It’s odd, opines the oracular Mark Steyn, that Jim Callaghan, a former British prime minister who, held all four great political
offices in Britain—and failed at all four—should get a better send off on his death than
the remarkable John Paul II. But then, it’s not odd, is it? John Paul II
stood like a bulwark
against
the entire secular world view and all its works, like, oh, socialism and fascism, both of which, like Edward
Teller, he had experienced personally, on the receiving end, so to speak.
Of course John Paul II tried to make life difficult for the modernising elites. The
New York Times complains that
“Among liberal Catholics,
he was criticised for his strong opposition to abortion, homosexuality and
contraception.”
No doubt. In the pope’s view, when you reduce sex to an
“instrument for self-assertion and the selfish satisfaction
of personal desires and instincts,” you diminish its real meaning.
“Thus the original import of human sexuality is
distorted and falsified, and the two meanings, unitive and procreative, inherent
in the very nature of the conjugal act, are artificially separated.”
The whole point of the modern project, as understood by the liberal media and the liberal academy, is
precisely against the pope’s view.
