Hennessy’s View

Thanks to the new Catholic Outsider blog, we learn that the impetus for forcing Catholic doctors in Europe to perform abortions against their will and against their God was the logic of a law professor at a “Catholic” university in Belgium.

The logic is that a woman’s right to kill trumps a Catholic’s desire for eternal salvation. Following Olivier de Schutter’s reasoning, then, the right to kill an unborn child is the supreme right of all. Again, a man who fears only the law and believes in nothing beyond this life cannot be trusted with anything, least of all reason.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Inspired by a program on EWTN, I re-read Thomas More‘s “Utopia” this evening and–to borrow from John Knowles–found it looking oddly newer than I had remembered it, as if some kind hand had scraped from eyes the ignorant varnish of youthful zeal.

I first encountered “Utopia” in high school when a religion teacher (who was to become a good friend) challenged me to read it and THEN tell her what I thought of Reagan’s ideas. (The year was 1981.) My first impression of the bound text was its brevity; thus, my enthusiasm accelerated upon checking out of the school library. To further my interest, I was preparing to play Henry VIII in Robert Bolt’s “A Man for All Seasons,” and had already learned a great deal about More, Henry, the period, and the other central figures, like Wolsey, Norfolk the 3rd, Roper, and Cromwell.

Heavily armed with the weaponry of the 1980s New Right, I plunged into the book which, I was told, demonstrated that “true socialism is true Christianity.” As best as I remember, I wrote in my analysis something along the lines of a) it’s a work of fiction–literature–not of theology and certainly not civics; b) Utopia means “no land” indicating More understood that attempting to establish this society on earth would be to imminentize the eschaton; c) this moneyless society’s proponent’s name is Raphael Hythloday which means “God’s messenger” in the first and “Teller of nonsense” in the last; d) the More character in the book mocks Hythloday’s idea of abolishing private property; and e) the Catholic Church took a full 400 years to canonize More and then did so because he was a martyr, not because of his book. (This last argument, supported by nothing but my own imagination and desire to pile-on having smelled victory, concluded that More’s martyrdom should have earned him canonization much earlier, but the socialistic tendencies in “Utopia” caused the Holy See much concern.)

Twenty-some years later, though, I find Raphael’s arguments far more compelling. For instance, I find that core of society is the family, that marriage is for life and that to encourage marriage, pre-marital intercourse receives the punishment of slavery for life. The form of government is very similar to our own with the exception that the Prince (president) is selected for life, not by a popular vote, but by a secret ballot of trusted electors. Instead of producing just enough of everything, the people of Utopia produce as much as they can–just in case. Gold and Silver, cherished by the rest of the world, are used for the basest of utensils and for permanently marking slaves. Marital infidelity also results in slavery and is one of only two grounds for divorce.

But most impressive to me is how this society handles religion. For my money, the First Amendment was a distillation of Hythloday’s description:

He [Utopus] therefore left men wholly to their liberty, that they might be
free to believe as they should see cause; only he made a solemn
and severe law against such as should so far degenerate from the
dignity of human nature as to think that our souls died with our
bodies, or that the world was governed by chance, without a wise
overruling Providence: for they all formerly believed that there
was a state of rewards and punishments to the good and bad after
this life; and they now look on those that think otherwise as
scarce fit to be counted men, since they degrade so noble a being
as the soul, and reckon it no better than a beast’s: thus they are
far from looking on such men as fit for human society, or to be
citizens of a well-ordered commonwealth; since a man of such
principles must needs, as oft as he dares do it, despise all their
laws and customs: for there is no doubt to be made that a man who
is afraid of nothing but the law, and apprehends nothing after
death, will not scruple to break through all the laws of his
country, either by fraud or force, when by this means he may
satisfy his appetites. They never raise any that hold these
maxims, either to honors or offices, nor employ them in any public
trust, but despise them, as men of base and sordid minds: yet they
do not punish them, because they lay this down as a maxim that a
man cannot make himself believe anything he pleases; nor do they
drive any to dissemble their thoughts by threatenings, so that men
are not tempted to lie or disguise their opinions; which being a
sort of fraud, is abhorred by the Utopians. They take care indeed
to prevent their disputing in defence of these opinions,
especially before the common people; but they suffer, and even
encourage them to dispute concerning them in private with their
priests and other grave men, being confident that they will be
cured of those mad opinions by having reason laid before them.

Would that the Supreme Court come understand the meaning of that Amendment as those who ratified it did. There, in one paragraph, Thomas More in 1516 published the answer to what is so infinitely wrong with modern liberalism: You cannot have a civil society based on laws made by men.

for there is no doubt to be made that a man who
is afraid of nothing but the law, and apprehends nothing after
death, will not scruple to break through all the laws of his
country, either by fraud or force, when by this means he may
satisfy his appetites.

Anyone who’s read “The Conservative Manifesto” knows that I’m a pretty ardent proponent of capitalism. I will make this offer to the moonbats and whoever else wishes to trade his pet ideology for a chance at peaceful, worry-free living: I will support abolition of private property and currency if you will support Utopus’s law on religious tolerance.

Any takers?

Utiopia in Latin (original)

Popularity: 1% [?]