The Dogma Delusion?
  by Phil Stahl

The problem confronting all doctrinal absolutists is that their reach exceeds their grasp and they become hoist on their own petards.

Such is the case with the Bishop Michael Sheridan and his recent efforts to “clarify Church teachings and doctrine” to one and all, and to make Catholics accountable if they happen to cast votes for politicians or policies that go against selfsame Church dogmas.

First, a plausible question to ask is: How perfect are the dictates put forward? And to what extent are they products of a perfect brain?

Secondly, we may certainly argue that if the brain or brains aren’t absolutely 100% perfect (including the assumption that every last neuron is used!), then they cannot formulate perfect doctrines. If they can’t formulate perfect doctrines, then it stands to reason that the doctrines they do formulate can be laced with error. If any doctrines are laced with error,
no one is under any obligation to adhere to them.

Now, with regard to the first question, we know that NO human brain is perfect, and even the most efficient barely makes use of 15% of its thinking power. I am referring here to the functioning of the neo-cortex, or the seat of reasoning – the area of the brain that is used to create ideas such as doctrines.

With inherent limits such as these, no human brain can arrive at a perfect doctrine or statement concerning moral reality. The very most the limited human brain can aspire to is make a negative declaration of what brains in general cannot do – as I’ve done here. But under no circumstances can any perfect positive declarative statement be made.

Nor is it any use at all to assert the doctrine “comes from God” – since the comprehension of an infinite God would require an infinite brain with an inexhaustible supply of neurons. No human, not even the esteemed Sheridan, has this.

This Social Darwinism remains embedded in the current incarnation of rabid individualism disseminated by ideologues, who salivate non-stop at the prospect of using it to dismember social safety nets, offering pitiful "faith-based" services in return.

Catholic Theologian Hans Kung observes the following: “..no one, neither Vatican I, nor Vatican II, nor the textbook theologians, has shown that the Church - its leadership or its theology - is able to put forward propositions which inherently cannot be erroneous” (from his book, “Infallible?” page 143).
Kung’s statement reinforces what I said regarding the inability of any single or collective of brains to affirm positive statements of doctrine that are without error. Indeed, this means that Sheridan is out on a long ecclesiastical limb and holds a position that is not supported by his Church’s own “infallibility” doctrine (since no guarantees exist that infallibility doctrine itself can’t be erroneous).

Kung goes on to cite one such error, the prohibition of artificial contraception in the encyclical Humanae Vitae. The late Carl Sagan and Anne Druyan showed another error, in terms of a change in the Church’s abortion position (Parade magazine, April 22, 1990):

“The Catholic Church’s first and long standing collection of Canon Law (according to the leading Church historian John Connery, S.J.) held that abortion was homicide only after the fetus was already formed – roughly the end of the first trimester. It was not until 1869 that abortion at any time for any reason became law.”

Clearly, the fact that the Church already changed doctrine on abortion shows it can do so again. And hence, none of its statements is absolute! Caught in its own trap!
 

Send us an Email

Or write to us at:
Freethinkers of Colorado Springs
P.O. Box 62946
Colorado Springs, CO 80962-2946
Phone: 719-594-4506