There is nothing more repugnant to me than - which I can say, based upon many years of quiet observation, must be to many the centre-point of their moral/religious experience - the feeling of satisfaction one derives from things considered moral, which cost one effectively nothing, and in fact, actually serve to bolster their socio-economic status. You see this with vegetarianism, ecumenism, being pro-homosexual (whatever that is!). But conservative Catholics are also guilty of this a million times over too (but at least they don't generally make these feelings their centre-point): they do it with regard to being pro-Latin mass, pro-Douay-Rheims, etc.
The major point of contrast between a conservative Christian doing this and someone else is that the former do not consider the feeling itself the point of religion. That is a secular idea, and a liberal Protestant idea (Schleiermachean) the feeling is the point. Yes, there are those who actually believe that. I have heard it expressed many times. How un-philosophical! It makes me worry about the fate of man, who could be content, not with truth, but with emotion. I thought that the use of reason was how we ascended from the animals...
So, our morality is to be judged by how we conform to the fine sentiments of others.
All this came about simply glancing at the title of an article referring to the World Council of Churches.