They found Lucretia sitting in her chamber, melancholy and dejected: on the arrival of her friends, she burst into tears, and on her husband’s asking, “Is all well?” “Far from it,” said she, “for how can it be well with a woman who has lost her chastity? Collatinus, the impression of another man is in your bed; yet my person only has been violated, my mind is guiltless, as my death will testify. But give me your right hands and pledge your honour, that the adulterer shall not escape unpunished. He is Sextus Tarquinius, who, under the appearance of a guest, disguising an enemy, obtained here, last night, by armed violence, a triumph deadly to me, and to himself also, if ye be men.” They all pledged their honour, one after another, and endeavoured to comfort her distracted mind, acquitting her of blame, as under the compulsion of force, and charging it on the violent perpetrator of the crime, told her, that “the mind alone was capable of sinning, not the body, and that where there was no such intention, there could be no guilt.” “It is your concern,” said she, “to consider what is due to him; as to me, though I acquit myself of the guilt, I cannot dispense with the penalty, nor shall any woman ever plead the example of Lucretia, for surviving her chastity.” Thus saying, she plunged into her heart a knife, which she had concealed under her garment, and falling forward on the wound, dropped lifeless. The husband and father shrieked aloud.
What Lucretia knew is that there is no self hovering aloof from the body; we are our bodies, and to violate the body is to violate the person, mental guilt or not. Such is the unique horror of rape.
Sometimes lack of consent is unambiguous, sometimes less so. One sometimes wonders if canon lawyers think it is even possible to consent to marriage, if there are any marriages they would recognize as annulment-proof. One wonders if universities think it is possible for coeds to consent to sex, if any such encounters cannot be declared rape retroactively. While in both cases I question their good faith, the ambiguities they deal with are real. To take another case, a woman who surrenders her body to keep or advance her career is not entirely without guilt, but she is still an object of pity because those who surrender their bodies surrender their selves and experience it in a profound sense of self-violation.
Women are not the only ones to suffer coercion of this sort.
No doubt some of the priests, consecrated to the worship of Jesus Christ, who bowed in worship before the idol of the demon Pachamama thought they were just showing respect for indigenous cultures (and saving their jobs, and avoiding an avalanche of accusations of “intolerance”). What reasons we give ourselves in the privacy of the mind are utterly insubstantial. Their bodies did homage, and so they did homage. What they might have been thinking of at the time can easily be forgotten without a trace as they accustom themselves to the service of their new master.
The police who kneel down in submission to black communists are perhaps only trying to improve community relations (and save their jobs, and protect their families from mob violence). It doesn’t matter. They are their bodies, and by their bodies their allegiance has been transferred from the United States to the communist revolution. They are broken; they may think that they have withheld their mind, but that is to withhold nothing at all. Someday, when they’re busying themselves shipping the last dissidents to the gulags, they will sincerely think that their beliefs have always been those of the mob, any prior mental reservations forgotten without a trace.
None of them resisted like Lucretia, because they didn’t really appreciate what was at stake in compelling a people’s men to pay homage to foreign idols. The spirit of the West has been broken.
Saint Augustine used to be against coercion applied to the Donatist heretics, until he saw how well it worked. Why not force people to adopt your beliefs? This is not a practical point–not just a matter of “it’ll work, so let’s do it”. The point is that because coercion works, because it achieves not only external but internal compliance, this means that people’s minds are not made up by the free exercise of reason anyway. In that case, why in the world should we respect the peoples’ current beliefs, which are really only their most recent prior conditioning? Coercion works, delivers not only the body but eventually the soul as well. If coercion didn’t work, people wouldn’t have so consistently used it.
Some Republicans are hoping that the current mayhem and anti-racist bullying will work in President Trump’s favor in November. Shouldn’t it repel anyone not already on board with the revolution? But in fact men are ruled by social reasoning; truth is whatever it is highest status to publicly espouse. And so Westerners submit to the new anti-police, anti-white orthodoxy, at first externally out of fear, but soon enough from the heart.