The Catholic Church has often produced a very dangerous morality. The doctrines of St Alphonsus Liguouri were luridly evil though the Church of his day had no problem with him spreading it.
The Church agrees with Kant’s malevolent and pharisaic Categorical Imperative that you should not do anything that you would not will the whole world to do like lying for example but adds the reason the rule is valid is because to break it is a sin in the sight of God (page 116, Moral Philosophy).
The Church says that the end never justifies the means because the means are willed more strongly than the end because the means are closer to you than the end. They are more immediately willed than the end and so if you do evil that good may come your will is more strongly into the evil means than the good end. The Church pushes it as far as the idea that a lie is wrong no matter what good will result from it (page 32, Moral Philosophy). So if you lie to do some good you have to commit the lie first and therefore you are surer that the lie will happen than that the good will happen for you will commit the sin of lying and the lie is nearer to you in time. You are more sure of what is closer, you know better what will happen in ten seconds and less better what will happen in five.
If the Church is right then it follows that it is always wrong to care about consequences. The stress Jesus made on living for today and treating the world as something that might not be here tomorrow would support this attitude for why do harm even for a justified purpose when the purpose might never get the chance to be fulfilled? It would make the means evil.
Humanism believes that even if you have to hurt somebody to help them you will the end and not the means.
The Church teaches much hypocrisy. The Church says that anger is allowed concerning public outrages but must be avoided with private ones (page 64, Moral Philosophy). This makes no sense for the law is a mixture of private and public stuff and private evil affects the public. The Church could not possibly be moral for the pope acts like a spiritual king and claims to be the monarch of the Church (page 327, Moral Philosophy) which gives a divine sanction to the snobbery and injustice and arrogance of monarchy. Jesus too is guilty of this crime. The Church also says that a thief has no obligation to turn himself into the police for it is their business to prove he committed the crime. Would it not be hypocrisy to report somebody to the police for harming you when you have committed crime yourself? Why should other people pay and not you? What is so special about you? Is it upholding the law to hide your crimes? No for hidden crimes that are not redressed and dealt with by the law mock the law. The law is meant to protect by bringing pain on criminals and would it be upholding the law to advise most criminals to avoid detection? That is telling them the law cannot protect society from their crime. I can’t believe that a Church with doctrines like this can claim to be relevant today! The Church and Christianity in general believe that the virtuous or humble man despises an undeserved insult and still takes it as his due (page 101, Moral Philosophy). It has to teach all this silliness because insults would be right if they were deserved and it cannot allow the man to think he does not deserve it for all are sinners and are guilty of sin even if they are cleansed from it now. It should get rid of the problem by getting rid of free will. The doctrine of free will prevents Catholic believers from ever formulating a practical and safe code of right and wrong. The morality of the Church is incoherent delusion.

A religion with a nonsensical morality cannot unite people.  That Jesus commanded Christianity to be united is ironic for his own morality couldn't unite anybody either.


No Copyright