The Family Under Attack Don Leone Ch. 6 b)

41VAKxjdgfLThe Family Under Attack  Ch. 6 cont.

It may be noted here that even a sexual relationship that does not constitute sexual love of the rational type, for example a relationship outside marriage, may have a healing effect. But this healing can only be partial and is counteracted by new wounding. For since any love that is contained in an extramarital relationship is (inasmuch as it falls short of marital love) only limited, it can only benefit the couple to a limited degree and therefore can only heal them to a limited degree. And since the extramarital relationship fails to treat persons with the respect due to them, namely with a full marital love, it maltreats and abuses them: it inflicts new wounds upon them.

It may also be noted that the extramarital relationship may bring with it a certain sense of fulfilment, but that this does not originate in anything positive in the relationship, but rather from the fact that it satisfies the appetites of fallen nature and deludes the couple into believing (even subconsciously) that it is a form of marriage.

We see then the power that sexual love exerts over man, and we see how it is principally his desire for sexual love that is fuelled by his augmented desire for passionate love.

The desire for sexual love issues into sexual relationships of an affectionate nature, which do not however amount to authentic love then, for the man and woman refuse to submit to the canons of objective morality or to recognize the importance of chastity, marriage, and procreation. Instead they subject themselves to the exclusive domination of the passions practicing contraception to avoid the ‘burden of children’ and remaining faithful to each other only for as long as their passions survive, be it a matter of a few months or a few years. If they have any appreciation for the marriage covenant, they are alarmed by its frequent demise (perhaps especially in the case of their own parents) and are reluctant to commit themselves to marriage at all, or until they have made a success of an extramarital ‘trial marriage’. In short, the desire for sexual love issues into a pale simulacrum of sexual love and into a pale simulacrum of marriage.

Now it is hard for a man once prey to adulterous passions to correct his ways, for as St. Thomas states (Summa II 153 a.5): ‘the effect of this vice is that the lower appetite, namely the concupiscible, is most forcibly intent upon its object, that is the object of pleasure, on account of the vehemence of the pleasure. Consequently, the higher powers, namely the reason and the will are most grievously disordered…’ The disorders he enumerates here may be translated as: blindness of the mind, lack of judgment, inefficacity, rashness, self-love, hatred of God, love of this world, and abhorrence of a future world. In the case of mortal sin in particular, the agent departs, as remarked in chapter two, from the order of reason: losing his orientation to his final end, he declines into a process of spiritual disintegration. Is this, one may ask, what lurks behind the brazen faces and clouded eyes of the youth one encounters increasingly on the streets of the great cities of to-day? Are these the ranks from which the ‘philosophers’ are taken with their hymns to adultery and their condemnation of the innocent child?

The media, for motives of financial gain, engaging in that same ‘flattery’ or kolakeia by which the cook, the rhetorician, the beautician, and the sophist ‘use pleasure as a bait to catch folly’ (Plato’s Gorgias 463-4) exacerbates man’s desire for sexual pleasure and for affectionate extramarital sexual relationships (‘love-affairs’): the advertising industry manipulating the former desire in order to sell those products in particular (such as clothing) deemed capable of enhancing a person’s power of sexual attraction, but also in order to sell an abundant cornucopia of other products, where, in the absence of inherent logical connections, recourse is made to contrived visual98, verbal, In the generic sense, i.e. all types of impurity. Armed, as it were, with his battery of chemicals and ‘microwaves’. we recall a scantily-clad couple eating ice-cream while embracing, favoured by the London bus-shelters not so long ago, a naked woman advertising a hand-bag and a naked man advertizing pet-food on the facade of the church of San Simon Piccolo in Venice (representing the triumph of Eros not only over the Church, but also over art and logic – Omnia vincit amor). Certainly these commissions were a challenge to the or conceptual juxtapositions; song, television, and the fictional arts, whether literary, dramatic, or cinematographic, exacerbating both desires by forcing on man’s attention the contemporary sexual malaise, or by exaggerating it with the object of providing entertainment and excitement.

At the same time, international ‘sex-education’ programmes are being promoted by agencies of the United Nations, and by multi-national pharmaceutical companies100 with the support of local governments. These programmes promote fornication (natural and unnatural), contraception, and abortion101 within a purely hedonistic vision of sexuality102 . Clearly a particularly

advertisers. As to whether or not they were equal to their task we defer to the respective sales statistics. See the internet for the remarkable work of ‘Bayer Schering Pharma’ in Asia, the Pacific, Latin America, America, and Europe. Amongst their various world-wide enterprises is to be noted ‘World Contraception Day’, doubtless a feast-day of a certain ampleur in the Ordo liturgicus Satanae. In the name of health, the body, affectivity, the woman, gynaecology, obstetrics, and parenthood. In chapter 13 we show how evil presents itself as good or as morally neutral.

for a refutation of this moral vision see chapter 13. An example of such a theory being promulgated at the time of writing is that of “Gender”. The very term “Gender” is itself a sure indication of the falsity of the theory which it denotes, for, if it were true, then one of the great thinkers of the past would certainly have elaborated such a thing before now.

The theory holds that sexuality is determined by Culture and must be freed of all constrictions and inhibitions by which it has been encumbered. Essentially it aims at promoting homosexuality and pedophilia, and this with the intention of controlling world population. Its ultimate objective is the establishment of a totalitarian World Order.

Leaving aside the political question, let us proceed to examine the theory in the light of Reason and Faith.

Now it is evident that sexuality can be influenced by Culture, as also by the particular circumstances of any given life. But it is also evident that it ultimately derives from human nature itself, differentiated as it is into two distinct sexes: male and female, each with its respective psychophysical characteristics.

The sexual differentiation may, in the final analysis and as we have already stated above, be understood only in relation to procreation or, in other words, to the conservation of the human race. Procreation is only licit within the context of marriage, as only marriage can provide the foundation for the education of well-balanced and happy children. The conservation of the human race is the greatest natural good that there is: thus the frustration of this good through the use of sexuality outside of marriage or against the finalities of marriage, is the worst thing that there is– the corruption of the best being the worst: corruptio optimi pessima est.

These truths of the Natural Law are confirmed by Holy Mother Church in Her doctrine on marriage, on the gravity of sins of impurity of all types, and on the particular depravity of homosexual acts, not to speak of pedophilia.

The theory of so-called “Gender” is false for four reasons: 1) It is unreal in the sense that it has no foundation in reality: nullum fundamentum in re: it has no foundation in human nature, that is to say in the psychological characteristics, whether male or female, of any given person; rather it regards the person as a type of boat, and sexuality as a type of sail, on which the wind of Culture blows, thus pushing the person in whichever direction it pleases.

2) It is irrational because, being contrary to the Natural Law, which is the foundation of ethics, it is also contrary to Reason itself.

3) It is superficial because it elects emotion as a guide to human conduct rather than the faculties of the intellect and the will, and heavy burden of responsibility weighs upon the international bodies which promote this corruption and murder of innocent children for motives of financial gain; and upon the school principals (especially those acting in the name of the Church) who are perverting the very the True and the Good which are their proper objects. 4) It is incoherent, and this for two reasons:

a) it promotes the very action that it claims to oppose: that is the influence of Culture on sexuality;

b) it is a type of hedonism, as such advocating happiness while procuring unhappiness. Suffice it to think of the last two generations of young people, impregnated as they have been with the ideal of earthly happiness: Are they any happier than those who came before them? Who would be so foolhardy as to assert such a thing?

The theory “Gender” is false, then: unreal, irrational, superficial, and incoherent. Promoting it in schools is a sin of particular gravity in that it promotes the evils that we have mentioned above. The gravity is all the greater in view of the public nature of the sin: inasmuch as it touches a great number of people and causes public scandal; and in view of its effect which is to corrupt the souls of innocent children of the most tender age.

With regard to those who act in this way, Our Lord Jesus Christ says: “And whosoever shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me; it were better for him that a millstone were hanged around his neck, and he were cast into the sea“. (Mark 9. 41).

The fact that this educative initiative has been widely accepted by public authorities throughout Europe manifests an acceleration in the Devil’s operations in this world as well as his growing audacity; it manifests equally a moral blindness of unparalleled scope, and the abysses of degradation into which modern man has fallen in his apostasy from God.

We in whom the light of Reason is not yet entirely extinguished, and particularly we Catholics, must do all that is within our power to fight against this high tide of iniquity, before our children are perverted and before we all perish in the flood.

1children whom they have been entrusted, and paid, to educate.

The children are being provided with a similar fare in the ‘literature’ classes. Are the education authorities intent on degrading them? or somehow aspiring to ingratiate themselves with them by engaging with the intellectual dullness and moral turpitude which they presume to be theirs? or are they simply swimming, like dead fish, with the tide?

The message that the media and these various bodies is at pains to communicate may be expressed as follows: fornication is the ne plus ultra of human existence103. Every-one engages in it; it is identical to love. The purported universality of the phenomenon gives a person a sense of security about engaging in it; its purported identification with love gives it the appearance of moral probity. By its insistence and ubiquity the statement, reiterated as by the incessant and baleful croakings of a host of demonic frogs104, drowns the voice of the conscience, it penetrates the mind and renders it incapable of critical thought, or indeed of any thought at all.

As of masculinity and femininity as well, rather than paternity, maternity, and virginity, as models of strength, constancy, and Charity. We note in passing that fornication is a mark of softness, or effeminacy, rather than of manliness, as shown in Homer‘s portrait of Paris in the Iliad.