(Christ the King (B): This homily
was given on November 25, 2012 at St. Pius X Church, Westerly, R.I., by Fr.
Raymond Suriani. Read John 18: 33-37.)
[For the audio version of this homily, click here: Christ the King 2012]
Imagine that Pontius Pilate had
been interviewed by a newspaper reporter on Good Friday—right after he
condemned Jesus to death (presuming, for a moment, that they had newspapers
back then—which of course, they didn’t—you have to use your imagination here).
If the reporter had asked him, “Why? Why did you do it, Pilate? Why did you condemn Jesus of Nazareth to
death, even though you knew that he was innocent of the charges they brought
against him?” how do you think Pilate would have responded?
I’ll tell you what I believe he
would have said. I think he would have
said something like this to that reporter: “Oh yes, I know that Jesus of
Nazareth was innocent. I have no doubt
about that. The chief priests and
religious leaders of the Jews came to me and accused Jesus of being a political
revolutionary and a threat to Caesar, but I could tell right away that this man
was no threat. He had no political
aspirations whatsoever! He was a little
delusional, yes: he spoke about having a kingdom in some other world. But there’s no crime in being delusional. Now in most cases like this, I would let the
accused go free immediately—but Jesus’ case was different. In this particular situation, given the
circumstances, I think it was right to do what I did. Sure, I killed an innocent man—I know that; but there are times when killing the
innocent can be the right course of action.
Think about it. The people
were ready to riot in the streets. If
that had happened, I would have ordered my soldiers to get the crowd under
control, and probably a number of people would have died in the process—or at
the very least many would have been injured.
So my act of condemning Jesus to death, as regrettable as it was,
probably saved many lives. And not only
that, because I gave the crowd what they wanted, they now have much more
respect for me, and for my office, and for my authority as procurator. Even though I’m a Roman—a foreigner, a
Gentile—the Jews will probably think of me in a much more positive way in the
future. These are all good things that have come about because of the death of one innocent man named Jesus. So it was well worth it.”
Pontius Pilate, my brothers and
sisters, was what we would call “a moral relativist.” A moral relativist is somebody who believes
that, as the old saying goes, “everything is relative.” In other words, there’s nothing that’s always
right; there’s nothing that’s always wrong; there’s no such thing as objective
moral truth.
That’s precisely the way Pilate
thought, which is why, when Jesus said to him, “Everyone who belongs to the
truth listens to my voice,” he responded by saying, “Truth? What is that?”
For the relativist, right and
wrong are determined by circumstances—or feelings—or personal preference—or
some other subjective criterion. For the relativist, what’s right for one
person might not be right for somebody else.
Pope Benedict XVI has been very
vocal in his condemnation of moral relativism during his pontificate—as was
Pope John Paul II before him. Even while
he was still a Cardinal, Benedict called relativism “the greatest problem of
our time.” And he was not
exaggerating! Then, in 2005, just after
he became pope, he said, “Relativism, which recognize[s] nothing as definitive,
leaves as the ultimate criterion only the self with its desires.”
And that, my brothers and
sisters, is a prescription for conflict and disaster—in families and everywhere
else in society—because it means that each person thinks that he or she should
be able to live by his or her own rules.
Can you imagine a family where
everyone lived by their own rules?
Can you imagine a country where
everyone lived by their own rules?
Well, you might not have to
imagine it in the near future, because that kind of country—that kind of
world—is fast becoming a reality.
And it will become a reality unless we do something to stop it.
I hope it’s not news to anyone
that our civil government is currently being run, to a great extent, by moral
relativists: moral relativists of both parties, and of no party affiliation
(the so-called “independents”). Some of
them will call themselves Catholic or Christian, but the policies and laws they
support indicate an inner allegiance to relativism, not to Jesus Christ. You know the people I’m talking about: the
ones who say, “Oh yes, I am personally opposed to that, but I can’t impose my
morality on anyone else”; or they say, “I am a Catholic, but . . . “
Believe me, Pontius Pilate would
be extremely proud of these politicians, because those are precisely the kinds
of things that he would say: “Yes, I am personally opposed to the death of
Jesus of Nazareth, but I can’t impose my belief on this angry crowd in front of
me”; “Yes, I am the Roman procurator who is supposed to make sure that justice
is done, but in this case I think it’s okay to dispense with justice.”
A relativistic world is a very
dangerous world—because, since there are no universal moral laws, evil people
will very often go unpunished (sometimes they will even be rewarded), and good
people will often be condemned.
Just like Jesus.
By the way, as far as I’m
concerned, moral relativism can very easily be refuted with one simple
question. If you ever encounter a
relativist who says to you, “There’s nothing that’s always right; there’s
nothing that’s always wrong; there’s no such thing as objective moral truth;
it’s all relative,” say to that person, “Okay, then answer me one simple
question: When would it be morally permissible to rape a child? You’ve just told me that there are no moral absolutes, and that everything
depends on circumstances. Well, alright,
under what circumstances would that behavior be morally acceptable?”
Unless you’re having a
conversation with a mentally deranged individual, this should help the other
person to see that there is at least one universal moral norm.
And, of course, if there’s one
universal moral norm, why can’t there be others?
Chris Stefanick, who speaks to
teenagers all over the country, wrote a great little booklet last year
entitled, “Absolute Relativism: The New Dictatorship and What to Do About
It.” In it he listed 8 bad effects of
relativistic thinking. I’ll conclude my
homily today by sharing these with you:
1.
Relativism robs
us of a sense of meaning. [That
should be obvious. If there’s no right
and wrong, then it doesn’t matter what we do here on earth. Thus there can be no ultimate consequences to
our good and evil behavior. So life is
essentially meaningless.]
2. Relativism leaves us with no criterion for
moral decision-making but personal taste.
3.
Relativism
deprives children of formation. [You
can’t teach your children right from wrong if there is nothing that’s
objectively right and nothing that’s objectively wrong. You can teach them your opinion, but that’s
about it.]
4.
Relativism
separates us from one another. [As I
said earlier, if we each do our own thing, we will be in constant conflict with
one another.]
5.
Relativism
undermines the right to life. [The
example of Pilate’s condemnation of Jesus shows us that. As a relativist, Pilate had no problem
robbing an innocent man of his right to life.
None whatsoever.]
6.
Relativism makes
it easy for those in authority to manipulate others. [Need an example of that? Just think of the HHS mandate and how that
will affect Catholics all over this country.
Manipulation—and coercion—at its worst!]
7.
Relativism puts the
freedom of speech under attack. [If
those in power decide that you should not be allowed to voice your opinion,
that will be the law and there will be no arguing against it.]
8.
And, finally, relativism
destroys faith. [That, also, should
be obvious. After all, if nothing about
God is objectively true, then the whole basis of our religious practice goes
right out the window!]
So my message to you today is
very simple: Learn to recognize relativism, and learn to resist it—to actively resist it!
And teach your children and
grandchildren and siblings and friends and co-workers to do the same thing, for
their own sakes, and also for the survival of our country.
