Democracy and the threat of self-destruction


The corruption of a culture and the consequent corruption of a democracy which owes so much of its validity and integrity to the essence of a culture is a frightening prospect. It is a prospect facing not a few democracies in our time.
George Weigel hopes that Cardinal Walter Kasper’s comments in the aftermath of Ireland’s same-sex marriage referendum were misquoted. The Cardinal said: “A democratic state has the duty to respect the will of the people, and it seems clear that, if the majority of the people want such homosexual unions, the state has a duty to recognize such rights.”
That comment, taken at face value, Weigel says in a First Things article last week, “would suggest that a distinguished theologian-bishop has seriously misunderstood the nature of democracy and the Church’s teaching about just political communities.” Weigel also, “delicately” he says, without being too delicate, wonders how much of his own country’s sad recent history the good Cardinal has forgotten.
“For the first word that came to mind” Weigel says, “on reading Kasper’s remark was ‘Weimar.’” He wonders if he means ‘democratic’ as in the… democratic election (which) put Hitler and his Nazi Party in power, or the democratically elected German parliament which passed the notorious Ermächtigungsgesetz (Enabling Act), which effectively granted Hitler dictatorial powers?
He quotes St. John Paul II’s Centesimus Annus, which he describes as “the pinnacle of Catholic social teaching on the democratic experiment, which taught that “democracy” can never be reduced to mere “majority rule.”

“Majorities”, he reminds us, “can get the technicalities of public policy wrong. More gravely, majorities can also get the fundamentals of justice wrong: as many Germans did in the early 1930s, when the outcome of voting for the Nazi Party was clear to anyone who had read Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ or listened to his rants; as many French citizens did in the early twentieth century, when the representatives they democratically elected dismantled Catholic schools, exiled members of religious orders, and expropriated their property; and as too many Americans did during our long national struggle over racial segregation, legally imposed by democratically-elected legislatures.”

Weigel reminds us of the pope-saint’s insistence…that, of the three interlocking parts of the free and virtuous society—a democratic polity, a free economy, and a vibrant public moral culture—the cultural sector is the key to the rest. For it takes a certain kind of people, formed in the arts of self-governance by a robust moral culture and living certain virtues, to operate the machinery of democracy and the free economy in ways that promote decency, justice, and solidarity, not degradation, injustice, or new forms of authoritarian bullying.

Weigel says nothing more about Ireland in this article but it may be added that the biggest shock for the nearly 40% percent of the Irish electorate which voted against the change in their Constitution was not the change in itself but the realisation that the culture of the country had changed so radically. Added to that was the shock that it was the two younger generations in the country which had brought about the change on the basis of an almost entirely emotional platform. Reasoned arguments from the “no change” side were ignored and constantly responded to with emotions ranging from sentimentalism, through arrogance down as far as naked hatred. All this was bolstered by a thoroughly deceitful abuse of the concept of equality – equating the sexual relationship of opposite sexes with that between two people of the same sex.
That the faith-and-reason based culture of a country had been so thoroughly dismantled and replaced with a barely rational and thoroughly sentimental alternative, careless of consequences, was for many a very disturbing experience. How did it happen?
The recalling by Weigel of the French experience of the dismantling of Catholic schools in the early part of the last century deepens the sense of foreboding of those concerned about the erosion of foundations of Irish culture. Most Irish schools are still nominally Catholic and Christian. But that nominal status seems destined to be short-lived and they will soon be entirely secular if the forces of the State and the now apparently secularist majority in the country have anything to do with it. The corrosive and self-inflicted secularisation of Irish education which has been going on for at least three generations now is a large part of the reason for what Irish people wakened up to on May 23 last.
By secularisation we do not mean the removal of institutions from ecclesiastical control. We mean the “disembedding” of all faith-based values from the ethos of educational institutions. We are talking about the process which has been traced so thoroughly by Charles Taylor (A Secular Age), Brad Gregory (The Unintended Reformation) and others in the past few years.
How did this secularisation of education in Ireland come about – apart, that is, from what it owes to the global process Taylor and Gregory have studied? There are never simple cut and dried reasons for these things but a huge contributor was the failure of the baby-boom generation to resist the sexual revolution and the drift toward hedonism which began (roughly) in the 1960s. The generation which they begat didn’t simply not resist this. They swallowed it hook-line-and-sinker. After that no one now even knows what Pope John Paul was talking about when he reminded Ireland’s young people in 1979 that “something else is needed” in their lives instead of drugs, sex and rock’n’roll. Many of them don’t think of much else now – other than money, celebrity and spectator sports. How else do you explain the extraordinary flight from stable marriage to divorce and cohabitation, the disregard for the stable family with a mother and father which the referendum result revealed – not to mention the country’s ranking for binge-drinking and suicide among the under 40s.
Hand in hand with this social decay went the capture by political ideologues of state agencies and services – education, health, justice and social services – and the media of social communication, vital to the cultural life of a country. These were the secularised new graduates from the Irish universities which themselves had come under the influence of American academic politically correct ideology.
These state agencies and the media combined to promote social policies in their own image and likeness which a not-too-bright-or-courageous elected parliament duly went along with. That ninety percent-plus of these representatives supported the same-sex marriage referendum proposal which was rejected by nearly forty percent of those who elected them is – or should be – deeply worrying for any lover of democracy.
Unlike the French, Ireland’s Catholic schools did not even have to wait for the state to dismantle them. In the post-sixties flight from faith they went into self-destruct mode all on their own. On the wave of muddled-to-bad teaching of Christian doctrine – moral included – which can be traced back to the 1970’s, generation after generation were left clueless about the foundations of their faith. The Catholic Church leaders of the era must take responsibility for this and indeed it can only be seen as another side of the coin which produced the careless dealing with those clergy, wolves in shepherd’s clothing, who in those decades perpetrated sexual abuse on those in their care. These same wolves were not only slaves to their own vicious and illicit passions but also victims of the woolly moral thinking which resulted from the ambivalence of some of their theology teachers about the clear moral teaching in Humanae Vitae.
We are all victims now and the barbarians at our gates in the form of ISIS may be far less threatening to the survival of our civilization than those in our midst.
Jonah Goldberg in his book The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas talks about the dangerous adulation of youth which infects our age and which betrays not only young people themselves but also jeopardises our civilization. In an interview about the book he said:

We have a popular culture that exalts young people simply because they’re young and I have a deep and abiding contempt for youth politics, certainly as it’s practiced on the Left… The assumption that we have to cater to young people because they’re young, and they’re the future and all that kind of stuff, is just a naked form of power worship. It assumes that since they’re going to run everything one day, we might as well cave into them now. This completely turns the idea of civilization on its head. Hannah Arendt once said that in “Every generation, Western civilization is invaded by barbarians – we call them ‘children.’”

The champions of same-sex marriage rode to victory in the Irish referendum thanks to tyrannical clichés. They had no arguments. All they had were meaningless slogans about a meaningless equality, based on the ludicrous Humpty Dumpty principle that we can make things mean what we say they mean. They did so by mobilising the under-forty voters and feeding them a great deal of romantic nonsense. It worked. The liberal Left now knows how it works and they are setting out to apply the same strategy to introduce abortion-on-demand to the country.
The way back from this trough of desolation will be long and arduous. It is not just an Irish problem. It is a problem for the remnant of Western civilization and it can only be countered at the level of education. The culture we had is now corrupted and only that remnant can revitalise it: by their families, by their devising adequate strategies for communal education, by Christians and all those of good will, whether Christian or not, with their commitment to the universal truths rooted in our very nature. The barbarians who descended on the Roman world destroyed the old civilization. They in turn, however, eventually withered away and their children’s children ceased to be barbarians because they grew into the light of the truth which had been slowly but surely growing inside that old Roman world. It can, and will, happen again. Believe.

Puncturing delusional balloons 

  
John Allen takes his pin to a few more wishful-thinking balloons which the liberal media has been busily hoisting into the atmosphere in anticipation of Pope Francis’ new encyclical.

Writing in Crux he says:

Mythology and media narratives to the contrary, Pope Francis has far more in common with Pope Benedict XVI than whatever separates them. Francis probably could be better understood as “Benedict 2.0,” supplying a warmer and more populist package for the same basic positions espoused by his more cerebral predecessor.

The release on Thursday of Pope Francis’ highly anticipated encyclical letter on the environment, Laudato Si, may well be the latest proof of the point.

First of all, it’s hardly as if embracing the cause of fighting climate change, saving the rainforests, and otherwise protecting the environment is somehow a break with Benedict. On the contrary, Benedict was famously the pope who installed solar panels atop a Vatican audience hall and signed an agreement to make the Vatican Europe’s first carbon-neutral state in order to back up his strong ecological concerns.

Read more here.

“There must be some way out of here…”

  
Unless you are one of the people who have swallowed, hook, line and sinker, the crazy contradictory propositions which Tom Hoopes draws our attention to in his latest Aleteia post, you might like to read what he says – and think a little about what we might do to get us out of the mess they have put us in. 

You know something has gone wrong when the culture simultaneously holds mutually exclusive propositions.

Some examples:

Smoking marijuana – good; smoking cigarettes – bad.

A process to change your sex – good; a process to change your sexual orientation – bad.

Polluting with your car – bad; polluting with your contraceptives – no big deal.

Caitlyn Jenner as a woman – good; Rachel Dolezal as black – bad.

Making a transgender violate her conscience – bad; making a Christian violate her conscience – no big deal.

Clearly, we are not dealing with a principled worldview interested in adhering to objective truth: We are dealing with ideologies that have decided what is true ahead of time and now wish to impose their truth on reality.

It really is a mad world. “‘There must be some way out of here’, said the Joker to the King*.” Tom has this suggestion.

*Correction. That should, of course, have been:

There must be some way out of here” said the joker to the thief

“There’s too much confusion”, I can’t get no relief

Businessmen, they drink my wine, plowmen dig my earth

None of them along the line know what any of it is worth.

Nor indeed do they.

Apologies to Bob Dylan.

A clear message to Kasper

Cardinal Robert Sarah has sent a clear message to Cardinal Walter Kasper and his followers who are generating what looks very much like a schismatic movement within the Catholic Church. Kasper and his group – mainly German – have been  “suggesting” that Holy Communion for divorced and remarried people should be condoned by the Church.

Cardinal Sarah is having none of it, stating that “the African Church will strongly oppose any rebellion against the teaching of Jesus and the Magisterium.”

“If some countries are doing this already (giving the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried) they are insulting Christ, it is a desecration of his Body and they are guilty because they are doing it knowingly.”

This is being proposed in the name of Christ’s mercifulness. Sarah comments:The fact is that we are not precise in using the Christian word ‘mercy’.  And without explaining [what this word means] we deceive people. Mercy [makes us] close the eyes not to see sin… The Lord is ready to forgive, but (only) if we come back, and if we are sorry for our sins,” he said. “Christ was merciful but he affirmed that to breach marriage is adultery. We cannot interpret these words differently – it is a sin [to do so] and the sinner without repentance cannot receive the Body of Christ.”

The Cardinal, who is prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments,  was speaking on May 20 at the John Paul II Pontifical Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family in Rome.

“The challenge for the Church”, he added, “is to fight against the current, with courage and hope without being afraid to raise her voice to denounce the deception, manipulation and false prophets. Over 2,000 years the Church has confronted many headwinds but with the help of the Holy Spirit, her voice was always heard.”

Referring to the Christian’s obligation to go to the periphery, as Pope Francis exhorts, he spoke of the persecuted Christians on those peripheries. “It is easy to go to the outskirts… But who are we going with?  If we don’t bring Christ, we bring nothing!  I think that the most courageous thing to do is to remain as a Christian, as many Christians are doing right now – they are dying in Pakistan, the Middle East, and Africa.”

Speaking of the secular goliaths of today attacking Christian families at every level, he said,  “I am not saying that we shouldn’t go out to bring the Gospel, but the courage we need to bring is that of going against the current because the world no longer tolerates the Gospel.”

The secular goliaths of today are attacking Christian families at every level. “The ongoing debate is drugged” he said,  “because oftentimes even the journalists place the Pope against the Curia, which is not true… But people think we are against each other and think that the Pope said he is in favor of giving Communion to the divorced [people] … this is only an interpretation of his words.

“As Ratzinger said, a right that is not based on morality becomes injustice. For this reason it is necessary to keep in mind the context of secularization in which we live… The distancing of whole parts of modern society away from Christianity goes hand in hand with ignorance and the rejection of doctrine and cultural identity.”

“To say that human sexuality does not depend on the identity of man and woman, but a sexual orientation, such as homosexuality, is a dreamlike totalitarianism.”

Echoing what Pope Francis himself has already said, Cardinal Sarah declared that, “Today one of the most dangerous ideologies is that of gender, according to which there are no ontological differences between man and woman, and the male and female identity would not be written in nature. … is a real ideology which negates the reality of things. … I don’t see a future in such deceit.”

“One thing”, he said, “is to respect the homosexual person, who have a right to genuine respect, another thing is to promote homosexuality.  Also the divorced-remarried people have a right to genuine respect but the Church cannot promote a new concept of the family. The homosexual people are the first victims of this drift. … The Church’s job is to announce the Christian doctrine and the truth of conjugal love bringing man to full realization.”

To the Promised Land from Gangland

John Pridmore, who sums up his life story in the phrase, “from gangland to promised land”, must be one of the most unique celebrities in the world. Now an international star since he addressed 400,000 young people at World Youth Day in Sydney, he is to share his story once again at an open day on 27 June in Waterford, Ireland.

Pridmore was born in the east end of London. At the age of 10 his parents got divorced and he says at that point he made “an unconscious decision not to love any more.”

At the age of 13 he had started stealing and by 15 had his first spell in prison. “When I left home after having been released, my only qualification was stealing, so that’s what I did.”

“At 19 I was in prison again and because the way I dealt with my pain was with anger, I was always fighting. They put me on 23 hour a day solitary confinement and I came out of there even more angry and bitter.”

He was big and strong so he started working as a “bouncer” around the east end and west end night clubs of London. He liked fighting so he thought he might as well get paid for it. This led him straight into London’s gangland, working with the guys who ran most of the organised crime in the city. Massive drug deals, protection rackets and vicious crime of all sorts were part of his daily – or more likely, nightly, – routine.

“I had what I thought was everything,” he says. “Money, power, girls, drugs, the lot.”

Then one night, everything changed. He got into a fight outside a night club and left someone for dead. The man wasn’t dead but, John says, “after nearly taking that man’s life, something incredible happened and my life began to change.”

He had reached a fork in the road which divides the road to perdition from the road to redemption. He took he latter. “I began working with ‘at risk’ youth showing them there is another path than the violent one I took. Within a few years I was full time speaking in parishes, schools and prisons around the U.K. and Ireland to tens of thousands of people each year. The latest stop on that road is at Waterford where he will speak at the Little Sisters of the Poor’s special celebration of the Year of Consecrated Life.

Sr Mairead Regina  and her colleagues in the order decided to invite other religious and the public to an event marking this special year in which the Catholic Church is celebrating this way of life. Very quickly the new  Bishop of the local diocese of Waterford and Lismore, Dr. Alphonsus Cullinan, gave his support and will also address the conference.

“We are inviting young men and women from all over Ireland to come to this one-day event to hear presentations on religious life and meet a number of religious and talk to them, Sr Mairead Regina says. “We are looking for vocations of course, if that comes out of it great, but really we are inviting everyone, even young families, to come because not too many young people know about religious life or they think it is gone and done away with which is not the truth at all,”

She is a young Sister of just 35 and says that religious life is still out there and offers “so much joy and happiness”. Her story is a good deal simpler than John’s, less dramatic but just as radical in its consequences.

She was working in a coffee shop when her friend invited her to a life-changing event. She found her vocation when she went on a weekend visit to the Little Sisters of the Poor.The friend subsequently found the religious life was not for her, while Sr Mairead felt at home from the minute she arrived in the convent. She has just spent two years in the novitiate in the USA.

She added, about this Waterford event, “I just want to share the story of happiness that I have found being a Little Sister of the Poor. This event that we are hosting on 27 June is just the beginning of what I hope will be a revival of consecrated life in Ireland.”

The first Little Sisters arrived in Ireland from Brittany and based themselves in Waterford in 1868. Their foundation at Manor Hill was completed in 1874 and their work continued there for over 130 years. They moved to a new home at Ferrybank, a little outside the city, in recent years.

The event is on 27 June 2015 from 10am-5pm at the Little Sisters of the Poor, Abbey Road, Ferrybank, Waterford.

For further details call Sr Mairead at 051 833006 or Email:lspwaterford@eircom.net

Getting to grips with ISIS network

It looks like a long battle ahead but this suggests that some progress is being made in the war against the terrorists who call themselves the Islamic State. The New York Times and Foreign Policy report today that American forces have captured a trove of data — 4 to 7 terabytes worth — that intimately details the financial and security operations of the would-be State. Discovered during a May 16 raid that killed one of its leaders in eastern Syria, the information culled from the operation has already been used to target other leaders. But, the magazine says, the real boon is the insight gleaned into the minutiae of the group’s operations. “I’ll just say from that raid we’re learning quite a bit that we did not know before,” said a senior State Department official in a telephone briefing last week, according to the New York Times. “Every single day the picture becomes clearer of what this organization is, how sophisticated it is, how global it is and how networked it is.” The data trove revealed how the Islamic State divides its revenues from oil —half is allocated to its general operation fund, while half is reinvested in production — as well detailed security procedures for meeting with the group’s leader and transmitting sensitive communications. The discovery is being touted by American officials as an important glimpse into an organization shrouded in secrecy. On Tuesday, the BBC published footage taken in the Iraqi city of Mosul, showing snippets of everyday life under Islamic State rule. It showed women being forced to cover themselves, discrimination against minorities, and mosques that Islamic State fighters considered sites of apostasy being blown up.

Pro life campaigns do produce results – how else do you explain this?

The New Your Times reports this morning that abortions are declining in nearly all the states in the US – in some states by as much as 15 percent. Associated Press has conducted a detailed survey across the country which will be a major boost in morale for the pro-life movement there and elsewhere, suggesting as it does that their work is bearing fruit in terms of a significant change in values and behavior.

The Times reports that not only have abortions declined in states where new laws make it harder to have them — but they’ve also waned in states where abortion rights are protected. Nearly everywhere, in red states and blue, abortions are down since 2010, the Associated Press survey finds

Explanations vary, the Times continues. Abortion-rights advocates attribute it to expanded access to effective contraceptives and a drop in unintended pregnancies. Some foes of abortion say there has been a shift in societal attitudes, with more women choosing to carry their pregnancies to term.

Several of the states that have been most aggressive in passing anti-abortion laws — including Indiana, Missouri, Ohio, and Oklahoma — have seen their abortion numbers drop by more than 15 percent since 2010. But more liberal states such as New York, Washington and Oregon also had declines of that magnitude, even as they maintained unrestricted access to abortion.

Nationwide, the AP survey showed a decrease in abortions of about 12 percent since 2010.

One major factor has been a decline in the teen pregnancy rate, which in 2010 reached its lowest level in decades. There’s been no official update since then, but the teen birth rate has continued to drop, which experts say signals a similar trend for teen pregnancies.

The work which has been done by positive education about human sexuality and the values associated with campaigns of people like Alveda King cannot be discounted as factors in this change – nor can the impact of pro life popular cultural influences like that in the film, Juno.

King, a niece of Martin Luther King Jr., calls herself a “reformed murderer” for undergoing two abortions when she was young.

Now an outspoken anti-abortion campaigner, Slate.com reported her saying last November that the best way to reduce abortions among black women is to dissuade more of them from premarital sex.

“We give free sex education, free condoms, free birth control,” she complained. “That’s almost like permission to have free sex, and the higher the rate of sexual activity, the higher the rate of unintended pregnancy.”

Read the full New York Times report here.

Love Changes Things, to the culture of Bruce Jenner

Caroline's avatarBeautiful Life with Cancer

There was a bracelet, and bumper sticker, and hat, and pencil case design that was quite popular a few years ago and still mingles in Christian bookstores. WWJD?

WWJD? What Would Jesus Do? I am sure it was started with great intention and that IS a great question to consider. HOWEVER, it was used as a pointing finger to say, “tisk tisk, shame on you. That was bad. Jesus would be so ashamed of you.”

But that is no new idea. Christians have been pointing that finger for quite some time. Some of them pointing that finger have a log so big in their eye that I would wonder if they have ever seen the love of Jesus at all and perhaps they are claiming Christianity when they have no concept of grace at all. Others, I truly believe are Christians, but yet again, do not allow the love and…

View original post 432 more words

A world gone mad – or going mad

Ross Douthat’s latest New York Times column tells us what we already expected to hear sooner or later. The Liberal Agenda is moving on and is now beginning to rub the Gini’s bottle again with the prospect of getting polygamy into the social mix – or should we say mess? We might ask, is it such a big step from serial polygamy (divorce on demand) to this?

Douthat takes his cue from the latest Gallup findings on our social attitudes:

On every issue save abortion, social liberalism is suddenly ascendant in America. The shift on same-sex marriage has captured the headlines, but the change is much more comprehensive: In just 15 years, we have gone from being a society divided roughly evenly between progressive and traditionalist visions to a country where social conservatism is countercultural and clearly in retreat.

This reality is laid bare in the latest Gallup social issues survey, which shows that it’s not only support for same-sex marriage that’s climbing swiftly: so is approval of unwed parenthood (45 per cent in 2001, 61 per cent now), divorce (59 per cent then, 71 per cent today), and premarital sex (53 per cent then, 68 per cent now). Approval of physician-assisted suicide is up 7 points and support for research that destroys human embryos for research is up 12, pushing both practices toward supermajority support.

Oh, and one more thing: The acceptance of polygamy has more than doubled.

Now admittedly, that last one is an outlier: Support for plural matrimony rose to 16 per cent from 7 per cent, a swift rise but still a very low number. Polygamy is bobbing forward in social liberalism’s wake, but it’s a long way from being part of the new permissive consensus.

Read more here.

.

A people not fit for public purpose?

In the Irish referendum campaign the Yes side – in favour of same sex marriage – kept saying all it was about was a handful of words in the country’s constitution. The No side focused on what they feared would be the unintended consequences of what they saw as a radical redefinition of not only marriage but also of the family. The Yes side in turn accused them of scaremongering. It was ugly. No political debate in Ireland in living memory was so ugly and acrimonious.

But that is now history – or is it? If the No side was right, it is only beginning. Conor Brady, former editor of the Irish Times, the paper which was cheerleader  extraordinaire  for the Yes campaign from  start – several years ago – to finish, ominously reflected today in his Sunday Times column on what he saw over the past few months and the past week.
“A revolution”, he said, “without generosity, broadmindedness and a respect for the sweep of history will simply lay the foundations of a new tyranny”.

A friend has just told me of a conversation she had with someone who was speaking to a priest from the old Czechoslovakia and now working in Ireland. The priest says that the atmosphere and culture in Ireland at the moment is almost an exact replica of that in his country just before the Communist take-over. The main similarity he sees is the almost 100% indoctrination of the youth to the ideology. His view? Ireland must now prepare itself for a time of persecution.

The Canadian story about the same issue is worth looking at. What has followed that country’s legislation is a nightmare of bitterness and discrimination and the insertion into the public square of a cancerous growth of the marginalization of conscientious Christians – and people of other faiths as well. The new hostility to religion is not about driving people of faith into the arena to be eaten by wild beasts, but it is about confining them to the margins of society as people not fit for public purpose.

Professor Robert George of Princeton this morning flagged an article in Crisis magazine which it would behove us all to read. It is an account by Lea Z. Singh, a Canadian lawyer, writer and a stay-at-home mom to three young children, of the “unintended consequences” which have occurred in her country in the aftermath of their radical law-making.

Canada legalized same-sex “marriage” in 2005, she wrote, the fourth country in the world to do so. During the rushed public debate that preceded legalization, the Christian and traditional understanding of marriage as the union of a man and a woman had strong support. Polls showed a deep split among Canadians, and the majority (52 percent) were actually against legalization at the time that it occurred.

Opponents of same-sex “marriage” were given all kinds of assurances. The preamble to the Civil Marriage Act states that “everyone has the freedom of conscience and religion,” “nothing in this Act affects the guarantee of freedom of conscience and religion and, in particular, the freedom of members of religious groups to hold and declare their religious beliefs,” and “it is not against the public interest to hold and publicly express diverse views on marriage.”

The Irish electorate was not even given this assurance.

But how quickly things change, she continues. Since the watershed moment of legalization, Canadian social norms have shifted rapidly, and what was once considered fringe or debatable has become the new normal.

Today, different opinions on “gender identity” and same-sex “marriage” are no longer tolerated. Our society is sweeping away respect for religious faiths that do not accept and celebrate same-sex “marriage,” and the Civil Marriage Act’s assurances seem merely farcical. It is not premature to speak of open discrimination against Christians in Canada.

The Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms declares that Canadians have a fundamental “freedom of conscience and religion” and “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression.” But constitutional guarantees are at the mercy of lawyers, and Canadian lawyers have emerged as among the most fiercely intolerant of anyone, including their own colleagues, who fails to support same-sex “marriage.” Read her full account here.

The spread of ideas is a fascinating subject – how they start, how they take root, how they spread, and the consequences which follow; sometimes good, sometimes indifferent and sometimes dire.

John Henry Newman offered a description of the process in his masterly Essay on the Development of Doctrine. What he says offers us a remarkable picture of what has been unfolding before our very eyes in Western culture over the past 50 years or so.

When an idea, he says, is of a nature to arrest and possess the mind, it may be said to have life, that is, to live in the mind which is its recipient. But, when some great enunciation, whether true or false, about human nature, or present good, or government, or duty, or religion, is carried forward into the public throng of men and draws attention, then… it becomes an active principle within them, leading them to an ever-new contemplation of itself, to an application of it in various directions, and a propagation of it on every side.

He cites as example such ideas as the doctrine of the divine right of kings, or of the rights of man, … or utilitarianism, or free trade, …or the philosophy of Zeno or Epicurus, doctrines which are of a nature to attract and influence.

Let one such idea get possession of the popular mind, or the mind of any portion of the community, and it is not difficult to understand what will be the result. At first men will not fully realize what it is that moves them, and will express and explain themselves inadequately. There will be a general agitation of thought, and an action of mind upon mind. There will be a time of confusion, when conceptions and misconceptions are in conflict, and it is uncertain whether anything is to come of the idea at all, or which view of it is to get the start of the others.

It will, he wrote, introduce itself into the framework and details of social life, changing public opinion, and strengthening or undermining the foundations of established order. Thus in time it will have grown into an ethical code, or into a system of government, or into a theology, or into a ritual, according to its capabilities.

Dublin’s Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, in the aftermath of the Irish referendum, described the event as “a reality check”. It was. The day before the referendum a great number of Irish people had made assumptions about the condition of their culture, about the ideas which carried weight within it. Two days later those assumptions were shattered. A radical idea – for many a terrible idea – about the nature of mankind, about gender, the nature of family and marriage had been working under cover for twenty, maybe thirty years. On the 23rd of May, 2015, Ireland awoke to find it in full flower.

But we must not forget that Newman’s words were written in the context of the ever-renewing process of refinement and development of the teaching of the Catholic Church. Those words hold fast to the promise that the truth of its teaching is strangely and marvellously rejuvenated from age to age. We should expect nothing less today.