Without Roots

Without Roots: The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam
Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, and Marcello Perez
Forward by George Weigel


In 2004, Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) addressed the Italian Senate on the state of Europe. The day before, Senate President Dr. Marcello Pera gave a lecture at the Lateran Pontifical University on the same topic. As they later compared notes and exchanged correspondence, they saw that they had come to the same conclusions regarding the political, cultural and spiritual condition of Europe. Their addresses and correspondence were then put together and published.

“A foul wind is blowing through Europe,” writes Dr Pera: a wind that reminds him of a similar one that blew across Munich in 1938. “While this wind,” he goes on to write, "might sound like a sigh of relief, it is really shortness of breath. It could turn out to be the death rattle of a continent that no longer understands what principles to believe, and mixes everything together in a rhetorical hodgepodge. A continent whose population is decreasing; whose economy cannot compete; that does not invest in research; that thinks the protective social state is an institution free of charge; that is unwilling to shoulder the responsibilities attendant upon its history and its role; that seeks to be a counterweight without carrying its own weight; that, when called upon to fight, always replies that fighting is the extrema ratio, as if to say that war is a ratio that should never be used."

Both Ratzinger and Pera trace the cause of this “foul wind” back to the West’s (particularly Europe's) rejection of its Christian roots, and the adoption of a new dogma: relativism.

”The thinking that currently prevails in the West regarding the universal features of the West is that none of them has universal value. According to the proponents of these ideas, the universality of Western institutions is an illusion, because in reality they are only one particularity among many, with a dignity equal to that of others, and without any intrinsic value superior to that of others. Consequently to recommend these institutions as universal would be a gesture of intellectual arrogance or an attempt at cultural hegemony.”

According to relativism, we cannot compare communities and cultures because each has their own understanding of what is true, beautiful and good, and “is only so according to the criteria by which that community defines them.” Furthermore, “There are no meta-criteria that can establish intrinsic truth, absolute beauty, or universal good. All criteria, according to this line of reasoning, are contextual.”

However, as Pera goes on to note, if relativism is correct in its assertion that there are no basic truths, “then not even relativism can be the foundation of democracy.” After all, when relativism is the foundation our society is built upon, who is to say that Sharia is better or worse compared to the US Constitution?

What is of particular interest in both addresses is that this relativism is investigated within the context of our present battle with Islamic jihadists. If there are no absolutes, no universal goods, how do we compare and contrast, how do we say this is Good, and that is Evil? If there is no universal understanding of the dignity owed to each and every human being, how are we going to define fundamental human rights?

To adopt a dogma that asserts there can be no dogmas and to make this the foundation of international relations is like adopting into your family an assassin who has been hired to kill you. As we face an enemy who has sworn to annihilate the West, if relativism is our new dogma, then all we are left with is acquiescence and capitulation: the only “virtues” possible to those who profess a politically correct creed.

This book deserves a wide audience. Go buy one for yourself and another for a friend.


Copyright, Monte E Wilson, 2008