Is Moral Truth Immutable or Historically Conditioned?

What is truth? Is it objective and permanent or is it historical and mutable? And what are the criteria for discerning truth? These foundational questions have overshadowed Catholic theological discourse for the past several decades. Many progressive theologians in the postconciliar era have opted for some version of historicism. In their opinion, it is virtually axiomatic that Catholic dogmas and doctrines conceived under the guise of revelation are an historical reality, always evolving and subject to reinterpretation. This is, of course, a recipe for moral relativism, as novel moral “truths” are often conditioned by shifting social conventions.

Many members of the hierarchy are also convinced that moral precepts should change over time. It was recently reported that 90 percent of Germany’s bishops support modifications to the Church’s traditional teachings on sexual morality. Bishop Peter Kohlgraf of Mainz, for example, has indicated that scriptural statements about homosexuality should not be interpreted as “timeless truths,” based on the presumption that the moral norms in St. Paul’s epistles and the Gospels are historically and culturally conditioned. And Bishop Heinrich Timmerevers of Dresden-Meissen is seeking changes to Church teaching on gender identities and sexual orientations to keep pace with scientific and cultural developments.

These German bishops can find reinforcement for their heterodox views in Fr. Mark S. Massa’s controversial new book Catholic Fundamentalism in America, which revives the debate about the nature of truth. Fr. Massa’s principal task is to expose “Catholic fundamentalism” in the United States. He describes, sometimes with unabashed irreverence, what he considers the emblems of fundamentalism, such as the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN), Christendom College, and CrisisMagazine.com. His harsh polemic singles out EWTN for particular scorn for trying to construct an “alternative church by fashioning something like an alternative ‘authentic magisterium.’” According to his way of thinking, many other Catholic organizations could be added to this list due to the defective ways they witness to the Gospel.

The traits of fundamentalism, so the thinking goes, include a sectarian aversion to ecumenical dialogue, the frequent use of extreme political rhetoric to castigate opponents, and, in particular, an ahistorical and “primitivist” understanding of Catholic dogmas and doctrines. According to Fr. Massa, those doctrines are not preserved in amber, as many presume. Fundamentalist Catholics fail to apprehend that truth is not ahistorical; hence, they remain trapped in the old paradigm of orthodoxy. On the contrary, Catholic institutions must accept the new paradigm that began to take shape at the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965). And that paradigm insists on the historical character of dogma, which is not fixed and propositional but mutable and often ineffable.