The Observer, March 21, 2008
Volume XL, Issue 21
Roman Catholic Church should follow own advice before damning others
Many people criticize religion for its outdated and often arbitrary codes for life. Yes, we get the occasional nutty literalist who insists that every word in the (insert ancient religious text of your choice here) really does apply to the year 2008 – which is why we have Hindu extremists protesting the "promiscuity" of Valentine's Day, for instance – but those of us with an iota of reason understand that at least some parts of religious doctrine hardly reflect the cumulative social experience of humanity.
For many religions, this scriptural doctrine is unchanging and constant. Not so with Catholicism, though – this past week the Roman Catholic Church added seven new "social" sins to the original deadly sins set forth by Pope Gregory I in the sixth century. In addition to the good old lust, greed, and envy, it's now a sin to abuse drugs, violate bioethics (i.e. promote birth control), do genetic manipulation (i.e. stem cell research), have excessive wealth, create poverty, increase socioeconomic disparities, and even pollute the environment.
"Forgive me, Father, for I have sinned: I mixed the paper with plastics." Does anyone else see something wrong with this picture? I guess I must congratulate the church for at least recognizing that humanity is ravaging the Earth, but the idea of magicking sins into existence just seems downright comical and perhaps a tiny bit frightening. Let's assume that the idea of "sin" somehow carries any semblance of rationality in the first place. We're living in 2008 and an organization of mortals – no better equipped to answer metaphysical questions than you or I – really, truly believes that they can really just make up rules as they go along or actually arbitrarily decide what the Big Guy in the Sky really wants. Moreover, the organization that creates these rules actually expects one billion Catholics in the world to just bow and accept that condoms and SUVs are the handiwork of the Devil?
The hypocrisy that the Roman Catholic Church has some sort of credibility in the field of social justice is pathetically laughable. To be sure, the church does contribute positively to the world in the way of charities and clinics, for instance. But the idea that they feel they have authority to criticize others for "excessive wealth" (as if that isn't vague enough) is a sad display of misaligned bravado at the very least. The church is easily one of the wealthiest organizations on the face of the earth with the billions in tax-free donations, real estate, and priceless art to prove it. The cash doesn't just sit there, though. It's been used to shell out millions upon millions in child molestation cases or to fund the enormously powerful lobby that exacerbates social and health tribulations in countries across the globe, from Argentina to Italy. Praise be to God!
The unsurprising failure of abstinence-only sex "education" is only one testament to the backward stance on birth control, as is the inane "AIDS is bad, but condoms are worse" mentality when it come to health policy in Africa, a continent quickly depopulating itself through disease. The hard-line stance against contraception has repressed generation upon generation of women, especially those too impoverished to access proper education or abortion, and it has done nothing but increase the divide between the rich and poor. Indeed, contraception and the spread of information have played a pivotal role in the liberation of women and the modern feminist movement. And I seem to remember something about a new sin for widening the socioeconomic gaps. Should we not hold the church to its own standards in perpetuating this form of social injustice?
Poorly disguised as progressivism, the Catholic Church has decided – seemingly on the basis of divine power invested in a Pope hat – that it needs to modernize itself by officially emphasizing the same absurd and hopeless positions it has vouched for in the past by making them "sins." While some may want to believe that awarding a three-day-old blastocyst more rights than a vulnerable girl in Africa would make the church relevant, perhaps the Catholic Church's goals would be better suited to taking its own advice first before damning others.
