The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 5 of 17)

br> -- Ed Alhsen-Girard br> Eglin AFB, Florida /p>

Once again, George Neumayr has done an outstanding job at pointing out something largely missed or worse, malevolently ignored, by members of the liberal elite media and dissenters within the Roman Catholic Church. The telling line in Mr. Neumayr's analysis in his article, "Protection Racketeers" is: "Unlike Law who had serious reporters on his heels, Mahony has long benefited from the somnolent coverage of West Coast media liberals willing to excuse his protection of pedophiles in gratitude for his political and doctrinal liberalism."

The tragic and dirty truth in this point is something that I know Mr. Neumayr knows -- that there is a deep philosophical and moral connection between the libertine secular humanism and morality promulgated and practiced by the secular liberal elite, and the "Catholic lite" teaching (a term coined by Papal biographer, George Weigel) of dissident "Catholics." Catholic lite is really only libertine secular humanism dressed up in sacred vestments.

The total embrace of the most morally libertine aspects of the sexual revolution of secular liberals really paints them in a moral corner on the question of child sexual abuse. Secular liberals have pushed for a variety of cultural, legal, and legislative issues that pretty much allow for sexual stimulation and sex itself on demand. All that is required is consent -- and many members of the secular liberal camp have worked tirelessly, in one form or another, to lower the age of consent. This has occurred through the constant promotion of contraceptives in schools -- which assumes that those below the age of 18 are consenting to sexual activity with one another -- why else would they need contraceptives? What about sex education? It is usually really nothing more than sex promotion, dressed up with a smattering of medical facts, but never moral reflection, concerning sexual activity. The list goes on and on.

Doctrinal liberalism is really nothing more than an attempt to theologically justify the sexual revolution in Catholic circles. Thus the secular liberal media has to give even a protector of pedophiles a break, because their libertine sexual ethic ultimately has no sound reason to reject even predatory sexual behavior--other than a generic appeal to some sort of psychological pragmatism. Unless, of course, there is consent. To attack Catholic dissidents who allow even pedophilia, a horrendous sin and crime, to occur would be to imply that there are some limits to the libertine ethic embodied in the sexual revolution. Revolutions and revolutionaries don't like to be limited and the sexual revolution is no different. Secular liberals defend even the worst excesses (if you can get them to call it that) to preserve the core program --sexual freedom without limit. In a system where potentially everything is permitted in the name of choice and consent, how can they, or we, be surprised that everything has been committed and enabled? Add a little disingenuous "Christian compassion" to the mix and you've got a kinder, gentler sexual revolution with a "Christian" stamp of approval.

p>Secular liberalism and doctrinal liberalism -- these two dogs always hunt together. So we should never be surprised to see their various advocates covering for and enabling each other. Such is the corruption of our present age. May God deliver us from evil in all its forms. br> -- Fr. Phillip W. De Vous br> Blessed Sacrament Church br> Fort Mitchell, Kentucky /p>

Thank you for that fine, "forensic" analysis of the person that is (we don't want him, but we're stuck with him) the Prince Archbishop of Los Angeles, Cardinal Roger Mahony or, as some of us like to call him, Roger Maphony; but then, you see, I don't like RM very much.

topics:
Education, Business, Religion, Catholicism, Law, Iran, Israel, NATO, North Korea, Oil