A very interesting article from the Catholic News Agency speculating about the possible connection.
We know that much of modern life has been a search for constancy and authenticity; especially since the cultural ferment of the 1960's.
For Catholics, it is found in the Latin Mass.
An excerpt.
“As debate surrounding the recently published John Jay Report (Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests in the United States, 1950-2010) continues, more and more Catholics are coming to the unavoidable conclusion (contrary to “official findings”) that the overwhelming majority of abuse cases were directly related to homosexuality.
“One may further deduce that the historical spike in such incidents also likely coincided with an increase in the relative number of homosexual men in the priesthood - a proposition too unsavory (not to mention too politically incorrect) for many to acknowledge.
“Those who are willing to look at the situation with eyes opened wide are left to ponder, not just the aforementioned abuse crisis, but also the broader implications of homosexuality in the priesthood.
“I would submit that the impact of homosexual priests has perhaps been brought to bear in a particularly profound way in the liturgical life of the Church, and I would ask the reader to keep in mind as we proceed the warning issued by St. Paul, “Know you not that a little leaven corrupteth the whole lump?” (1 Cor. 5:6)
“Let’s begin by considering that the priest who celebrates Holy Mass does so in persona Christi – in the person of Christ – such that he “does nothing of his own power” when he carries out his liturgical duties; rather, it is the Lord Himself who is present and active in offering the Holy Sacrifice (cf St. John Chrysostom – Homily on the Holy Pentecost).
“Jesus Christ, the Eternal High Priest, is uniquely present and made visible to the faithful in the person of the ordained minister at Holy Mass (cf Sacrosanctum Concilium - 7) – a reality that compels the celebrating priest to personally surrender to Christ after the example of St. John the Baptist who said, “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30).
“The cleric who suffers with homosexuality, however, will necessarily find this liturgical submission-of-self a most challenging proposition.
“Psychiatrist Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a consultant to the Vatican Congregation for Clergy and a leading expert with more than 35 years of clinical experience treating priests and others who suffer with Same Sex Attraction (SSA), said in a recent interview with regard to homosexuality in the priesthood, “Narcissism – a personality disorder in which an insatiable need for admiration often leads to attention-seeking behavior – is prevalent among men who struggle with homosexuality. This conflict results in a need to draw attention to his own personality in the liturgy rather than to surrender his personal identity in favor of Christ.”…
“According to Dr. Fitzgibbons, “The insecurity inherent to SSA could also predispose the homosexual cleric to seek the approval of the laity by treating the liturgy as performance or by otherwise calling attention to himself. Furthermore, the underlying anger and disdain for authority that is also endemic to homosexuality could lead to rebelliousness and a determination to ‘do his own thing’ with the liturgy.”…
“Prior to Vatican II, Holy Mass was commonly celebrated in Latin in the ad oreintem posture in which both priest and people faced east, even if only a “liturgical east.” As such, the personality (and underlying emotional health) of the priest was of little consequence in the celebration, and so “losing himself” in order to make room for Christ in the liturgy was far more easily accomplished by the priest than it is today.
“In the Novus Ordo, however, the priest most commonly offers Holy Mass in the vernacular versus populum (facing the people) wherein his personality (and at times his emotional health) is unavoidably on display. Aware of the impact that his liturgical persona can have on the experience of the assembled faithful, the priest often feels tremendous pressure to draw upon his personal resources to “perform” his duties in a compelling way. Even in the best of circumstances, it is quite natural for the priest to feel moved to so meet the expectant eyes and ears of the faithful such as they are ever cast upon him in the newly configured rite.”
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Monday, August 8, 2011
America’s Catholic Roots
Too many history books proclaim the beginning of modern America happened with the Pilgrim’s arriving on New England’s shores, but the truth is more Catholic and way before the Pilgrims came, as this article from Catholic Culture explains.
An excerpt.
“Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles has called upon Catholics to remember that the roots of America are “Hispanic-Catholic” as well as “Anglo-Protestant.”
“The story of the founding fathers and the truths they held to be self-evident is not the whole story about America,” he told participants at a conference sponsored by the Napa Institute. “The rest of the story starts more than a century before the pilgrims. It starts in the 1520s in Florida and in the 1540s here in California.”
“Long before the Boston Tea Party, Catholic missionaries were celebrating the holy Mass on the soil of this continent,” he continued. “Catholics founded America’s oldest settlement, in St. Augustine, Florida, in 1565. Immigrant missionaries were naming this continent’s rivers and mountains and territories for saints, sacraments and articles of the faith.”
Archbishop Gomez added:
“When we forget our country’s roots in the Hispanic-Catholic mission to the new world, we end up with distorted ideas about our national identity. We end up with the idea that Americans are descended from only white Europeans and that our culture is based only on the individualism, work ethic and rule of law that we inherited from our Anglo-Protestant forebears.
“When that has happened in the past it has led to those episodes in our history that we are least proud of — the mistreatment of Native Americans; slavery; the recurring outbreaks of nativism and anti-Catholicism; the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II; the misadventures of “manifest destiny.”
“There are, of course, far more complicated causes behind these moments in our history. But at the root, I think we can see a common factor — a wrongheaded notion that “real Americans” are of some particular race, class, religion or ethnic background.”
An excerpt.
“Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles has called upon Catholics to remember that the roots of America are “Hispanic-Catholic” as well as “Anglo-Protestant.”
“The story of the founding fathers and the truths they held to be self-evident is not the whole story about America,” he told participants at a conference sponsored by the Napa Institute. “The rest of the story starts more than a century before the pilgrims. It starts in the 1520s in Florida and in the 1540s here in California.”
“Long before the Boston Tea Party, Catholic missionaries were celebrating the holy Mass on the soil of this continent,” he continued. “Catholics founded America’s oldest settlement, in St. Augustine, Florida, in 1565. Immigrant missionaries were naming this continent’s rivers and mountains and territories for saints, sacraments and articles of the faith.”
Archbishop Gomez added:
“When we forget our country’s roots in the Hispanic-Catholic mission to the new world, we end up with distorted ideas about our national identity. We end up with the idea that Americans are descended from only white Europeans and that our culture is based only on the individualism, work ethic and rule of law that we inherited from our Anglo-Protestant forebears.
“When that has happened in the past it has led to those episodes in our history that we are least proud of — the mistreatment of Native Americans; slavery; the recurring outbreaks of nativism and anti-Catholicism; the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II; the misadventures of “manifest destiny.”
“There are, of course, far more complicated causes behind these moments in our history. But at the root, I think we can see a common factor — a wrongheaded notion that “real Americans” are of some particular race, class, religion or ethnic background.”
Friday, August 5, 2011
Rehabilitation Bonds
An interesting public/private partnership concept from Social Finance.
An excerpt.
“The Social Impact Bond (SIB), a public-private partnership pioneered by our UK-based sister organization, is at the heart of our work. SIBs are an innovative form of financing social outcomes that align the interests of government agencies, private investors, and nonprofit service organizations around specific social outcomes. SIBs leverage private investment capital to pay for early intervention programs delivered by nonprofit service providers. The government agencies pay financial returns to the investors if, when and only to the extent that improved social outcomes are achieved. If measured outcomes do not improve, then the investors do not recover their investment. But, if the outcomes are achieved, the government returns the investors’ principal plus interest equivalent to a specified return.
“The first SIB was offered in September 2010, by Social Finance, Ltd. and the British Ministry of Justice, with the goal of reducing prisoner recidivism at Her Majesty’s Prison Peterborough. Of the 40,200 adults on short term sentences in the UK, an estimated 60% will go on to re-offend within a year of release, at a significant cost to the taxpayer and society. Private investors and foundations invested £5 million (more than $8 million) in the bond to fund intensive counseling, employment, housing, and other support services for recently released prisoners. The program is also designed to reintegrate prisoners over the longer term in their communities. If this initiative reduces re-offending by 7.5%, or more, investors will receive payments from the government that reflect a share of the long-term savings that result from fewer incarcerations. To the extent that recidivism is reduced by more than 7.5%, investors have the potential of earning market-rate financial returns. However, if recidivism rates are not reduced by at least 7.5%, the Ministry would have no financial obligations and the investors would lose their investments.”
An excerpt.
“The Social Impact Bond (SIB), a public-private partnership pioneered by our UK-based sister organization, is at the heart of our work. SIBs are an innovative form of financing social outcomes that align the interests of government agencies, private investors, and nonprofit service organizations around specific social outcomes. SIBs leverage private investment capital to pay for early intervention programs delivered by nonprofit service providers. The government agencies pay financial returns to the investors if, when and only to the extent that improved social outcomes are achieved. If measured outcomes do not improve, then the investors do not recover their investment. But, if the outcomes are achieved, the government returns the investors’ principal plus interest equivalent to a specified return.
“The first SIB was offered in September 2010, by Social Finance, Ltd. and the British Ministry of Justice, with the goal of reducing prisoner recidivism at Her Majesty’s Prison Peterborough. Of the 40,200 adults on short term sentences in the UK, an estimated 60% will go on to re-offend within a year of release, at a significant cost to the taxpayer and society. Private investors and foundations invested £5 million (more than $8 million) in the bond to fund intensive counseling, employment, housing, and other support services for recently released prisoners. The program is also designed to reintegrate prisoners over the longer term in their communities. If this initiative reduces re-offending by 7.5%, or more, investors will receive payments from the government that reflect a share of the long-term savings that result from fewer incarcerations. To the extent that recidivism is reduced by more than 7.5%, investors have the potential of earning market-rate financial returns. However, if recidivism rates are not reduced by at least 7.5%, the Ministry would have no financial obligations and the investors would lose their investments.”
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Recidivism Reduction?
The question to be asked here—based on decades of rehabilitation program failure—in this story from Deseret News, is the drop a result of not sending people back to prison that were normally sent back and are now being sent to programs or an actual drop in their criminal behavior.
If you are just shifting people from one correctional program, prison, to another, drug abuse/mental health treatment, but only count as recidivism those going to prison, then what has really been accomplished?
Until the specific drug abuse/mental health programs have been rigorously evaluated and shows a corresponding result, claims of recidivism reduction may be premature.
That being said, we certainly wish Utah well in their efforts to help criminals.
An excerpt.
“SALT LAKE CITY — More than 50 percent of Utah ex-convicts commit crimes within three years of their release and end up back behind bars, but the most recent figures represent a drop compared to data from the late 1990s, according to a report released Wednesday.
“From 1999 to 2002, 65.8 percent of prisoners ended up back behind bars at some point, but the numbers dropped from 2004 to 2007, to 53.7 percent, according to the report by the Pew Center on the States.
“Jean Nielsen, director of Salt Lake County's Department of Human Services, credits Utah's improvement over the years to an increase in substance abuse programs and resources that help the mentally ill.
"Instead of putting the mentally ill in jail, we have teams of social workers and psychiatrists that help them," Nielsen said. "With education, training, substance abuse programs, various treatment, housing options, and counseling, we want to ensure they have a smooth transition back into society and don't go back to jail."
“Utah's recidivism rate remains above the national average of 43 percent. The Pew Center study showed only marginal improvement in the nation's recidivism rate even as spending on corrections departments increased to about $52 billion annually from around $30 billion a decade ago.
"Despite an enormous escalation in spending, the overall recidivism rates have not budged," said Adam Gelb of the center's Public Safety Performance Project. "A lot of the funding is being put into the wrong places. We know much more than 30 years ago and there are other options such as research-based strategies for non-violent offenders that are more effective."
“About 43 percent of prisoners in the U.S. who were released in 2004 were sent back to prison by 2007, either for a new crime or for violating the conditions of their release, the study found. That number was down from 45 percent during a similar period beginning in 1999.
“One of Utah's biggest challenges, according to Steve Gehrke, a spokesman for the Utah Department of Corrections, is funding for new programs that would lower the recidivism rates.
“Nielsen said those include substance abuse treatments, which have about a five-month waiting list.
"Our biggest cry is for more substance abuse treatment resources," Nielsen said. "Some of these people are recommended for treatment, but we just don't have the resources to support their needs, so they end up back in jail."
If you are just shifting people from one correctional program, prison, to another, drug abuse/mental health treatment, but only count as recidivism those going to prison, then what has really been accomplished?
Until the specific drug abuse/mental health programs have been rigorously evaluated and shows a corresponding result, claims of recidivism reduction may be premature.
That being said, we certainly wish Utah well in their efforts to help criminals.
An excerpt.
“SALT LAKE CITY — More than 50 percent of Utah ex-convicts commit crimes within three years of their release and end up back behind bars, but the most recent figures represent a drop compared to data from the late 1990s, according to a report released Wednesday.
“From 1999 to 2002, 65.8 percent of prisoners ended up back behind bars at some point, but the numbers dropped from 2004 to 2007, to 53.7 percent, according to the report by the Pew Center on the States.
“Jean Nielsen, director of Salt Lake County's Department of Human Services, credits Utah's improvement over the years to an increase in substance abuse programs and resources that help the mentally ill.
"Instead of putting the mentally ill in jail, we have teams of social workers and psychiatrists that help them," Nielsen said. "With education, training, substance abuse programs, various treatment, housing options, and counseling, we want to ensure they have a smooth transition back into society and don't go back to jail."
“Utah's recidivism rate remains above the national average of 43 percent. The Pew Center study showed only marginal improvement in the nation's recidivism rate even as spending on corrections departments increased to about $52 billion annually from around $30 billion a decade ago.
"Despite an enormous escalation in spending, the overall recidivism rates have not budged," said Adam Gelb of the center's Public Safety Performance Project. "A lot of the funding is being put into the wrong places. We know much more than 30 years ago and there are other options such as research-based strategies for non-violent offenders that are more effective."
“About 43 percent of prisoners in the U.S. who were released in 2004 were sent back to prison by 2007, either for a new crime or for violating the conditions of their release, the study found. That number was down from 45 percent during a similar period beginning in 1999.
“One of Utah's biggest challenges, according to Steve Gehrke, a spokesman for the Utah Department of Corrections, is funding for new programs that would lower the recidivism rates.
“Nielsen said those include substance abuse treatments, which have about a five-month waiting list.
"Our biggest cry is for more substance abuse treatment resources," Nielsen said. "Some of these people are recommended for treatment, but we just don't have the resources to support their needs, so they end up back in jail."
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Cell Phones in Prison
One of the reasons given by the capital punishment abolitionist movement—and even noted in the Catechism—is that current penal technology keeps prisoners from threatening society so effectively, that capital punishment is no longer needed to protect the innocent from the aggressor.
The Catechism says:
“2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
“If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
“Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."
This story from the Cleveland Plain Dealer is but another in a long line of articles noting the complete opposite.
An excerpt.
“Dimorio McDowell transformed his prison cell into a business office with nothing but a mobile phone and a lot of chutzpa.
“From 7 a.m. until midnight, seven days a week, McDowell worked tirelessly building a Cleveland criminal enterprise that did up to $1 million worth of work.
“Want a jumbo flat-screen, but don't have $2,000?
“McDowell and his unsavory team of Cleveland shoppers could fetch a 55-inch TV and anything else you wanted -- stainless steel refrigerator, hardwood flooring, laptop computer -- for half the store price.
“Just give them a few days. McDowell was serving time for credit card fraud at Fort Dix federal prison in New Jersey. But one of his associates would meet you at a Cleveland gas station with the loot.
“Incarceration in the largest U.S. prison was doing nothing to slow down McDowell's life of crime. Then, in October 2009, McDowell accidentally tripped across the path of a small-town Summit County cop.”
The Catechism says:
“2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
“If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
“Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."
This story from the Cleveland Plain Dealer is but another in a long line of articles noting the complete opposite.
An excerpt.
“Dimorio McDowell transformed his prison cell into a business office with nothing but a mobile phone and a lot of chutzpa.
“From 7 a.m. until midnight, seven days a week, McDowell worked tirelessly building a Cleveland criminal enterprise that did up to $1 million worth of work.
“Want a jumbo flat-screen, but don't have $2,000?
“McDowell and his unsavory team of Cleveland shoppers could fetch a 55-inch TV and anything else you wanted -- stainless steel refrigerator, hardwood flooring, laptop computer -- for half the store price.
“Just give them a few days. McDowell was serving time for credit card fraud at Fort Dix federal prison in New Jersey. But one of his associates would meet you at a Cleveland gas station with the loot.
“Incarceration in the largest U.S. prison was doing nothing to slow down McDowell's life of crime. Then, in October 2009, McDowell accidentally tripped across the path of a small-town Summit County cop.”
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Priestly Power
The Latin Mass holds to the ancient practice of the administration of the Holy Eucharist, and, in the Latin Mass, only the priest can accomplish this, as taught in the Catechism of the Council of Trent, (1976) McHugh, J. A. & Callan, C. J. (Translators) first published in 1566 by Pope St. Pius V.
An excerpt.
“Only Priests Have Power to Consecrate and Administer the Eucharist
“It must be taught, then, that to priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer to the faithful, the Holy Eucharist. That this has been the unvarying practice of the Church, that the faithful should receive the Sacrament from the priests, and that the officiating priests should communicate themselves, has been explained by the holy Council of Trent, which has also shown that this practice, as having proceeded from Apostolic tradition, is to be religiously retained, particularly as Christ the Lord has left us an illustrious example thereof, having consecrated His own most sacred Body, and given it to the Apostles with His own hands.” (p. 270)
A very nice reflection about a current priestly ordination from The Catholic Thing.
An excerpt.
“The sacraments,” said Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, “are a kind of contact with God himself. They show that this faith is not a purely spiritual thing, but one that involves community and creates community.” Of the seven sacraments, priestly ordination – and the subsequent first Mass – involves and creates community like no other. Faithful from far and wide across a diocese, some of whom never even having met the ordinandi, come together as contact with God is made: by God’s power individual men are made priests of Jesus Christ forever according to the order of Melchizedek.
“I experienced this moving spiritual dynamic recently when four men in my own diocese celebrated their “marriage” to their bride, the Church. Priestly ordination is the ultimate challenge to secularism’s myopic worldliness: the complete gift of self to an invisible reality that lies beyond the verification of empirical science. The hundreds of faithful who gather at the ordination liturgy and the first Mass come to support the new priests’ commitment to the Transcendent. In the celebration of this sacrament we see firsthand that the Church – contrary to media reports, condemnations by pundits, and even her own self-inflicted wounds – is still alive and committed to the Lord with authentic faith, hope, and love.
“The sheer number of Catholics who pack cathedrals and churches for ordination and first Mass proves that the priesthood is still esteemed, even after a decade of public scrutiny and controversy. The evident joy and approbation that gleam from the faces of the faithful as they lean over for closer views is matched by the smiles on the faces of the new priests, who are supported by dozens of concelebrating priests and fellow seminarians. This combined witness presents the priesthood as a great gift, one not given for the individual but for the good and salvation of all.
“The nature and mission of the priesthood is expressed in the ordination rite and prayers, but it is the following day, when the novus ordinatus offers his first Mass, that the priesthood appears as a gift to the whole Church. This year the first Mass I attended fell on Corpus Christi Sunday, the annual celebration of Christ’s real and continued presence with us in the Eucharist. Offering the Eucharistic sacrifice, according to the Second Vatican Council, is the “principal function” of priests because by it “the work of our redemption is continually carried out.” The Eucharist is the summit and source of the priest’s mission of preaching the Gospel because it brings about primary contact with Christ, the goal of all preaching.”
An excerpt.
“Only Priests Have Power to Consecrate and Administer the Eucharist
“It must be taught, then, that to priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer to the faithful, the Holy Eucharist. That this has been the unvarying practice of the Church, that the faithful should receive the Sacrament from the priests, and that the officiating priests should communicate themselves, has been explained by the holy Council of Trent, which has also shown that this practice, as having proceeded from Apostolic tradition, is to be religiously retained, particularly as Christ the Lord has left us an illustrious example thereof, having consecrated His own most sacred Body, and given it to the Apostles with His own hands.” (p. 270)
A very nice reflection about a current priestly ordination from The Catholic Thing.
An excerpt.
“The sacraments,” said Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, “are a kind of contact with God himself. They show that this faith is not a purely spiritual thing, but one that involves community and creates community.” Of the seven sacraments, priestly ordination – and the subsequent first Mass – involves and creates community like no other. Faithful from far and wide across a diocese, some of whom never even having met the ordinandi, come together as contact with God is made: by God’s power individual men are made priests of Jesus Christ forever according to the order of Melchizedek.
“I experienced this moving spiritual dynamic recently when four men in my own diocese celebrated their “marriage” to their bride, the Church. Priestly ordination is the ultimate challenge to secularism’s myopic worldliness: the complete gift of self to an invisible reality that lies beyond the verification of empirical science. The hundreds of faithful who gather at the ordination liturgy and the first Mass come to support the new priests’ commitment to the Transcendent. In the celebration of this sacrament we see firsthand that the Church – contrary to media reports, condemnations by pundits, and even her own self-inflicted wounds – is still alive and committed to the Lord with authentic faith, hope, and love.
“The sheer number of Catholics who pack cathedrals and churches for ordination and first Mass proves that the priesthood is still esteemed, even after a decade of public scrutiny and controversy. The evident joy and approbation that gleam from the faces of the faithful as they lean over for closer views is matched by the smiles on the faces of the new priests, who are supported by dozens of concelebrating priests and fellow seminarians. This combined witness presents the priesthood as a great gift, one not given for the individual but for the good and salvation of all.
“The nature and mission of the priesthood is expressed in the ordination rite and prayers, but it is the following day, when the novus ordinatus offers his first Mass, that the priesthood appears as a gift to the whole Church. This year the first Mass I attended fell on Corpus Christi Sunday, the annual celebration of Christ’s real and continued presence with us in the Eucharist. Offering the Eucharistic sacrifice, according to the Second Vatican Council, is the “principal function” of priests because by it “the work of our redemption is continually carried out.” The Eucharist is the summit and source of the priest’s mission of preaching the Gospel because it brings about primary contact with Christ, the goal of all preaching.”
Monday, August 1, 2011
Human Behavior is a Mystery
A good article from the Wall Street Journal about the futility of the scientific pursuit of knowing why humans act the way they do.
An excerpt.
“Theodore Dalrymple worked as a prison doctor and psychiatrist in Britain for 15 years. He's known serial killers, petty thieves and everything in between. As he puts it, with a mischievous grin, "I've probably spent more time in prison than the average murderer."
“It's a beautiful summer day in the south of France, and Dr. Dalrymple is holding forth on what we can—and can't—know about the mind of a mass murderer like the Oslo shooter, Anders Behring Breivik. "I don't think we'll ever understand" what makes a person capable of this kind of premeditated murder, Dr. Dalrymple tells me over lunch. What's more, he says, "we don't even know what it is to understand. At what point do you say, 'Aha! Now I understand!'" he asks.
“Dr. Dalrymple is the pen name of Anthony Daniels, author of more than a dozen books of scathing social commentary on everything from crime to travel to, most recently, what he calls "the toxic cult of sentimentality" in modern society. In his writing and in conversation, he returns frequently to the criminals he's known and treated.
“Your garden-variety convicts, he contends, are much simpler subjects than a man like Breivik. To ask them why they steal, he says, "is like asking you why you have lunch." They want something, so they take it. "And since in Britain," he adds with a smirk, "the state does very little to discourage [thieves]," or to incarcerate them when they are caught, "the question is not why there are so many burglars, but why there are so few."
“A Breivik is a deeper mystery. Of him, "you can say, 'This man is highly narcissistic, paranoid and grandiose,'" and this may lead you to seek reasons for that in his past—"his father disappeared at the age of 15 and so on and so forth." But uncovering such facts doesn't solve the mystery because "whatever you find, you would also find among hundreds or thousands or even millions of people who didn't do what he did." There is, he says, "always a gap between what is to be explained and your alleged explanation. So there's always a mystery, and I think that's going to remain."
“Even so, we find irresistible the urge to understand an atrocity like Breivik's, even as we are repulsed by it. When asked whether we hope thereby to understand something about ourselves, the former prison doctor offers an arch denial: "Well, he doesn't tell me much about me." And then, with a morbid chuckle and wary look—"I can't say for you," before adding: "I suppose the only thing one can say is that he tells us about the range of human possibility. But we knew that already."
“The human impulse to explain the inexplicably horrific is revealing, according to Dr. Dalrymple, in two respects—one personal, one political. First, it says something about us that we feel compelled to explain evil in a way that we don't feel about people's good actions. The discrepancy arises, he says, "because [Jean-Jacques] Rousseau has triumphed," by which he means that "we believe ourselves to be good, and that evil, or bad, is the deviation from what is natural."
“For most of human history, the prevailing view was different. Our intrinsic nature was something to be overcome, restrained and civilized. But Rousseau's view, famously, was that society corrupted man's pristine nature. This is not only wrong, Dr. Dalrymple argues, but it has had profound and baleful effects on society and our attitude toward crime and punishment. For one thing, it has alienated us from responsibility for our own actions. For another, it has reduced our willingness to hold others responsible for theirs.”
An excerpt.
“Theodore Dalrymple worked as a prison doctor and psychiatrist in Britain for 15 years. He's known serial killers, petty thieves and everything in between. As he puts it, with a mischievous grin, "I've probably spent more time in prison than the average murderer."
“It's a beautiful summer day in the south of France, and Dr. Dalrymple is holding forth on what we can—and can't—know about the mind of a mass murderer like the Oslo shooter, Anders Behring Breivik. "I don't think we'll ever understand" what makes a person capable of this kind of premeditated murder, Dr. Dalrymple tells me over lunch. What's more, he says, "we don't even know what it is to understand. At what point do you say, 'Aha! Now I understand!'" he asks.
“Dr. Dalrymple is the pen name of Anthony Daniels, author of more than a dozen books of scathing social commentary on everything from crime to travel to, most recently, what he calls "the toxic cult of sentimentality" in modern society. In his writing and in conversation, he returns frequently to the criminals he's known and treated.
“Your garden-variety convicts, he contends, are much simpler subjects than a man like Breivik. To ask them why they steal, he says, "is like asking you why you have lunch." They want something, so they take it. "And since in Britain," he adds with a smirk, "the state does very little to discourage [thieves]," or to incarcerate them when they are caught, "the question is not why there are so many burglars, but why there are so few."
“A Breivik is a deeper mystery. Of him, "you can say, 'This man is highly narcissistic, paranoid and grandiose,'" and this may lead you to seek reasons for that in his past—"his father disappeared at the age of 15 and so on and so forth." But uncovering such facts doesn't solve the mystery because "whatever you find, you would also find among hundreds or thousands or even millions of people who didn't do what he did." There is, he says, "always a gap between what is to be explained and your alleged explanation. So there's always a mystery, and I think that's going to remain."
“Even so, we find irresistible the urge to understand an atrocity like Breivik's, even as we are repulsed by it. When asked whether we hope thereby to understand something about ourselves, the former prison doctor offers an arch denial: "Well, he doesn't tell me much about me." And then, with a morbid chuckle and wary look—"I can't say for you," before adding: "I suppose the only thing one can say is that he tells us about the range of human possibility. But we knew that already."
“The human impulse to explain the inexplicably horrific is revealing, according to Dr. Dalrymple, in two respects—one personal, one political. First, it says something about us that we feel compelled to explain evil in a way that we don't feel about people's good actions. The discrepancy arises, he says, "because [Jean-Jacques] Rousseau has triumphed," by which he means that "we believe ourselves to be good, and that evil, or bad, is the deviation from what is natural."
“For most of human history, the prevailing view was different. Our intrinsic nature was something to be overcome, restrained and civilized. But Rousseau's view, famously, was that society corrupted man's pristine nature. This is not only wrong, Dr. Dalrymple argues, but it has had profound and baleful effects on society and our attitude toward crime and punishment. For one thing, it has alienated us from responsibility for our own actions. For another, it has reduced our willingness to hold others responsible for theirs.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
