I have remarked in previous posts on the prevalence of politically correct fantasy over truth, over empirical reality … in these days we find ourselves living in a culture and society where keeping control is more important than truth, than reality. Over decades I have come to believe that a truth can always be proven, a truth can be defended, even against a vigorous attack. But a lie will not hold up to scrutiny.
Today, in the mainstream media, social media, state information organs and even in our churches we are witness to radical attempts on the part of many established authorities to vilify, demean and silence anyone, literally by any means possible, who dares to disagree with them. Anyone who is not advocating the current social narrative in lockstep with the talking heads and all the suits at the photo-ops is publicly ridiculed as (pick your favorite belittling and denigrating anathema, ban, curse, execration, malediction, malison, ).
Should you have the slightest doubt of the truth of this just take a cursory look at what passes for political, municipal, or even social dialogue as reported in all media in Canada and the good old U.S.A. today, eh? It’s a no brainer … anyone with even 1 neuron firing and 1 ounce of integrity would have to acknowledge the scarcity of polite consideration for the views of others or honest “good will” efforts to understand anyone who doesn’t agree with us.
So, continuing with my illustration of the gulf between what TROTKU (the rest of the known universe) spouts and believes about Christianity and what the Truth is, here is some more about bearing one another’s burdens. I continue to be a little surprised when I discover how many heterodox modernist practitioners and followers still claim to be “christian” and even “catholic” when their daily performance is light years away from what Christ’s Truth was all about.
There were still traces of orthodox tradition to be found amongst the general population in “Western Christendom” up into the early 20th century and those Truths and Traditions are still practiced today in a few isolated locations on the planet. But the modernist progressives have made huge strides in establishing the kingdom of The Prince of This World in our “enlightened” 21st century. The Mystical Body Of Christ has been pretty well subverted by the mystical body of Antichrist over most of the planet in our day.
But what have we discarded in our “rush to belong”, our drive to “get with the times”, to “get a life”, as my family members and acquaintances are fond of remarking when they are feeling polite. Here is a sample:
” If charity and grace unite us to Christ in such intimate and vital relations, it is evident that we must live this union, first with Him who is our Head, and then with our brethren, who like us have also been engrafted into Christ. Hence there will be a supernatural affection which will bind us to one another and make us one heart and one soul, ready to labor and suffer for one another, to help and sustain one another.
`Rejoice with them that rejoice; weep with them that weep` (St. Paul, Rom 12,15), Thus the Apostle teaches us to share the joys and sorrows, the cares and anxieties of others as if they were our own. They are, in fact, our own, because they are the joys, cares, and anxieties of that one Mystical Body of Christ to which we belong and which, therefore, is ours.
… Bearing one another’s burdens also means enduring the faults of others calmly and kindly. Faults are the inevitable consequence of human limitations. “The Imitation of Christ” tells us, “what a man cannot amend in himself or others, he must bear with patience till GOD ordains otherwise” (I, 16, 1). (Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, O.C.D. from the book “Divine Intimacy” meditations on the interior life for every day of the liturgical year pp 778-779)
Saint Thérèse of Lisieux, born Marie Françoise-Thérèse Martin, also known as Saint Thérèse of the Child Jesus and the Holy Face, O.C.D., was a French Catholic Discalced Carmelite nun who is widely venerated in modern times. She is popularly known as “The Little Flower of Jesus”, or simply “The Little Flower.” In the last months of her life, she wrote “Now I know that true charity consists in bearing all my neighbor’s defects, in not being surprised at mistakes, but in being edified at the smallest virtues” (St, 10)
And yet another lesson which has fallen out of favor:
For Whom the Bell Tolls
No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thine own
Or of thine friend’s were.
Each man’s death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.
John Donne (1572 – 1631) was an English writer and poet. As a Catholic in a time when that denomination was illegal in England, he endured constant prejudice and harassment and was ultimately forced into joining the Anglican church by King James I. Early in his life, John earned a reputation as a playboy and spendthrift, but at 25, he fell in love with Anne More. Despite her father’s scorn, the couple married, had a dozen children, and John became a devoted—if not financially successful—family man.
His career forays included law, diplomatic service, and church leadership, but he is best remembered as the founder of a group called the “metaphysical” poets. Popular during his lifetime, then dismissed for many years as inferior because it was so different from other poetry of that time, John’s work is today considered brilliant and his influence on literature legendary among some who don’t get their daily reality from social media, but he continues in obscurity amongst most modernists including some allegedly highly intelligent intellectuals and high leaders of church and state.
Well, I suppose that is about enough for one day … just now I am thinking of a fictional “man of honor”, Ned Stark.
In A Game of Thrones (1996), Ned Stark is introduced as the virtuous and honorable patriarch of House Stark and the father of six children. The moral compass of the story, he is content to remain far from courtly intrigues and is unwavering in his view of loyalty and honor.
His family name, Stark, serves as an indication of his resistance to moral compromise, but his boundaries are increasingly tested over the course of the novel. Finding himself a key player in the escalating political intrigue of King’s Landing, Ned struggles as his own sense of honor draws him into corrupt goings-on at court.
Sean Bean said of the character, “he’s a good man trying to do his best in the middle of this corruption, he’s a fish out of water, he’s used to being up north in Winterfell where people are pretty straight and pragmatic, and he comes down to a place where people are playing games and backstabbing … he’s a principled man who tries to hold things together. This is a journey that he makes where ultimately his loyalty causes his downfall” … and death.
I thought the book and the show were pretty good right up to the early point where Lord Stark is executed. Things got too real for me at that point as both the show and the book abandoned any semblance of morality in the interest of the corruption of viewers and readers. The despair which the series invoked and the plot direction which kept it popular with viewers is a symptom of our cultural and societal moral turpitude.
Moral turpitude is a legal concept in the United States and prior to 1976, in Canada, that refers to “an act or behavior that gravely violates the sentiment or accepted standard of the community”. In 1976, the Canadian government and legal community decided that no behaviour gravely violates the accepted standards of our communities and opted for another path of subjective relativism in which “it all depends”.
The precise definition of a crime that involves moral turpitude isn’t always clear, but in the U.S.A., the following crimes are always considered crimes of moral turpitude:
- voluntary manslaughter;
- statutory rape;
- domestic violence;
- fraud and crimes where fraud is an element
- all theft offenses;
- malicious destruction of property;
- alien smuggling;
- harboring a fugitive;
Of course, in Canada, “It all depends…” on geographical location, on age, on employment status, on political allegiance, on social status, on voting record, on gender or lack of same, on language, on religious beliefs, on victim-hood, on racial profile, … whatever …