What is the ultimate objective of Catholicism? (Main Forum)

by Brian Coyne , LINDEN, NSW, Tuesday, April 03, 2012, 18:58 (417 days ago) @ James

Yes, thanks for this James — and also the expanded comments on a similar theme you wrote in the response to Aragon HERE. I think Humanae Vitae was a huge turning point for Catholicism — possibly even rivalling Vatican II itself as a turning point but in an almost diametrically opposite direction. It might be said in fact that Vatican II and Humanae Vitae stand as the two icons or symbols of the confused identity of what the two main camps in Catholicism think Catholicism is meant to be — what the two camps think the ultimate objective in being Catholic is all about?

You and I have had this discussion before: I think there is a legitimate and substantial strand in Catholic thought that primarily saw Catholicism as "a quest for ultimate truth". Despite all its failings down through history, all the bad popes and things like the crusades, the inquisition, even the modern day sexual abuse scandal (which has probably always been a problem but only different in this present age because it is now 'out in the open'), I think it can be argued that there has always been a significant strand in Catholic thought and endeavour that saw the institution as an aid, or encourager, of the human quest for ultimate truth. Endeavours such as the encouragement of education were not simply some sophisticated and largely pragmatic exercise in recruiting a good management elite so that the institution could perpetuate itself, a strong strand of thought did actually believe that the encouragement of education was an important endeavour in its own right for the well being, and greater knowledge of humankind.

Against all that, this institution has also had plenty of "men on the make" or "main chancers" (although why people would do that in the Church and not in some property development company, or selling used cars, has always struck me as a bit odd but, in the end, I've put that down to the fact that all of us have within us a great streak of irrationality also) who couldn't give a fig for any lofty intellectual or spiritual objectives. To them "Church" was simply another pathway in life to "getting ahead" of the rest of the human flock.

A third important strand has been the one that has seen religion primarily as a "place of refuge and certitude". It is primarily perceived as a place of psychological comfort. That comes through in that quote I'm always trying to throw back at Benedict: "The Christian believer is a simple person: bishops should protect the faith of these little people against the power of intellectuals." Benedict is partly correct in his observation: for many of his "simple people" Catholicism is primarily seen as a place of emotional comfort and they are not at all concerned with any lofty intellectual ideals or some "pursuit of truth". What they want is certitude — and authority figures who will give them certitude — the Jo Belke Petersen and George Pell type leaders who will say to them "now don't you worry your pretty little heads about that, we leaders will look after all those matters that concern you. Just trust us." (That's what essentially resides at the heart of Pell's desire to ditch the thinking, and teaching, on Primacy of Conscience.) These people ultimately couldn't give a rats if what their leaders are telling them are porkies or not. The chief thing in the minds of this class of listeners is whether it sounds authoritative or not. Logic and rational analysis simply doesn't come into the equation. "Give us the rosaries, the novenas, and the 'dancing suns' at Fatima or Lourdes, so that we have the 'warm fuzzies' in our tum-tums" is the version of religion and Catholicism being served up in this cafeteria.

I think it could be argued that Vatican II was the place in history where these competing strands all came into collision. And Humanae Vitae was the first great symbolic test after Vatican II where the neanderthal element started throwing their weight around — and in fact won. It's all essentially been "downhill from there" as illustrated so graphically in this set of statistics...

And perhaps even more graphically in the exit of the "educated management elite" in the institution, its priestly class, who would be the leaders of the future.

The publication date of Humanae Vitae is effectively the "turning point" on the graph where the "great exit" began from seminaries. Around the time I was leaving school in 1965 the elite schools in the Catholic education system were still the prime recruiting grounds where the institution channeled the "best and brightest" minds into its seminary system and ultimately into the highest management ranks of the institution. Today it is almost a standing joke that the recruiters for the seminaries have to patrol around looking for society's social misfits — and the young people in the most elite schools have their sights firmly set on careers in the elite professions, as property developers or in the "white shoe brigades" of secular society.

Catholicism, I submit, needs to work out what is its essential or ultimate objective? If it continues down the present course it is on it will end up no different to any of the thirty thousand or other cults and denominations there are within Christianity. It's essentially no longer an endeavour searching for, or encouraging the wider societal search for, ultimate truth, but it has turned itself into some kind of "comfort station" for the emotionally insecure mothered by bullies, main chancers and mummy's boys. Essentially it becomes an organisation still playing the kindergarten-level game that little children play of trying to argue "my Dad's bigger 'n your Dad and he'll come and rip ya bloody arms off". (To mix metaphors with Aunty Jack.)

Brian Coyne
[Editor & Publisher]