Answering that question, which is applicable in many circumstances, requires an answer to two others: why is ‘it’ being considered or attempted, and what ‘bother’ might be – or is being – encountered? This essay analyses the matter in the context of effort to advance (including defence of) recognisably-Catholic teachings which are not embodied in the laws and practices of States. If you are involved in such effort or are considering whether to become so, you may find interest in what follows, especially in the parts which follow what may seem a tediously-‘dry’ and –‘abstract’ introduction. If you are neither involved nor considering it, you may as well not read any further.
Asking ‘why’ counter-culturally-Catholic activity is being considered or attempted may be a defective expression of the question, because it is ambiguous. It could be answered by either ‘because Catholic teaching is true’ or ‘because Catholic teaching should be implemented’. People who believe something to be true do not necessarily believe that behaviour should conform to it.
“This split between the faith which many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age. … Therefore, let there be no false opposition between professional and social activities on the one part, and religious life on the other. The Christian who neglects his temporal duties, neglects his duties toward his neighbour and even God, and jeopardizes his eternal salvation.… Laymen should also know that it is generally the function of their well-formed Christian conscience to see that the divine law is inscribed in the life of the earthly city.”[1]
Instead of ‘why’ the relevant activity is being considered or attempted, the question should be ‘for what purpose’ is that the case. Activity always has a purpose, and participants can reasonably be assumed to desire that the purpose will be achieved. Yet those two truisms distract attention from the fact that sometimes achievement of a purpose (known commonly as ‘success’) means different things to different people. For example, if participants in a game are handicapped in some form, simply the participation can be regarded as ‘success,’ whereas if they are ‘able-bodied’ they are likely to regard success as defeat of the opponent(s).
There are people who regard advocacy of what is true and good as an end in itself, and profess to be unconcerned about whether the advocacy convinces the minds and influences the behaviour of the ‘audience’. Some people may believe that the mere statement of Catholic truth is the purpose, by comparison with which the effect (if any) on the recipient of the statement is unimportant, but it ‘sells short’ the apostolic purpose which Catholics should have. Such advocates may thereby be ‘insulated’ from disappointment if their persuasion makes no recognisable ‘impact,’ but protection from disappointment is (even if desirable) really not a recommendation of their indifference.
Our Lord came to the Earth not only to bear witness to the truth[2] but also to destroy the works of the Devil.[3] He said much about the truth, but made very clear that we have to behave in line with it, and properly-informed Catholics know that the Magisterium of the Church is His instrument in making known the truth and its requirements with firm certainty and without error.[4] There is clear Magisterial teaching on the duty of Catholics to seek the Catholicisation of their countries, but it seems to be rarely even mentioned, far less advocated, by priests and bishops (is your experience different?). That may be because they have answered ‘No’ to the question with which this article is concerned, and prefer to try to keep everyone with them by ignoring ‘awkward’ subjects and speaking only of (in the reported words of St. Oscar Romero) “very nice, pious considerations that don’t bother anyone.” [5] Such a policy is misconceived and a failure. The ‘faithful’ in so-called developed countries have diminished enormously. “Even in countries evangelised many centuries ago, … in many regions Christians are, or are becoming, a ‘little flock’ (Lk. 12:32).”[6] Meanwhile, the Church’s enemies
(Excuse me, Mr. Hofler – did you say “enemies”? What do you mean? Yes, I did say “enemies,” although I know how infrequently their existence is acknowledged by seemingly-typical clerics. An exception has been Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., who, citing a warning that the great weakness of Christian witness in our time is that we preach as though we don’t have enemies, added that “we do. … Catholics have ignored an unpleasant truth: that there are active, motivated groups…that bitterly resent the Catholic Church and the Christian Gospel, and would like to silence both.” [7] More recently, historian Dr. Darrick Taylor added his own warning that “No one should have any illusions about what kind of societal forces are arrayed against the Church—they are very real, and very threatening.” [8])
As I was going to say, the Church’s enemies have gone from strength to strength in controlling the laws, policies, and general ‘atmosphere’ in large parts of the world. As their grip has tightened, the “dictatorship of relativism”[9] has made it more and more relevant for active or aspiring advocates of Catholicism to ask the question at the top of this article. What was once Christendom has disappeared, and Christian denominations are “weak, infiltrated by secular liberalism, [and] full of uncertainty and diffidence.” [10]
While ‘Western’ countries flounder in spurious ‘tolerance’ and give ‘equality’ to incompatibles, Islam seems to be untroubled by such turbulence. Catholicism and Islam have in common at least an acknowledgement that God’s will should be done on Earth, but, whereas orthodox Catholicism can be found on paper but is a long way from being implemented in society at large, Islam seems far more successful in implementation. The difference must be most noticeable among people who have lived in each type of country.
An example is Derya Little, who was brought up amidst Islam, drifted into atheism, converted to Evangelical Christianity, came to a ‘Christian’ country, and (not because of the surrounding ‘culture’) became a Catholic. In her enthralling explanation of that story, she wrote that Islam’s view of the world “is drastically different from that of Christianity.” The role of Islam is to be “the glue that holds the society together and the compass that should guide the government.” Those two opinions can be found also among ‘wishful-thinking’ types of Christian, but, as Derya commented, “[w]hat the glue is made of, however, is equally important.” So is having a correctly-functioning compass. According to Islam, the role of government “is to implement Islamic law, sharia…” [11] The key word is “implement,” with its coercive connotation. Unlike the mind-set which seems dominant in Islamic societies, typical representatives of Christianity (probably infected by pervasive permissiveness promoted by secularism) seem wary of, or even opposed to, coercion. Derya wrote that many Muslims think that the world would be better off if everyone lived under Islamic law, and that because nothing can be more important than expanding the kingdom of Allah, all Muslims are required to be part of that struggle. [12] Have you noticed an equivalent mentality among Christians?
Despite warnings from British and American friends in her home country, Derya looked forward to moving to a ‘Christian’ one, but after arriving there her optimism was realised to be irrational and soon “burst”: teenage mothers, binge drinking, and promiscuity “made an impact,” and few of the Catholics whom she knew talked about those unsavoury phenomena: “Either it was the silence of defeat I was hearing, or I had moved to the land where political correctness had been invented.” [13] She wondered about this evident crumbling of Western civilisation by comparison with strength in the Islamic world, and about what has changed so much – after centuries of resistance to the spread of Islam – that “the West [is]no longer able to defend itself against this mortal enemy.” [14] Nine years of residence in the West led her to “agree with Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who in his Without Roots explains how the collapse of Western civilization is happening from within, by turning away from its roots, in other words, the Catholic faith.” [15] “Everything that makes the West attractive,” she wrote, “is a mere echo of its Christian past,” and that when material allurements fade, without Christ the West has not much to offer, and therefore “we should not be surprised that Islam, with its strong identity and community that springs from a shared way of thinking and acting, gains a foothold” in Western countries. [16]
Teaching “stark black-and-white rules, not to be bent,…Islam offers boundaries and a structure in which to function, which gives a person a sense of security and of his place in the world. Everybody knows what is expected of everybody else.” [17]
Except in entirely mundane living, such predictability does not exist in post-Christian countries. The process of its dissolution has been occurring for so long that it was hardly noticed until too late to stop, and unpredictability is often portrayed as a benefit of a ‘liberal, tolerant society’. Derya Little discovered that in such a society “there is nothing beyond the material – there are no rules to live by and nothing is sacred. … There is nothing there in comparison with the strong Muslim community.”[18]
Young people, whose inexperience renders them impressionable, can recognise material hollowness and lack of an intellectual ‘anchor’. Some of them succumb to those social norms, and others are attracted to counter-cultural lifestyles. A newspaper-article in 2006 considered this theme, arguing in particular that Catholicism is losing ground to Islam in the battle for young men’s souls. According to the article, young men “admire strength, crave respect, look for a feeling of brotherhood, and love the comfort of certainty. Islam, both mainstream and radical, offers all of these things. Catholicism, with its remote leadership and passivity in facing secularism’s excesses, clearly does not. Catholicism also fails to offer that special thing teenagers crave: rebellion. … [Y]oung men and women are…turning to the Koran. But why not the Bible? Because this is a de-Christianised European problem caused by a spiritual vacuum that only Islam is filling,” and Christianity “is now associated with weakness, with old people, with [hymn-singing] and bishops who make mealy-mouthed comments about ‘people of all faiths and none’.” [19]
“Christianity in Western societies has,” wrote Derya Little, “been watered down by indifference and weakened by relativism. Christians are scorned by those in government, media, and education who think that believing in anything other than what their death culture suggests is bigotry.” [20]
Given this lamentable situation, “the question we must ask ourselves is,” Derya added, “[w]hat can I do to change the tide?” [21]
[1] “Gaudium et Spes paragraph 43.
[2] Jn. 18:37.
[3] 1 John 3:82.
[4] “Catechism of the Catholic Church, “ paragraph 38; “Dei Verbum,” paragraphs 6 and 7.
[5] Quoted in “The Catholic Times,” 25th July 2010, p.13.
[6] Pope St. John Paul, Apostolic Letter “Novo millennio ineunte”, 2001, paragraphs 40 and 36.
[7] “Render Unto Caesar – Serving the Nation by Living our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life,” by Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.; Doubleday, 2008, p.187.
[8] https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/the-truce-of-68-revisited
[9] https://www.vatican.va/gpII/documents/homily-pro-eligendo-pontifice_20050418_en.html
[10] “The Rage Against God,” Peter Hitchens; Continuum International Publishing Group, 2010, p.158.
[11] “From Islam to Christ,” Derya Little; Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2017, p.46-47.
[12] Ibid., p.47.
[13] Ibid., p.194.
[14] Ibid., p.192-193.
[15] Ibid., p.193.
[16] Ibid., p.196.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Ed West, in “The Catholic Herald,” 18th August 2006, p.10.
[20] “From Islam to Christ,” op. cit., p.199.
[21] Ibid., p.200.
Leave a Reply