This is a good article.
I recommend that our Catholic readers read and digest it and wonder what changed. It doesn’t sound all too different from Luther’s idea of the Orders of Creation.
“As a Catholic theologian, Aquinas unsurprisingly identifies God as the preeminent object of man’s love. But this hierarchy also has broad implications for the ordering of society, beginning with the family and working outwards. Aquinas proposes two general principles for making determinations in reference to charity: from the object loved and from the union caused. He writes: “a thing is loved more in two ways: first because it has the character of a more excellent good, secondly by reason of a closer connection.” In other words, we love certain persons more either because of the nature of who or what they are, or because we enjoy with them some deeper union. We love the virtuous person more than the scoundrel, and we love our parents, our spouses, and our children over strangers, because we share deep, close bonds with them. …
From the family, we can apply the Order of Charity outwards. Aristotle observes: “it is our duty to render to each class of people such respect as is natural and appropriate.” Aquinas assents: “we ought to love some neighbors more than others.” For example, “some neighbors are connected with us by their natural origin, a connection which cannot be severed, since that origin makes them to be what they are.” Just as there is an indelible givenness to our family, so there is with members of our communities and our nation that require the prioritization of our affections. Aquinas says, “Since our neighbor is more visible to us, he is the first lovable object we meet with.” In other words, because of his proximity to us in time and space, we love our fellow countryman before citizens of other nations. Thus, “in matters concerning relations between citizens, we should prefer our fellow-citizens, and on the battlefield our fellow-soldiers.”
Yet one might ask: doesn’t the Christian religion—as well as the secular humanism that often unknowingly derives many of its ethical principles thereof—teach that we should love all our neighbors equally? Not so fast. While we can love all persons with “one same generic good, namely everlasting happiness,” it is impossible to love all people equally. Says Aquinas: “we are bound to observe this inequality [of love], because we cannot do good to all.” As finite beings, we must daily make choices that demonstrate a prioritization of our loves and duties, even if unintentionally. Furthermore, because our love is inherently tied to intensity, attempting an equality of love is both unnatural and societally disastrous. Imagine a culture where husbands loved other men’s wives as much as their own, fathers loved other people’s children as much as their own, and workers loved their professional competitors as much as their own employers, and you’ll appreciate why. …”
It is natural to love your own wife, children and family more than others. It is natural to love your own kin and nation more than others too. There is nothing wrong with wanting to preserve these things. Wars have mostly been fought throughout history for these things.
Liberalism condemns and pathologizes this natural, healthy sentiment as “prejudice” and “bigotry.” In the place of traditional morality, the liberal cosmopolitan elite substitutes a cult of racial self hatred for Whites, a laundry list of -isms and -phobias which were made up and spread by television in the 20th century, a racial pecking order of victim groups and a license of unlimited individual freedom to engage in acts which used to be proscribed as cultural degeneracy.
The funny thing is, this is conflated with “Christianity” by some people, but that is because Christian churches are going with the flow and reflecting back the values of the liberal mainstream like a mirror. Christianity is no longer our dominant culture in the age of mass media. It is not the basis of the social order. It is a private practice that some people engage in these days. The current state of affairs was only made possible by the total breakdown of Christianity over the past two centuries. The fact that we have a Jewish cultural elite which is mainstreaming homosexuality and dissolving the “gender binary” only shows the weakness of the grip that Christianity has on our culture. This would have been unimaginable only a few centuries ago.
If you travel back in time before liberalism, you won’t find much of any of this in the West. You won’t even find much of it in the Enlightenment either although the language of “prejudice” and “bigotry” dates back to that era and was starting to take root then.