc., etc., etc. the list goes on and on.

let’s discuss.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

WindyHair

right and wrong is different for everybody

People differ in their views of right and wrong. But right and wrong are still right and wrong, even if you try to make right, wrong … or wrong, right.

When people make it right to kill babies, or to stick a penis up someone anal canal, they are kidding themselves … but they are not kidding anyone playing with a full deck.

 

[WindyHair]

WindyHair

right and wrong is different for everybody

People differ in their views of right and wrong. But right and wrong are still right and wrong, even if you try to make right, wrong … or wrong, right.

When people make it right to kill babies, or to stick a penis up someone anal canal, they are kidding themselves … but they are not kidding anyone playing with a full deck.

so who’s right and who’s wrong?
i guess that depends on who u ask right? lol

 

[CatsAndDogs]

so what’s wrong with relativism when it comes to religion and morals? i think you guys got it all wrong.

is there any scientific data showing religious people are more moral? whether you believe it or not, right and wrong is different for everybody, whether christian or not.

People who are moral are Catholic, whether they call themselves that or not.

People who are not moral are not Catholic, whether they call themselves that or not.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Are you implying that no one is objectively right and no one is objectively wrong? If so, do you really want to live in such a world?

If someone stole your wallet, I think you would be calling that wrong … and no doubt about it! If someone raped your daughter, I think you would be calling that wrong, even if the rapist wanted you to believe that it’s right.

Do you believe or not believe that some things are really right, and some things are really wrong, even when someone tries to stand the truth on its head?

Charlie

 

[Cristiano]

People who are moral are Catholic, whether they call themselves that or not.

People who are not moral are not Catholic, whether they call themselves that or not.

I disagree with that. There is more to it. Morality comes from natural law. To be be Catholic you need to choose and follow the supernatural law.

 

[Benedictus]

Relativism has been gaining ground throughout the last century due to the rising influence of atheists and liberals, who as you know are famous for protesting objective norms for morality, unless it is their morality.

You contradict yourself. A relativist is someone who doesn’t believe in objective ethics or morals, but then you describe atheists who do have an objective system, even though it’s different than yours.

Frankly, you’re in the same boat as the atheists you describe. You protest the atheist’s objective system of ethics/morals but are happy with your own. By your reasoning, you’re a relativist.

This is a trend that is prevalent on this forum: people pejoratively apply the label ‘relativist’ to people that aren’t really relativists at all, they’re just people that you disagree with. I’ve met very few relativists in my life. I’d be hard-pressed to think of more than one atheist I know is a relativist. Most simply think differently than you.

 

[Veritas248]

peterkreeft.com/audio/05_relativism.htm
Relativism is the single most important issue in our world today.
Rejection of the moral law leads to the acceptance of ANYTHING.
Peter Kreeft’s refutation helped me get a relativist to see the error of his ways just last week. I think it is quite powerful.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Benedictus

You contradict yourself. A relativist is someone who doesn’t believe in objective ethics or morals, but then you describe atheists who do have an objective system, even though it’s different than yours.

Now then, please show me where I said the atheist has an objective moral system.

Thanks,
Charlie

 

[Wirraway]

peterkreeft.com/audio/05_relativism.htm
Relativism is the single most important issue in our world today.
Rejection of the moral law leads to the acceptance of ANYTHING.
Peter Kreeft’s refutation helped me get a relativist to see the error of his ways just last week. I think it is quite powerful.

rejection by who? the state? perfectly aligning civil law with Catholic morality would be a total disaster for both the state and the church. write a law banning all forms of homosexual behavior. now try to enforce it. you would have an outrageous invasion of personal rights by the police where the cure would be much worse than the disease.

what you condemn as moral relativism is, in many cases, compromise inherent in any state that doesn’t invest the church with plenary authority over everything.

even a casual reading of threads on this forum (“is it a sin to …”) wherein every aspect of human activity becomes a candidate for criminalization I mean condemnation shows what would happen if some degree of “moral relativism” were not necessary.

 

[KingAlfred]

Hi everyone,

I’m new to the Catholic church. I was baptized last year.

I’d like to start a discussion on relativism because I’ve heard Pope Benedict talk about it and I’m very interested in this subject.

Perhaps the Catholics here could tell me what they think relativism is, or give references or links to provide information on it.

Why is this concept so important in our modern age?

Thanks, I very much look forward to learning about this.

We believe in the opposite of relativism – objective, changeless, universal truth. Relativism is typically post-modern: “Everything Man has done in history is so horrible, there is no longer any such thing as right versus wrong. Everyone is right *and *wrong, about everything, all the time.” Nonsense.

 

[rossum]

It is a very seductive idea. I remember the line in Hamlet “nothing is good or bad but thinking makes it so.”
This of course is the same sentiment as is found in Buddhism which is growing in popularity in the west.

You seem to have misunderstood Buddhism. Motive is indeed important, but underlying it there is an objective morality:Mind precedes all conditions,
mind is their chief, they are mind-made.
If you speak or act with an evil mind then suffering will follow you,
as the wheel follows the draught ox.

Mind precedes all conditions,
mind is their chief, they are mind-made.
If you speak or act with a pure mind then happiness will follow you,
as a shadow that never leaves.

Dhammapada vv 1-2

From the Buddhist point of view it is Christian morality that is a relative morality. Christian morality only applies to humans, God can do things that would be immoral if humans did them. There are two sets of rules, one set for men and a different set for God. In Buddhism all living beings, gods included, are subject to the same moral rules. There is only one set of moral rules.

rossum

 

[Veritas248]

rejection by who? the state? perfectly aligning civil law with Catholic morality would be a total disaster for both the state and the church. write a law banning all forms of homosexual behavior. now try to enforce it. you would have an outrageous invasion of personal rights by the police where the cure would be much worse than the disease.

what you condemn as moral relativism is, in many cases, compromise inherent in any state that doesn’t invest the church with plenary authority over everything.

even a casual reading of threads on this forum (“is it a sin to …”) wherein every aspect of human activity becomes a candidate for criminalization I mean condemnation shows what would happen if some degree of “moral relativism” were not necessary.

Individuals, not the state. I agree that state laws need to show relativism, because not everyone obeys the moral law in the first place. The state becomes relative only after the majority of its citizens become relative.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

so what’s wrong with relativism when it comes to religion and morals?.

Totalitarians love this type of thinking. It makes their job SOOO much easier. None of that pesky protest stuff, because human rights are all relative, so why rock the boat? Makes it easier to isolate and kill off those religious fanatics like Bonhoeffer.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatsAndDogs View Post
People who are moral are Catholic, whether they call themselves that or not.

People who are not moral are not Catholic, whether they call themselves that or not.

I disagree with that. There is more to it. Morality comes from natural law. To be be Catholic you need to choose and follow the supernatural law.

How do figure that morality comes ONLY from natural law, which is your implication?

Natural law is a subset of supernatural law, and is “adequate” for salvation (maybe) if followed closely in an inculpable-of-mortal-sin fashion.

If one is moral, then one is “at least” acting according to natural law, which is contained within supernatural law, where “supernatural law” is equivalent to “Catholic law”.