It is no wonder, in the case of the cathedral, why the cosmopolitan, the modern man, is so adoring of a remnant of the old order. He has never expressed a distaste in the beautiful, and in fact would be seen as rather ridiculous for not recognizing the sheer greatness and profundity of these ancient relics of that old, vile, theocracy. However, what makes him peculiar is his way of life. Most modern men, from the rabid atheist, to the more considerate agnostic, and everyone in between, would refer to themselves as "secular humanists."
Secular humanists live by a notion of loving your fellow man for the sake of his being also a man. There is no moral order, other than caring for each other, and loving one another. No rigid rules apply here, as they did in the old world of the theist, rather, a loose series of understandings and personal beliefs hold the fabric of social reality together. Through this, reason, rationality, opinion, and freedom dominate the daily comings and goings of the modern man. But there is one thing that haunts this high-minded, rational, system of inter-subjective relations; the presence of moral absolutes. These moral absolutes range from the simple, don't kill people, that's not nice, to don't hate people, that's also not nice, and anyone who disagrees, isn't nice, and is therefore wrong and, in a certain sense, evil.
What's wrong with that though? You can have moral absolutes which have a firm, necessary, demand on man's actions and decisions without there being some cosmic giver of meaning and necessity, right?
Perhaps you can, but the question becomes, why do you? It could be that these moral absolutes exist because we don't want others to be mean, or harm us. They don't really have a meaning behind them, no necessity, but we keep them around to make sure that other people don't hurt us. They're a shield against a necessary consequence of meaninglessness. So, what's wrong with that?
This is upsetting to the Secular Humanist, who wants to retain this love between men, these great cathedrals, all without the need for a God to fill them. So, can't you have a system of moral absolutes without religion?
So, why do we have these absolutes? Why do we have Secular Humanism? Because cathedrals are beautiful. Despite how inconvenient the implications it has on sexual morality, and scientific "progress," the old order, the Christian order, is beautiful. And just as it would be ridiculous for modern man to think that the old cathedrals are ugly, so it would be ridiculous for him to not like the ideals of inter-subjective relation set down by Christianity. This being said, Secular Humanism becomes not a violent revolt against the Church, but rather a tourist wondering into St. Peter's to take pictures of the statuary during Mass. It becomes a parasite, a vulture living off the corpse of Christianity.