As the USA continues to legally and culturally recognise lifestyle choices that conflict with the teachings of the world’s major religions, religious institutions have had to think seriously about their mission and employment policies.

Is firing a teacher who enters into a same-sex marriage pastorally insensitive, or a matter of moral consistency? What about teachers in Catholic institutions who divorce and remarry without an annulment, or who indulge in more private sins like fornication or using artificial contraception? In order to deal with this divisive matter with more nuance, it might help to consider the shifts in what philosopher Charles Taylor would call our ‘social imaginaries’ in the West.

In his 700-page tome A Secular Age, Taylor defines social imaginaries as ‘the ways people “imagine” their social existence’ and ‘the deeper normative notions and images that underlie’ their social interactions. In contrast to purely sociological or philosophical theories, social imaginaries focus on ‘the way ordinary people “imagine” their social surroundings’ which ‘is often not expressed in theoretical terms, but is carried in images, stories, and legends’.

Needless to say, the social imaginaries surrounding matters of faith and morals have shifted dramatically since the Middle Ages. It used to be common for someone to assent to the doctrines of a religion while personally not following them in his or her private life. Being a ‘bad Catholic’ was more of a norm than a shocking scandal. ‘Bad Catholics,’ according to theologian Aaron Taylor, ‘knew the moral rules taught by the Church, and they broke – even flouted – them, particularly when it came to sex.’

In this regard, things may not have been so different from how they are today. They did not, however, ‘argue that the rules should be changed to confer moral approval on their behaviour. Despite their moral failings, bad Catholics also tended to maintain a high regard for the Church’s sacramental and spiritual rules and practices. They attended Mass, were devoted to the Virgin Mary, and expressed love for the Blessed Sacrament precisely by not receiving it in Communion when in an unworthy state to do so’.

And thus, someone could believe that sexuality is ordered toward unity and procreation, that fornicating, using artificial contraception, and engaging in sodomy is not what God wills for them, and still do it anyway… and then confess, make ‘a half-hearted attempt to mend their ways’, and slip back into their old sins ‘like a comfortable pair of slippers,’ and repeat, all the while ‘never [being] excluded from the Church’.

Things changed when what Charles Taylor calls the ‘spirit of reform’ emerged around the 14th century. Religions used to have a ‘two-tiered system’ in which the spiritual ‘elites’ (priests, monks, and nuns) would adhere strictly to their beliefs and attend to more ‘spiritual matters’, while the lay people would adhere less strictly and attend to more worldly matters (thus the acceptability of being a bad Catholic).

As religious orders became more involved in ‘the world’, there was a new push to encourage lay people to strive toward greater sanctity. This spirit inspired the Protestant Reformation and (much later) the Second Vatican Council’s ‘universal call to holiness’.

Aaron Taylor recognises that while the universal call to holiness may ‘in itself’ be ‘sound teaching,… poor catechesis’ has led people to believe that ‘the Church on earth is a club for holy people’. As a result, he continues, ‘Catholic morality is either softened and bowdlerised to reassure people that they are already saints, or it is put forward with such intolerant rigidity that sinners are driven out of the Church, made to feel that their mere presence in the congregation is a source of “scandal”.’

The new social imaginary that has emerged allows for fewer grey areas: you are either a good, ‘orthodox Catholic’ who assents to everything the Church teaches and attempts wholeheartedly to adhere to all of it, or you become a ‘cafeteria Catholic’ who follows the teachings that make the most sense to you (or that are easiest to follow) and expect the Church to conform its doctrines to your tastes… or you can just become an ‘ex-Catholic’ and leave the Church altogether.

The rise of relativism and expressive individualism changed things even more. Our inclinations don’t have to be ordered toward a specific telos or end goal. And happiness is envisioned not as living in accord with God’s design, but as expressing oneself and being true to one’s identity – without harming others, of course.

That’s why the claim that marriage is an exclusive, lifelong commitment between a man and a woman who are open to procreation no longer holds ground for most people today. Fornication – as long as it is consensual – is a way of expressing one’s feelings for another. Gay people (a category that Foucault reminds us didn’t come into existence until the late 19th century) are not choosing to transgress against the laws of Nature when they engage in sodomy… they are just expressing their true selves.

We can’t ignore the reality that ‘there will always be some group of people’, argues Aaron Taylor, who will struggle to ‘conform their lives to Christ’s demanding teachings despite repeated effort’. Thus, the Church, he insists, needs to relearn how to embrace their struggle – without ousting them for their moral incoherence or trivialising their sins.

I wonder how firing someone who gets married to another woman – believing that she is being ‘true to herself’ – is going to help her (or others involved at an institution) to think more deeply about what constitutes the truth of her identity and inclinations. Before deliberating on whether or not to fire an employee for acting against the moral teachings of the religion with which the institution is affiliated, administrators ought to first consider the discrepancy between social imaginaries.

Perhaps by shifting from a defensive, ‘political’ stance to a pastoral and educative one, matters might unfold more fruitfully. Were clergy and administrators to ‘walk with’ their employees toward developing a deeper understanding of their personal callings within the institution, it would help those who ‘publicly defy’ certain moral precepts, and ideally everyone else, to see how the religious beliefs of their employer can deepen their sense of purpose in their daily work and personal lives.