Watch this space! After all the abuse scandals of the past twenty years, is there about to be a subtle u-turn concerning the legitimacy of paedophilia?
We know that in the Sixties and Seventies various organisations in the West, including some here in Ireland were working towards the normalisation of paedophilia in society. The
American Man Boy Love Association was one of the most prominent of these organisations. To put it in official language, the aim of these associations was to reduce, or get rid of, the age of consent so as to enable inter-generational sexual contact. Such opinions were uttered as recently as last year here in Ireland. It was the abuse scandals in the Church which led to a stalling of these organisations lobbying: the public were rightly horrified, so the climate was not favourable to lobbyists. However, are they getting the campaign cranked up again?
Here is an article on CNN's website by James Cantor asking if paedophiles deserve sympathy? It is an article looking at the nature-nurture debate. Chelsea Schilling
offers a few reflections on the article here. The question one might ask: if they are saying someone is born that way, can we assume, then, that it is wrong? If people begin to answer that question in the affirmative, then interested parties may well be laying the foundation for the new "civil rights issue of this generation". Watch this space. We may soon find ourselves trying to argue against the tide of those who believe "minor-attracted" people should be allowed to live as they see fit.
In related news,
here's a good article by Michael Kelly on the abuse crisis in Ireland - how canon law was not the problem - it was not to blame for the Church in Ireland's pitiful response to child abuse, but rather its being ignored. It was the liberal attitude that rules and laws do not matter anymore that created a climate in which a false view of love and compassion neutralised the Church's strict laws and punishments due to offenders.
And here's another example of secularists's tolerance with regard to those who disagree with them. Jane Pitt, Brad Pitt's mother, is pro-life and pro-marriage, as are many millions of Americans. She expresses her opinion, as is her right in a democracy, but she is attacked, reviled and even threatened, and the media hang her out to dry and paint her as a bigot. Jane said that she will not be voting for Barack Obama because he is pro-gay marriage and pro-abortion (which he is) and she advised Christians not to dismiss Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon (which is correct and fair). Journalism worthy of
Pravda during the darkest days of Soviet oppression.
I was in a book store yesterday and I saw the pornographic novel
Fifty Shades of Grey was number one in the store's bestseller chart. I have heard a few debates about the novels and it seems some of our secular feminists have no problem with them - the books tell the story of what is, in all intents a purposes, an abusive relationship in which a man uses a woman for his own pleasure. Some would say it is not abusive since the woman consents: well, that's the subject of the debates. Pia de Solenni
has a few interesting points to make on this issue.
And
here is an interesting article on democracy, tyrants and the role of constitutions in keeping public order. In recent years we have come to see constitutions are pliable - they can be changed. Of course they can be amended; but as they are, we need to be careful and ask the simple question: in changing parts of a constitution are we undermining the whole? If, as Fr Schall in this article points out, a constitution is there to help keep public order, can we constantly subject it to human whims which may, in the end, create disorder and chaos? Have we not been a little flippant with the constitution in Ireland in recent years? The present government has initiated a constitutional reform process in which a number of amendments will be considered among them gay marriage and the abolition of the upper house of parliament (this, I think, is a bad idea too - reform the Senate, make it more democratic, but do not abolish it - we need an upper chamber to keep an eye on the lower).
Fr Schall also reminds us of what Plato and Aristotle teach us - something which is undeniably true today because we can see it happening before our eyes:
"[A] tyrant arises out of a democracy when the citizens have little or no inner principle of order other than what they will for themselves. The tyrant becomes the “leader of the people” and, finally, their master. He can impose on them his cure for their well-being. But he is seen as a savior because the people, no longer in contact with the rationale of their own tradition, have little else in their souls with which to judge him. Hence, the loyalty and enthusiasm [to] follow the “leader.”" The sidelining of religion to the private sphere coupled with the establishment of an secular "church" and a selfish concentration on individualism and personal desires is a perfect breeding ground for tyrants.
And today is the feast of St Benedict, patron of Europe. A man who helped preserve the Christian faith in Europe, and the best of European culture and civilisation with it, he is a worthy patron of these times. We pray that he will watch over all of us and help us in our needs; given the issues above, we certainly need his intercession. One thing the Holy Patriarch teaches us is that we must never lose hope. Looking at the attack on the Church, and indeed on what is best in humanity, I see the devil at work, and he seems to be desperate. He must know something great is coming, a great flowering of faith, and he is doing what he can to stop it. As followers of Christ we must always remember that the victory is already won. So we must not be afraid and we must have confidence.
Here's a video on Pope Benedict's visit to the tomb of St Benedict in 2009 - the Holy Father has some interesting things to say:
