Revenge of Conscience

    “Things are getting worse very quickly now,” J. Budziszewski begins his essay entitled, “The Revenge of Conscience,” (fully available on First Things web site at the link, http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9806/articles/budziszewski.html). This statement of the obvious struck home to me when I returned to the USA after years in a Third World country. I went back to the university to continue some study and found myself in an ethics class full of college students some ten years or so younger than I and was surprised by the fact that moral relativism had become such a cherished dogma among the young.
    Now, as one contemplating becoming a Catholic, I was getting used to the idea that a dogma must be based upon some genuinely credible authority, whether of a venerable institution (as I was beginning to view the Church) or of reason itself, with the understanding that the former would never contradict the prudent and accurate conclusions of the latter. But with these younger students, I was amazed to find what the Church has always condemned as “fideism,” a kind of forced faith, faith in faith, rather than belief in something acknowledged as true and able to be cogently argued as such.
    Yes, fideism. For their relativism is a dogma – and a “holy” one at that – based on nothing more than a kind of agreement on the “rules of the game”… and on a contradiction. Like all dogmas, relativism has its formulation in a proposition (especially in the area of ethics): “There are no absolutes”… absolutely not, a proposition that simultaneously proclaims a “truth” while denying the possibility of such claims. Nevertheless, it is the rule of the game of lifestyles, essential to the “pursuit of happiness” as Jefferson’s words in the Declaration of Independence have come to be interpreted. And to question it is to elicit all kinds of “intellectual” gymnastics and a fanatical rage at the audacity of a Christian to question the modern foundation of the edifice of Self.
    Here is where the fun in that ethics class began. Besides pointing out the contradictory nature of relativism – something most of the students seemed to have a difficult time grasping, they were so immersed in their presumption of their dogmatic view – all one had else to do was to get the defenders of this basic doctrine of modernity to admit that something was in-and-of itself wrong, morally unacceptable and never defensible. This was for me, as it turned out, hard going. I sat patiently, listening to tenuous and nervous defenses of Nazism (the Jewish girl in the class remained strangely silent at that point in the conversation), child rape, suicide, slavery, abortion, etc. I made some headway with racism in America and with the Muslim treatment of women, but then students would take refuge in cultural relativism: you know, “Who are we of Western culture to condemn other cultures….?”
    They espied the trap: admit one thing, one single action that is reprehensible, and the whole house of cards comes tumbling to the ground; because if one thing, one behavior is condemnable, then others too could be. And before long, one’s own cherished vice would be under threat and one’s own refusal to submit to the conscience speaking of an unchangeable truth in the heart would be under the scrutiny of indictment, judgment and condemnation.
    I have to admit, these students fought bravely to defend their cherished dogma, but in the process they lost nearly all integrity. They lied, cheated, defended the indefensible; they threw reason to the winds; they behaved as terrorists in the realm of morality – all for the sake of a “sacred belief,” which they used as their Star Wars-esque force field-shield against Truth tugging at their hearts and minds. They could offer no real defense of their position, but it was their story, and they were sticking to it.
    I am reminded of Ouiser Boudreaux (played by the inimitable Shirley MacLaine in Steel Magnolias), when she brings her homegrown tomatoes to the beauty salon to share with her friends; and when the truth comes out that she doesn’t even like this fruit, she defends her gardening with words to the effect, “I don’t make the rules, I just go by them.” Well, dogmatic relativism is the rule of the game, of the contest of the modern lifestyle: “you don’t condemn my vices, and I’ll not judge yours”; “Who am I to judge?”; “There are no moral absolutes”; etc., ad nauseam. The most important truths about human life – answers to the deepest questions about meaningfulness, purpose, good and evil, the existence of God (who just might judge us according to our deeds, as He has promised to do), all that Socrates held dear and Christ Himself revealed in His life – the most important truths about human life must go unanswered, as modern man pursues, not his end, but the millions of distractions that cloud and obliterate from his mind his true end and his very nature which is fulfilled in that end. The rule, the dogma of relativism, must be obeyed, unthinkingly adhered to, or you’ll spoil the show, cause angst in the big playpen of life, and be the skunk at the garden party. The game must go on. And it does; that’s why “things are getting worse very quickly now.” Hardly anyone will make the simple observation that the emperor is stark naked… and it’s getting intolerably embarrassing, stupefying, and, yes, deadly. Yet, people equivocate; they refuse to open their eyes. They are starving to death in the trenches of relativism and still “think” they’re comfortable. What is one to do?
    I let Budziszewski have the last word.

Unfortunately, the condition of human beings since before recorded history is that we don’t want to learn hard lessons. We would rather remain in denial. What power can break through such a barrier? The only Power that ever has. Thomas Aquinas writes that when a nation suffers tyranny, those who enthroned the tyrant may first try to remove him, then call upon the emperor for help. When these human means fail, they should consider their sins and pray. We are now so thoroughly under the tyranny of our vices that it would be difficult for us to recognize an external tyrant at all. By our own hands we enthroned them: our strength no longer suffices for their removal: they have suspended the senate of right reason and the assembly of the virtues: the emperor, our will, is held hostage: and it is time to pray. Nothing new can be written on the heart, but nothing needs to be; all we need is the grace of God to see what is already there. We don’t want to read the letters, because they burn; but they do burn, so at last we must read them. This is why the nation can repent. This is why the plague can be arrested. This is why the culture of death can be redeemed. "For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before thee . . . a broken and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise."