Translate

domingo, 10 de abril de 2016

L’ “Associazione Psichiatrica Mondiale” rinnega la scienza e si piega al “gender diktat” globale





Il settimanale “Panorama” e la “normalizzazione” della bisessualità


Il periodico settimanale “Panorama”, del 23 marzo 2016, dedica la copertina al mondo bisessuale italiano, rappresentata dal mero fenomeno di ambiguità sessuale del momento: si tratta dell’artista romeno George Popescu, anni 21, vero e proprio simbolo dell’ambivalenza sessuale. Il giovane truccatore ama rappresentare “generi” di trucco in grado di rispecchiare la fluidità sessuale e lo […]



Negli Stati Uniti vige oramai una vera e propria “dittatura del gender” che impedisce agli Stati di legiferare in difesa della famiglia naturale e contro le assurde disposizioni anti-discriminazione. Dopo lo Stato della Georgia, costretto a ritirare prontamente il suo “Free Exercise Protection Act” di fronte alle minacce dei big del cinema Disney e Marvel, tocca ora allo Stato del North […]



Non è giusto che gli studenti siano obbligati a partecipare ai corsi Arcigay e che i genitori si vedano respingere le loro richieste di esonero.


L’ “Associazione Psichiatrica Mondiale” rinnega la scienza e si piega al “gender diktat” globale


Nelle ultime settimane, i media di tutto il mondo hanno dato grande risalto alla notizia della forte presa di posizione a favore dell’omosessualità e della “fluidità sessuale” da parte dell’ “Associazione Mondiale degli Psichiatri” (WPA) attraverso la pubblicazione di un inequivocabile documento di azioni pratiche a sostegno delle persone omosessuali, lesbiche e transgender dal titolo […]


Il mese scorso il tribunale di Reggio-Emilia ha riconosciuto il risarcimento del danno parentale alla compagna della madre biologica di un ragazzo morto per incidente stradale, a soli 18anni.



Al liceo Petrarca di Trieste riunione sul progetto “A scuola per conoscerci” di Arcigay e Arcilesbica. Molti genitori non ci stanno. Lettera di uno di loro.


Continuano gli incontri e i dibattiti, scolastici ed extra-scolastici, volti a presentare e normalizzare la “teoria del gender” su tutto il territorio nazionale. Lo scorso venerdì 1° aprile è stata la volta di Trieste dove si è è tenuto, presso il Liceo classico “Francesco Petrarca”, un incontro di formazione, rivolto a docenti e genitori delle scuole coinvolte nel […]



Nella biblioteca di Fossano, in provincia di Cuneo sarà ospitata una mostra dal titolo ““, a cura della solita casa editrice “Lo stampatello”. Per chi non lo sapesse o non lo ricordasse facciamo un breve rammendo su questa casa editrice, già più volte al centro di numerose polemiche. In particolare a Venezia, dove il sindaco Luigi […]


VISITA IL NOSTRO SITO WEB: Osservatoriogender.it
SCRIVICI: info@famigliadomani.it

The nation’s largest annual demography conference, held in Washington, D.C., last week...


From multiracial children to gender identity, what some demographers are studying now


BY D’VERA COHN


The nation’s largest annual demography conference, held in Washington, D.C., last week, featured new research on topics including couples who live in separate homes, children of multiracial couples, transgender Americans, immigration law enforcement and how climate change affects migration. Here is a roundup of five of the many innovative posters and papers from the Population Association of America meeting, some based on preliminary work. They give insight into the questions on researchers’ minds. (To see the conference presentations by our own Pew Research Center experts, check out this page.)

Living Apart Together

As marriage declines in popularity and other kinds of relationships replace it, a category of couple known as Living Apart Together is the focus of new research in the U.S. These LAT couples, whether opposite-sex or same-sex, say they are in a long-term relationship but do not live together. They include older couples who each own homes as well as people who work in different cities. There’s been some research on these LAT couples in Europe, but until recently, less in the U.S.

................

Read more: www.pewresearch.org


lunes, 4 de abril de 2016

We need not ignore politics, but we must not seek our salvation there.


Asceticism: The Alternative to “Hope and Change”



It is in the practice of virtue, and especially in the desert spirituality of asceticism, that the narrow gate widens into the portal of heaven.

In the midst of Trumpmania and the swooning over Bernie Sanders’ Kentucky Fried Socialism, we see, if not blatant calls for political salvation, at least the expectation of it. This is nothing new nor is it peculiar to the United States. But the advanced case of Carteresque malaise from which the country now seems to be suffering is due, in part, to a failure of salvific expectations. The millions that gathered in Hyde Park following President Obama’s election in 2008 had as many reasons to celebrate. His election did not merely represent the triumph of a person, a party, or a political ideology. It represented the triumph of the personal expectations of the many who desperately desired hope and change, the recession of the waters, and the arrival of the one for whom we had been waiting. Many had projected their hopes and dreams for a different country and a different world onto the person of Barack Obama. And not just the masses either. We all recall the Nobel committee’s coronation of Obama as the postmodern prince of peace.

As far as I know, no one ever claimed Obama was the messiah. There were many though who acted as if he was. I remember being present in a courtroom shortly after Obama took office and a man appeared before a judge for an arraignment. Bond was set and the court asked the man if he would be able to post it. The man replied in all seriousness and sanity, “No, your Honor, but Obama will.” Unreasonable but not unreal. The feeling of anticipation for great things to come was palpable.

We find ourselves again seeking salvation in presidential politics. Not only is this misguided it will always, regardless of person or party, lead to disappointment at best and ruin at worst. Such is the corruption of our character, and the character of our corruption, that we do not seek to do the hard work of renewal. Instead, we look to the easy path of politics for someone to save us from ourselves. Our lack of collective will and individual fortitude echoes Livy’s oft quoted diagnosis of decline that “we cannot bear our diseases or their remedies.” But the real trouble these days is that we reject the remedy because we deny the disease. We are not a healthy lot.

What to do?

If we read Romano Guardini, the choice is clear. In The End of the Modern World, the Italian-German philosopher and theologian warns, “Contemporary man can bring himself to destruction of both the interior and exterior orders or he can fashion a new universal order, a space where he could fit himself and, conscious of human dignity, lay the roadway of the future.” Such an order, he says, would require support from a triumvirate of virtues grounded in the truth: earnestness, gravity, and asceticism.

Earnestness “must will to know what is really at stake; it must brush aside empty rhetoric extolling progress or the conquest of nature.” A person needn’t be very observant to notice that all the histrionic babble about progressive change and climate catastrophe somehow misses the mark as to what truly ails us. The virtue of gravity or courage, Guardini argues, “will be spiritual” and must be purer and stronger than the courage to confront bombs or biological warfare “because it must restrain the chaos rising out of the very works of man.” This virtue will be opposed “by an enemy … ranged against it in public organizations clotted with catchwords.” Those who defend the dignity of the unborn, or sacramental marriage, or the right of Catholic institutions to follow the mandate of heaven and not that of a government obsessed with the ubiquity of contraception, know well the range of organizational enemies arrayed against us. Denunciation replaces debate. And euphemistic catchwords like choice, reproductive rights, contraceptive access clot the lifeblood of a society that degrades and denies human dignity.

If earnestness and gravity are how we must carry ourselves into battle, then the virtue of asceticism describes the ground on which we fight. It is here that Guardini’s prescriptive prophecy reaches greatest import. “Man must learn again to become a true master by conquering and by humbling himself.” It seems to me that he clearly understood that we shall master ourselves or be mastered by the demonic force of power in a world that does not submit to the natural authority of God. The consequences are graver than any time in history because the crises we face have their root in a human heart that denies its Creator. Existential crises may be assessed generationally but Guardini rightly draws our attention to the underlying spiritual crisis for which existential assessments and political policies offer no real remedy.

We must find true freedom in ascetic self-mastery or we will be enslaved to the free exercise of our desires. Great effort is needed because the stakes are so high. All hangs in the balance for as he says, “Only the freedom won through self-mastery can address itself with earnestness and gravity to those decisions which will affect all reality.” But we know this. Or we should. Still listening to the sibilant suggestions of the Serpent, we are deaf to the roar of his power in our hearts and in our world. “Everywhere,” Guardini observes, “man is capitulating to the forces of barbarism. Asceticism is the refusal to capitulate, the determination to fight them, there at the key bastion—namely, in ourselves.” Evil must be resisted, Guardini reminds us, “and this resistance is asceticism.”

......................


Mercy featured prominently in the polemics surrounding the recently concluded Synod on the Family.


St. John Paul II: No Mercy Without Truth

By John M. Grondelski
“Where [mercy] enters in, evil effectively gives way. Where evil does not give way, mercy is not there—but we also add, where there is no mercy, evil does not yield. Mercy does not accept sin nor looks upon it as if peeking between one’s fingers, but only and exclusively helps in conversion from sin…. Divine mercy goes strictly in tandem with justice”

Mercy featured prominently in the polemics surrounding the recently concluded Synod on the Family. Mercy was frequently counterpoised to dogma as an appeal to dilute ecclesiastical practice, and admit to Holy Communion those who are now “remarried.” Cardinal Kasper went so far as to publish a book between the 2014 and 2015 Synod sessions: Mercy: The Essence of the Gospel and the Key to Christian Life (New York: Paulist, 2014).

One might walk away from these events with the impression that, suddenly, the Church had discovered its vocation to mercy and was now busy making up for lost time when it was, presumably, unmerciful. Yet one should remember that St. John Paul II was the Pope who laid enormous stress upon Divine Mercy, emphasizing it as God’s premier attribute particularly relevant for contemporary man, and underscoring that focus by making the canonization of the “secretary of mercy,” Sr. Faustyna Kowalska, the first of the new millennium. If St. John Paul II’s first encyclical, Redemptor hominis, laid out the programmatic focus of his pontificate as one of Christian humanism, so we should not forget that his second encyclical, Dives in misericordia—issued 35 years ago this November 30—focused on the God who is “rich in mercy.” So much for the myth of the Church just awakening to her mission of mercy.

In the course of remembrance, however, we should go back even further, to a probably largely forgotten text from St. John Paul II’s prepapal writings, “Problem prawdy i miłosierdzia” (The Problem of Truth and Mercy). That short text dates from 1957, and was one of twenty brief articles printed under the title “Elementarz etyczny” [The Ethics Primer] in Tygodnik Powszechny, the independent Catholic weekly then-published in Kraków. The articles in that series largely grapple with issues in modern philosophy having implications for faith and are distinguished by their succinct presentation of those questions in the light of faith.

“The Problem of Truth and Mercy” addresses a number of issues relevant to the current debate with regard to sacraments and the divorced in subsequent “unions”: mercy, conscience, and truth. Wojtyła notes that “religious ethics” is often the target of critics (one thinks particularly here of Kant) who see it as setting up a Divine Judge who does not really take good and evil seriously, since he can always cancel out evil using the trump card of “mercy.” In such a morality, man is the plaything of “‘supernatural’ powers” that decide his fate arbitrarily.

Wojtyła protests such a caricature, insisting that “God knows [man] fundamentally and probes him more deeply than he knows or probes himself.” As a morally self-determinative creature, man should rely on his concrete judgment of conscience, which God accepts, even if that conscience is invincibly erroneous. But because God probes a man more deeply than he does himself, and is aware of the baggage that man carries (even if man himself is not aware of it), the human is challenged to an ever deeper penetration of himself.

Mercy, likewise, is not moral peek-a-boo. Mercy requires moving away from evil: “Where [mercy] enters in, evil effectively gives way. Where evil does not give way, mercy is not there—but we also add, where there is no mercy, evil does not yield. Mercy does not accept sin nor looks upon it as if peeking between one’s fingers, but only and exclusively helps in conversion from sin…. Divine mercy goes strictly in tandem with justice” (all translations mine).

Listening to this year’s discussion over the question of admitting “remarrieds” to the Eucharist, one senses a very different notion of “mercy” at play. In that discussion, one gets the impression that mercy does exactly what Wojtyła insists it cannot—pretend that God’s Justice and Mercy are at loggerheads, the latter prevailing.

One also has the impression that the baneful effects of nominalism still contaminate thought and theology. To recap: William of Ockham’s exaggerated focus on one Divine attribute—omnipotence—led to an ethic grounding right and wrong in God’s Will. “X is wrong because God prohibits it,” runs a nominalist ethic, not “God prohibits X because it is wrong.” The metaphysics underlying this thinking deny, in effect, objective reality: things are the results of the labels God attaches to them, not intrinsically so.

The scrupulous nominalist Martin Luther imported this voluntarism into Protestant theology through his doctrine of forensic justification: man is always sinful and never righteous, he is merely declared righteous by God, grace changing nothing. Man is moral dung. Grace is snow. The snow covers the dung, but does not change it: don’t go tip-toeing through the snowdrops barefoot…

Nominalism’s impact has continued on Western thought, even as the latter has secularized. Instead of an omnipotent God whose Will determines reality, we now have “omnipotent” (albeit, unfortunately, not omniscient) man who affixes the labels, so that, yesterday, marriage presupposed sexual differentiation but today it cannot; yesterday, abortion was homicide and today a “choice,” etc.

Now, it seems that some of the Synod Fathers may be serving us up nominalism in Catholic theology in two ways. First, they would give us a “mercy” that ignores Divine Justice, that cancels out the “go and sin no more” addressed to the adulteress by “reckon with the possibilities of your Lebenswirklichkeiten [possibilities in life].” God’s attributes cannot be in contradiction, and “mercy” cannot pretend that living as husband and wife in conjugal relationship in an invalid union is not wrong. Second, they would give us a nominalism that divorces theological principle from pastoral praxis, ostensibly in the name of “mercy.” In theory, they would maintain the principle of marital indissolubility, just simply treat it as not binding in practical instantiations. Indissolubility might be an “aspirational norm,” an ideal to be reached for, but not a binding norm, a moral clam demanding observance.

Pace these voices, the Church has not been AWOL in its mission of mercy. The Church is, in fact, faithful to that mission when it mercifully calls those who freely committed themselves in marriage to stop acting as if they are married to those to whom they are not. It is not “mercy” to rationalize a pastoral practice that makes peace with the modern cultural collapse of marital indissolubility. Christ would not have been “merciful” by picking sides between the strict Shammai and the lenient Hillel in the debate over Old Testament grounds for divorce, much less by coming down on Hillel’s side of broad concessions to the Lebenswirklichkeiten of his world. He was merciful by calling man to what God intended for him “in the beginning” and enables him to achieve by grace. The Church must do likewise, in both its external and internal fora.

The process by which Christians of Justin’s day were incorporated into the Church


What Justin Martyr Said About Confirmation in the 2nd Century Will Blow You Away

by Matt Vander Vennet


Justin Martyr lived in the 2nd century, and was the first Christian dedicated to apologetics. There’s a reason that he has the surname “Martyr” — he believed so much in what he was defending that he eventually was killed for being a Christian. With so many people entering the Church over Holy Saturday at the Easter Vigil, I wanted to see how the early church welcomed in their new members as well. Justin tells us exactly what happens when one wants to be a part of Christ’s Church.

On catechesis prior to confirmation:
“As many as are persuaded and believe that the things we say are true, and undertake to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and ask God with fasting for the remission of their past sins, while we pray and fast with them.” – Justin, Apology 1, 61.2

“And we think it for the good of all people that they are not prevented from learning these things, but are even urged to consider them.” – Justin, Apology 1, 10.5

“Those who likewise choose what is pleasing to Him are, on account of their choice, counted worthy of incorruption and of fellowship with Him.” God further ordains that man may “follow those things that please Him, choosing them by means of the rational powers He has given us, He both persuades us and leads us to faith.” – Justin, Apology I, 10.3-4
On Baptism:
“They are led by us to where there is water and they are reborn in the kind of rebirth in which we ourselves were also reborn. For at the name of the Father of all and Lord God and of our savior Jesus Christ and of the holy Spirit they then wash in water.” – Justin, Apology I, 61.3

“Since at our first birth we were born of necessity without our knowledge, from moist seed by the intercourse of our parents with each other, and were brought up in bad habits and wicked behavior; in order that we should not remain children of necessity and ignorance, but of free choice and knowledge, and obtain remission of the sins formerly committed, there is named at the water over him who has chosen to be born again, and has repented of his sinful acts, the name of God the Father and Master of all; they who lead to the washing the one who is to be washed call on this [name] alone.” – Justin, Apology 1, 61.10

“And this washing is called illumination, as those who learn these things are illuminated in the mind. And he who is illuminated is washed in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and in the name of the Holy Spirit, who through the prophets foretold all the things about Jesus.” – Justin, Apology 1, 61.12-13

“But we, after thus washing the one who has been convinced and has assented [to our instruction], lead him to those who are called brethren, where they are assembled; and we offer prayers in common for ourselves and for the one who has been illuminated and for all others everywhere, that we may be accounted worthy, having learned the truth, by our deeds also to be found good citizens and guardians of what is commanded, so that we may be saved with eternal salvation.” – Justin, Apology 1, 65.1
On the Eucharist:
“There is brought to the Ruler of the Brethren bread and a cup of water and [a cup] of wine mixed with water, and he taking them sends up praise and glory to the Father of the Universe through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and offers thanksgiving at some length for our being accounted worthy to receive these things from Him.” – Justin, Apology 1, 65.3

“And this food is called among us eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things which we teach are true, and has received the washing that is for the remission of sins and for rebirth, and who so lives as Christ handed down. For we do not receive these things as common bread nor common drink; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior having been incarnate by God’s logos took both flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food eucharistized through the word of prayer that is from Him, from which our blood and flesh are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who became incarnate.” – Justin, Apology 1, 66.1-2

It’s fascinating that the process by which Christians of Justin’s day were incorporated into the Church and to see what they actually had to believe in order to become a part of the Church. 

For more information on Justin, check out his First and Second Apologies and his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew.


En 1980, les citoyens de Géorgie étaient musulmans. Aujourd’hui, 75% des 400 000 musulmans se sont convertis. Ils sont devenus chrétiens.


A Pâques, des musulmans se convertissent en masse au christianisme



L’exemple de la Géorgie illustre ce qui pourrait se passer en Europe avec les « réfugiés »

La Georgie fut l’un des premiers pays à adopter le christianisme en tant que religion officielle, en 301, quelques décennies après l’Arménie.

Après quelques attentats et conversions forcées à coup de décapitation – déjà – l’Adjarie devint très majoritairement musulmane. En 1991, la chute du communisme permit à la Géorgie de retrouver son indépendance, et à l’Adjarie de faire sécession.

En 1982, des milliers d’habitants de la région, jusque là musulmans, furent baptisés. Le jour de Pâques, des centaines de conversions étaient célébrées.

Le 13 mai 1991, 5000 musulmans et athées devinrent orthodoxes – en une seule journée.

Selon le métropolite Dimitri « cette métamorphose de toute une région, cette conversion de l’islam à l’orthodoxie » est due à « un retour aux sources, à la foi des ancêtres », car les Adjariens, convertis de force à l’islam par les Ottomans, étaient, en fait, restés chrétiens de coeur.

« Ils continuaient à porter secrètement une croix, ils peignaient des œufs de Pâques, ils conservaient des icônes dans leurs habitations. Lorsqu’ils faisaient cuire le mchadi (le pain traditionnel géorgien), ils traçaient dessus une croix. De même, lorsqu’ils préparaient leur beurre. »

« Il faut comprendre que l’Eglise orthodoxe est un pilier fondamental de notre identité nationale. Dans le passé, nous avons été envahis par tous nos grands voisins, les Perses, les Ottomans, les Russes. S’il n’y avait pas eu le ciment de la religion, il n’y aurait même plus de peuple géorgien », explique une ancienne journaliste, Alina Okkropiridze.

Un témoin, cité par Orthodoxie.com, précise :

« Quand l’Union Soviétique s’est effondrée, de forts courants patriotiques traversèrent toute la Géorgie. Les Adjars ont alors compris qu’on les avait obligés à se convertir à l’islam par la force ».

« Notre objectif principal était de convertir l’intelligentsia. Ici comme ailleurs, elle est l’exemple pour les autres couches de la population. Lorsque nous l’avons convertie, elle nous a aidés dans la prédication. Voyant que l’élite culturelle et scientifique était passée du côté du christianisme, les gens sont devenus orthodoxes. Gloire à Dieu ! »

Allemagne : des conversions par centaines

A Berlin, des centaines de réfugiés iraniens et afghans ont changé de foi religieuse à l’église évangélique de la Trinité. Beaucoup affirment que cela représente leur vœu impossible à réaliser dans leurs pays d’origine.

Silas, un jeune iranien de 25 ans, récemment converti et vivant à Berlin, explique à Charisma News pourquoi il a changé de religion :

“Quand j’ai commencé à lire la bible, ça m’a transformé. … Au début, je ne voulais pas être chrétien, je voulais juste comprendre. Mais plus je trouvais de réponses, plus je réalisais que je trouvais Dieu. C’est là que j’ai compris que l’Islam est un énorme mensonge.”

Les Pasteurs allemand font remarquer que les convertis chrétiens ont certes plus de chances d’obtenir le droit de rester en Allemagne, du fait qu’ils peuvent maintenant affirmer que si on les renvoie, ils seront persécutés, ce n’est pas la vraie raison pour laquelle ils embrassent le Christ.

Seulement 10% des convertis ne reviennent pas à l’église, explique le pasteur Gottfried Martens

Célébrant le baptême d’un converti de l’islam, le pasteur Gottfried Martens demande à un réfugié iranien qui s’appelle encore Mohammed Ali Zonoobi :

« Acceptes-tu de rompre avec Satan et ses mauvaises actions ? Acceptes-tu de rompre avec l’Islam ? »

Et Mohammed lui répond avec ferveur : « Oui ! »

Puis Martens le baptise « au nom du Père, du Fils et du Saint Esprit ».

Selon Gottfried Martens, de nombreux réfugiés sont pris par le message chrétien qui change leur vie.

« Je sais qu’il y a – constamment – des gens qui viennent ici car ils ont l’espoir que cela facilitera leurs démarches d’asile permanent, mais seulement 10% des convertis ne reviennent pas à l’église après être devenus chrétiens ».

D’autres communautés chrétiennes partout en Allemagne rapportent des faits semblables. L’église Luthérienne de Hanovre a également indiqué qu’un nombre important d’iraniens se convertissent au christianisme, indiquait une dépêche d’Associated Press en novembre 2015.

Et il se pourrait bien que comme en Géorgie, des iraniens, des irakiens, des afghans, convertis de force à l’islam depuis plusieurs générations, aient gardé dans le secret de leur tradition, des restes du christianisme, et qu’à la première occasion – en arrivant sur le sol européen – ils se convertissent.

Et en France ?

4% des 4 000 baptisés chaque année viennent de l’islam. Compte tenu des pressions sociales exercées contre les apostats de l’islam, voire des menaces physiques de leurs proches, ce chiffre est en fait très significatif.

C’est à la fois peu, mais beaucoup si l’on considère que la France est devenue la terre des sans religion. Beaucoup si l’on songe que la religion chrétienne est l’objet d’attaques continuelles par les médias, que le président de la république ne souhaite plus Pâques aux chrétiens, mais qu’il n’oublie pas l’Aïd des musulmans. Beaucoup enfin parce que l’islam est cajolé par les élites, les politiques, et les journalistes.

A peu près 4 000 Français, essentiellement des athées, se convertissent à l’islam selon les estimations de Dalil Boubakeur, ex président du Conseil français du culte musulman (CFCM) et recteur de la Grande Mosquée de Paris. Paradoxalement, le chiffre est faible, si l’on considère que les musulmans se livrent à un prosélytisme actif, par un mélange d’attentats terroristes historiquement toujours suivis de vagues de conversions, et de démarchages vigoureux sur les marchés et dans les rues populaires. De plus, aucune pression, aucune menace, ne pèsent sur les convertis à l’islam, mais l’inverse n’est pas vrai.

Ainsi Ali, devenu Jean-Marc le soir de la veillée pascale, le 4 avril 2015. Il s’est fait baptiser à l’église de sa paroisse, en banlieue parisienne. Responsable dans la sécurité à la Défense, il sait que ses collègues musulmans « parlent » dans son dos. Son petit frère le traite de « menteur », mais il est heureux : « Par le baptême, je suis sauvé, lavé de mes péchés. Je peux rencontrer Dieu avec joie, mourir tranquille. C’est ma nouvelle vie. »

Reproduction autorisée avec la mention suivante : © Jean-Patrick Grumberg pourDreuz.info.


Read more: www.islam-et-verite.com

Moving forward : More and more people are opting out of civic engagement. It's a big mistake


Should you retreat from the public square?



For many people the state of America’s presidential campaign is an index of the corruption of our national culture. At the moment, though anything is possible given the fickleness of the electorate, the flawed personal lives and political views of the candidates, and a savage media, it seems that Donald Trump will face Hillary Clinton, though at this writing, this match-up is not certain.*

It’s damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t for voters, a choice between two evils. The choice is a symptom of a culture which has been corrupted over the past 50 years by the decay of the family, moral relativism, fading religious commitment and a forgetfulness of history. Many people are so disgusted that they are turning their backs on the political process and retreating from civic life altogether, though many others are becoming active because they see the consequences of their failure to vote before.

Throughout history there have been many responses to corrupt or dysfunctional public life. It is worthwhile to consider several of them.

The Epicurean Option

Epicurus, a philosopher of the late Classical Greek period, famously told us that pleasure is the highest principle of being. But he also warned us to be moderate and refined in our delights, for hedonism is a tricky thing. Too much pleasure usually backfires into sickness or it depresses us because it does not seem to be what satisfies us, once we have it.

Epicurus advocated a cautious, ne quid nimis, nothing in excess, moderate approach which was based on a calculated despair at ever finding a definite meaning in life. It was a sign of ignorance even to try; things happened by necessity; free will was an illusion. An insane fear of the gods plagued most people, gods which had been invented by clever politicians and poets to make rule easier by postulating mythical rewards and punishments.

The only thing that made sense to him was to shut off the din of praise and blame, the passions of public life and the idiotic blather of sophists. Have nothing to do with them, said Epicurus. Stop worrying about what goes on in the heavens, or in the world, or in the city.

“Withdraw from it all!” was the prudent way to deal with public affairs: get as far away as possible from the shrines, the town square, the theaters, and the academies. Find yourself a quiet garden. Water the flowers; feed the chickens. The only sane thing was to chuck it all. Enjoy what you could. There was no alternative.

Today the “Epicurean Option”, for all its bleakness, can make sense to a weary modern mind. What little pleasure there is lies in careful moderation. That is the best we can do.

The Benedict Option

There is a Christian version of the “Epicurean Option” called the “Benedict Option”, a phrase from Alasdair MacIntyre’s book After Virtue. MacIntyre argues that the classical understanding of virtue and vice is no longer possible in the hazy ideologies that control modern culture. In a world where the autonomous self is free to shape itself into whatever it wants, a natural law or Christian notion of virtue and vice has no meaning. For those who understand the deep disorders of the culture, what alternative is there but retreat?

The “Benedict Option” refers to the monastic tradition of St Benedict of Norcia whose isolated monasteries preserved the wisdom of the past during the barbarian invasions and the moral corruption of late Roman civic life. It was in these centers of tradition and order that what was good in the classics and early Christian life was saved and represented anew.

As opposed to the “Epicurean Option”, the “Benedict Option” creates islands of wisdom and virtue in a sea of chaos. Men are men; women are women. The family is not blighted by the obscenities of decadent cities. This life could transform Sodom and Gomorrah once they had realized the depths of their own corruption.

The problem with this “Benedict Option”, as the theologian Jean Daniélou once noted, is that Christianity is not intended for the few. The whole point of Christianity, as contrasted with Greek elitism, was that it was intended also for the Gentiles, for the poor and the normal, not just the Chosen People. The “Benedict Option”, so it is said, leaves the culture at the hands of the ideologues. It is a counsel of despair that admonishes us to flee.

The Apocalyptic Option

Then there is the “Apocalyptic Option”. Its supporters argue that the dominance of relativism, the expansion of Islam, and the loss of Christian faith means that God has seen all He needs to see about what men do with their free will when actually lived in various times and places. The appointed time is near. There is no need to strive to establish a perfect city on earth (an abiding temptation designed to avoid what Christianity actually teaches). The only thing that remains to complete in history is the Judgment.

Musing about “the end time” is popular amongst fundamentalist Christians, as the popularity of novels about “The Rapture” attest. The Late, Great Planet Earth, by Hal Lindsay, has sold about 30 million copies since its publication in 1970; Left Behind novels about the “tribulations” before the coming of Christ have also sold millions of copies.

But we should not forget the sober and profound reflection of Josef Pieper in his book on the end of history. Robert Hugh Benson’s novel, The Lord of the World takes up the same topic, a book cited by both Pope Benedict and Pope Francis. Ratzinger’s book on Eschatology is still worth a careful reading.

The “Apocalyptic Option” may seem preposterous, but predictions of “the end times” have a long history. The Greek philosopher Plato imagined a kind of apocalypse in which each man would be judged by how he had lived his life. In the Gorgias he said that history would not be complete until good was rewarded and evil punished. Plato is still a master of this topic.

The Muslim Option

A new, and surprising, option is the “Muslim Option”. In recent years, most of the ancient Christian enclaves in the Middle East, the “Benedict Options” of earlier centuries which had survived for hundreds and hundreds of years have been destroyed or are under threat.

Even in the remotest corners of the world Christian monasteries and churches are being destroyed, literally ground into gravel as contrary to Allah’s will. Even the remote and most renowned monasteries and churches are eradicated as alien to the new culture. The Benedict option presupposed some place to which one could escape, a political system that at least let them alone, or so remote from the centers of power that no one cared about them. Today, a cell phone can take a pick-up truck with soldiers, machine guns, knives, and demolition equipment to any address on the planet.

The “Muslim Option” is peace through the voluntary or forced “conversion” of everyone to Islam as the Qur’an has mandated. While this option seems improbable to many besides its advocates, it may well be the fate of a good part of Europe as it has been the fate of the Near East, North Africa, and parts of Asia.

Europe and America are belatedly beginning to talk of fences and walls, the means that were set up to protect the medieval towns and cities from the barbarians or from the earlier armies of Mohammed. We even hear discussions of “The Islamization of America”. Neither Christians nor secularists would be able to hide in this new world order.

Moving forward

Analyzing these options can give us some insight into how Christians are engaging and should engage with a dominant secularist culture. The Epicurean option suggests that we should take no real interest in these public things. We just want to be left along. The Benedict option counsels us to disengage from public life and to live in counter-cultural communities where some semblance of right order can be preserved. The Muslim option is to conquer and crush the dominant culture (i.e., both Christians and secularists). The Apocalyptic option suggests that Christians let God sort out the mess.

In the light of these considerations, is there yet another option that we might call “the Aristotelian Option”? Aristotle lived in a sophisticated but turbulent age. He observed wars, corrupt and demagogic politicians. He knew the passions of the great majority in any society. He knew how tyrants rose out of the unlimited freedom of democratic citizens who had no principle of order in their own souls.

Yet he taught that the good man did have responsibilities in society. He defined man as a “political animal”. Man found his greatest dignity and fulfillment when he participated courageously in affairs of state. For Aristotle that meant serving in the government of Athens or fighting in its army. He did not think that a rational being ought to retreat from engagement in public life. But he was realistic enough to acknowledge that good regimes do fail and there is an order to their failure. He also could envision, with a change in the souls of the citizens, a return to good order. But immediately, Aristotle is most helpful for us today in his description of what happens in democracies in which the souls of the citizens are not ruled by anything but their own desires. He saw how quickly tyrants would arise within such regimes and impose their own arbitrary rule.

Bede the Venerable, the Anglo-Saxon monk who wrote An Ecclesiastical History of the English People about the year 730AD, had harsh words for British Christians who failed in their duty to convert the Saxons, Angles and Jute invaders from the Continent: “Among other most wicked actions … which their own historian, Gildas, mournfully takes notice of, they added this - that they never preached the faith to the Saxons, or English, who dwelt amongst them.” But the context of conversion today is not that of pagan tribes who were open to Christianity. In 12 centuries, very, very few Muslims have been converted, while whole nations once Christian are now Muslim. The imposition of understandings of human life directly contrary to the natural law is now almost the norm of public life in the West. Christians are being driven out of public life if they do not change their views and accept the politics of the state.

The old saying that we attribute to Alcoholics Anonymous that you will not reform till you hit bottom seem almost true of our culture. The mark of Christianity is the Cross. As Georg Marlin (Christian Persecution in the Middle East) and Robert Royal (Catholic Martyrs of the Twentieth Century} have pointed out, we are seeing more martyrs than have happened in all of previous history. What struck these authors was the relative indifference with which these killings are greeted among us and the nobility of those who have suffered them in quiet.

So, in the end, is there what might be called a “Schall Option”? The first is that each of the “options”—Epicurean, Benedict, Muslim, Apocalyptic, and Aristotelian—is at work among us. And they are live options because the political regimes we see before us are disordered in the way Aristotle outlined them to be and in the way the natural law is being systematically dismantled by legal and political decisions. Such is not exactly a cheery conclusion, but it is one that conforms to the outlines of what we see almost everywhere we look, whether it be North or South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, or what’s left to escape to.

Still, there is something to be said for knowing where we are. Most of our trouble has been caused by rejecting or not receiving what indeed could set us on a real Aristotelian option, one in which the things of Caesar were limited to what belonged to him.

* Rev. James V. Schall SJ taught political science at Georgetown University for many years. He is the author of numerous books.


Read more: www.mercatornet.com