Eroticism is a fundamental feature of contemporary Western civilization. This is not clearly recognized by the majority and is thoroughly rejected by elite opinion.1 To attempt a serious discussion of the matter in the media or in academia would immediately eliminate one from serious consideration. So, today, this truth can only be approached in contexts where it is recognized, which is largely reduced to traditionally religious environments.
The reaction to the opening ceremonies at the Paris Olympic Games provides a somewhat rare opportunity to see how the theme of eroticism does and does not play out in the current cultural context.
Eroticism and culture
First, however, some background is necessary in order to situate eroticism’s place in our culture.
To my mind, no one has explained the role of eroticism in the contemporary high-tech, materialist and consumerist culture better than the late Italian philosopher, Augusto Del Noce, so a brief summary of his thoughts on the subject will help here. For Del Noce, it was in “the decomposition of Marxism” that we find the stage for the culture that developed in the West in light of the deterioration of the Soviet Union.2
Two trends worked simultaneously. On the one hand, the proletarian revolution largely faded out as a real political goal, with working classes everywhere opting for other possibilities. On the other hand, in a move that originally escaped many in the West, the entire notion of freedom was completely undermined by the relativism proclaimed by Marxism. Marxism did not fail so much as break up into two parts, one mostly a failure but the second an astonishing success. For Marxism gave the West the precise kind of relativism it came to adopt, that is, the belief that political and social ideas were mere byproducts of material (specifically economic) conditions; this is what made up Marx’s superstructure of ideas.
So, for example, bourgeois ideals were really just covers for the real interests, which were the interests of the property-owning class. The original idea was expanded over time to include the more expansive claim that ideas were the byproducts of a broader set of sociological and historical conditions. The further categories of race and gender were introduced in later years. Of course, all these factors were changing, which led to an interpretation of reality as a whole, as a constant state of flux mirrored by a dizzying “development” of corresponding ideas. This led us in the long run to where we are today, with the social sciences and history largely overrun by theories which reduce social reality to one or more members of what I call “the triumvirate”: class, race and gender. Today, you can a doctorate in the social sciences without ever questioning that society is essentially reducible to the current state of relations in these three areas.
What happened to the culture in which this massive intellectual shift took place? In the relativist onslaught, class, race and gender replaced the true, the good, and the beautiful.
Del Noce saw three dominant trends emerging: (1) secularization, which corresponded to the loss of belief in any transcendent truth, which clearly cannot exist in this universe of ever-changing flux. It is important to remember that this change was not simply a rejection of revealed religion, but just as importantly it was a rejection of that entire philosophical tradition going back to Plato and ancient Greece, crystallized in the Prologue to John’s Gospel: “In the beginning was the Word.” This belief in an ultimate transcendent source of truth issued in the entire moral tradition of the natural law, which rests on a permanent, transcendent reality. Natural law, too, was jettisoned by the relativist thrust as an alleged schema of class, race, and gender domination; (2) positivism. In the absence of philosophical truth or any philosophy of nature, the only claim to objectivity came to be the empirical, the hard sciences and mathematics. Only science could withstand the relativist battering ram.
(3) Finally, there was eroticism. This was among Del Noce’s most distinctive moves intellectually. Many Christians, of course, noted and lamented the moral decline occasioned by the sexual revolution, but among philosophers Del Noce was perhaps unrivalled in his lifting up eroticism to be a pillar of the civilization as a whole.3 Even many Christians were influenced by the influences of rationalism and modernity here, particularly in the latter’s’ rejection of original sin and the belief in a fundamental flaw in human nature. Christianity had argued that sexuality was a particularly weak link here, and so subject to special vigilance. The moderns would miss this altogether and eventually scoff at the entire moral edifice Christianity had articulated as “puritanism’ and “repression,” a manifestation of psychopathology.
The worldviews were polar opposites. It was easy for the moderns to accept a life of sin in the name of the “new normalcy” created by the sexual revolution. Empirically, they were correct as behaviors formerly defined as serious sins indeed became the social norm, even expected. Yet, the old moralists were right all along. Sexuality really is the weakest link in human nature, and when the vigilance collapsed so did the entire moral edifice. So eroticism, the complete reversal of the Sixth Commandment, progressively became a pillar of the new Western culture, aligning perfectly with secularization and positivism. And today we see the inevitable refrains that traditional morality is no more than a series of non-rational taboos entirely unsupported by science.
The Paris Olympics opening ceremony
This is the context within which we can best see that what was going on at the Paris Olympics opening ceremony, which was in complete continuity with the eroticism that is already at the heart of Western culture. Most readers are already painfully aware of the details, so I will simply summarize a few points recognized even by the mainstream media. There was a prerecorded element featuring an “androgynous poly throuple” preparing to engage in acts of “casual polyamory,”4 which manifest a ”liberating queer polycule.”5 Then there was the widely discussed drag queen portrayal of a hypersexualized The Last Supper, amidst other novelties such as a bearded woman dancing provocatively and a naked smurf with an erection, all with child dancers nearby.
I guess we can all ask when such a display might have landed the practitioners in Western jails. But the larger point is that all of this simply proceeds from philosophical premises already in place in the West: the old order of morality is repressive, particularly to “sexual minorities” who must now be liberated. All the old rules about sexuality are without foundation, even clear distinctions between male and female. Moreover, there is no reason to exclude children from seeing any of this.
The way the media “covered” the ensuing controversy merits a separate article, so I will be brief here. When people complained, the media immediately turned to those responsible and asked for an explanation. Much of what was said was outright lies. For example, although Thomas Jolly denied there was any attempt to suggest The Last Supper, some of the actors admitted the obvious truth that it was indeed the intended idea. We had the further absurdity that the intended portrayal of the Greek God Dionysius was an attempt to show the folly of violence, unaccompanied by any explanation of how such an interpretation might arise in the mind of a rational person.
And of course there was the standard appeal to an undefined “diversity.” How the Greek God Dionysius, the god of frenzy and excess, would be linked in the average mind to civil peace in any context was left unexplained. The biggest takeaway from all of this is that it is now clear that the secular media accept with great seriousness the hypocritical claims of the art world that there really is no such thing as an objective interpretation of a work of art. Of course, this is belied by the obvious fact that the organizers had a very clear message to communicate, which they did. But this claim of relativist interpretation is always pulled out of the hat as the preferred, though dishonest, way of dealing with criticism.
In the eyes of the media, we were left with two competing interpretations of the parade, without a clear way to resolve the differences, yet the two interpretations were not really equal. If we look further, we see that there is the reading of the educated and sophisticated contemporary art world, which contends that the message is world peace and diversity. Then there are the right-wing, clearly artistically clueless band of angry and out-of-touch Christians who read what they want into things as part of their broader narrative of hate, reaction and frustration at the progress of enlightened France. This is what is left of what used to be called a fair and unbiased mass media.
Moving away from the media discussion back to reality, we can see that what the parade was doing was best summarized by Del Noce in his discussion of eroticism, because here we get to the true intent of the people who organized these vignettes.6
The attack on creation and nature
At the deepest level, they intend to attack creation itself, the entire notion that the universe indeed was created and that something we used to call nature was the result. These people understand, like their surrealist forebears, that the erotic revolution they propose still faces obstacles in popular culture and will not succeed so long as people maintain their beliefs in creation and nature.7 If we think of Satan as “the ape of God,” then eroticism is, in the final analysis, nothing less than the attempt to undo the Book of Genesis. There is no God, no creation, and no nature. Eroticism is all about “de-creation,” the undoing of the order God intended through the creation of human sexuality. The portrayal of man in the parade is not man made in the image and likeness of God. These people honor no God beyond their own desires.
Yet, as Del Noce says, if we do not believe in creation and do not believe in the order of nature, what can we do with the reality of nature that is in front of us and, frankly, inescapable? All that is left is to rebel against it, to attempt to dissolve it, an ultimately impossible and frustrating attempt covered over by the search to create the kind of frenzied “fusion” of bodies that eroticism proposes. But frenzied sex provides no basis for human happiness or community, as the practitioners always discover.
We should note here the intended separation of sex from both marriage and procreation. In a sense, the choice of Dionysius, the god of frenzy, was a good choice, because it underlines the proposal for man to find relief from his loneliness through temporary frenzy. The entire person is indeed engaged in an imitation of ecstasy for a moment. This is why, as Del Noce says, that the orgy has always been a “religious” exercise. Black masses have long been accompanied by nakedness and eroticism for a reason. Del Noce reminds us ominously that throughout history the decay of civilization has been accompanied by orgiastic cults. Which is why we must take a firmer stand when the media, the artistic and intellectual classes try to tell us that we have this all wrong, that eroticism is just some innocent fun designed to liberate us from our puritanical hangups, repressions and old patriarchal ideas about sex.
Del Noce quotes Georges Bataille in summary:
The transition from the normal state to that of erotic desire presupposes a partial dissolution of the person as he exists. . . Paving the way for a fusion where both are mingled. . . The whole business of eroticism is to destroy the self-contained character of the participators, as they are in their normal lives. Stripping naked is the decisive action. Nakedness offers a contrast to self-possession. . . It is a state of communication revealing a quest for a possible continuance of being beyond the confines of the self. Bodies open up to a state of continuity through secret channels that give us a feeling of obscenity. Obscenity is our name for the uneasiness which upsets the physical state associated with self-possession, with the possession of recognized and stable individuality.8
Bataille was no theologian, not even a Christian, but Del Noce credits him for capturing some important truths about eroticism here. Del Noce writes, by way of commentary:
If we think about the idea of the devil as simia Dei, it seems that these passages, which define perfectly the essence of eroticism, provide [an] interpretive key for the description of creation and of original sin presented in the first few chapters of the book of Genesis. Indeed, eroticism is the precise opposite: its principle is, so to speak, de-creation, as opposed to creation. Having denied every trace of the divine image within human individuality, the process moves toward dissolution, fusion with totality through the negation of individuality.”9
It still may seem to some that we have here too much of an abstract discussion, with all of this emphasis on the theology of creation, human nature, and self-possession vs. fragmentation. But it is not. At the practical level, the goal of the Paris organizers is the same as that of the older surrealists and earlier proponents of the sexual revolution like Wilhelm Reich: the destruction of the family. Del Noce leaves no ambiguity on the point:
At the cost of repeating myself, I should insist on some truths that have been almost entirely forgotten. The idea of indissoluble monogamous marriage and other ideas related to it (modesty, purity continence) are linked to the idea of tradition, which in turn presupposes. . . the idea of an objective order of unchangeable and permanent truths (the Platonic True in itself and Good in itself).10
What is the practical core of this tradition other than the family? It is the family that makes tradition throughout history by passing on tradition from one generation to the next. Here we can see that our enemies are evil—but they are not stupid. They have long understood better than many Christians that the family is the battlefield where all of this is to be fought out. They know that their revolution will be limited if the traditional family stays intact. They know that the revolution they seek cannot co-exist with Christian morality. They have to attack and undermine the family in order to undermine tradition effectively. The family passes on traditional religion, moral codes, and a set of beliefs the opposite of eroticism.
This is the context in which we need to view what the French organizers are truly up to. They understand the family as the repressive social institution, and that it is inseparable from tradition. In their view, as Del Noce puts it, “Thus, the abolition of every meta-empirical order of truth requires that the family be dissolved.”11
Finally, it is interesting to note that a Frenchman who truly deserves to be recalled got bypassed in the kerfuffle: the Marquis de Sade.12 It was truly De Sade’s night! He would have been proud. De Sade is the father of at least modern eroticism, the particular movement designed to get to the root of things, delink sex from marriage and procreation, with a true aversion to childbirth. He must love France’s current statistics on natality. In De Sade’s universe, there is no God and no creation. Man has an absolute creative power but with no creation to work with, all he can do with his creativity is to attempt to destroy creation, which he and his current followers indeed set out to do. This always included violence for De Sade, but his contemporary followers seem to miss this central point.
In the final analysis, an attack on God, creation, and nature is what was going on at the Olympic’s opening ceremony, with the intent to further undermine the family and its foundations in the faith of Christians.
Endnotes:
1 For a more thorough treatment of the role of eroticism in Western culture in the postwar world, see Augusto Del Noce, The Crisis of Modernity (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press), 157-186. When I use the term “elite opinion,” I mean the opinion that prevails, in general, in the mass media and entertainment worlds, academia, and the government bureaucracy.
2 Ibid, 82-84.
3 For a brief summary, see Augusto Del Noce, The Crisis of Modernity, 87-92.
4 “Viewers stunned by threesome in Olympics opening ceremony” (July 27, 2024).
5 “Paris Olympics opening ceremony quick hits — Lady Gaga, heavy metal beheadings, Céline Dion, and a queer polycule” (July 26, 2024).
6 The following draws closely on Augusto Del Noce, The Crisis of Modernity, 184-85.
7 Del Noce gives a fair amount of emphasis to the surrealists, unique among political theorists. This discussion of the surrealists is from Del Noce, The Crisis of Modernity, 170-177, 184. Del Noce underlines the break of the surrealists from Marxism in 1947 as of immense significance. They broke away because they failed to see in the Marxists the necessary element of the rejection of Christian morality as the precursor of revolution. For them, as for Wilhelm Reich, it was absolutely necessary to attack Christianity at its cultural roots, and it was naïve of the Marxists to think they could succeed with Christian beliefs concerning sexuality, marriage, and the family intact. Of further note was that the document announcing the break was published on the occasion of the International Surrealist exhibit in Paris in 1947 (emphasis mine). It is interesting to note the historical continuity in France here.
8 Georges Bataille, quoted in Augusto Del Noce, The Crisis of Modernity, 184.
10 Augusto Del Noce, The Crisis of Modernity, 161.
11 Ibid. Emphasis mine.
12 Del Noce discusses DeSade’s role at numerous points. See The Crisis of Modernity, 88, 93, 146, 184, 235.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
About the Olympics blasphemy on the Seine, Rourke identifies (identity!) eroticism and destruction of the family as “the context in which we need to view what the French organizers are truly up to.”
Two points:
FIRST, this nihilistic agenda can even be expressed in an intergenerational way. Consider Spain in the late 1930s, and the besieged city of Huesca:
“And since the forces of progress, democracy, and enlightenment could not take Huesca, they vented their hatred on the dead. The vulgarities, the obscenities, the corpses torn out of their graves and assembled in obscene positions gave one a never to be forgotten impression of the fine spirit which received such enthusiastic support from the American and British left. I saw these horrors just a few days after the liberation of that cemetery [….] the Red counterrising […] had indeed been an orgy of rape, sadism, torture, and unspeakable obscenities perpetrated by our dear friend, the Common Man, and which has its analogies wherever leftism lifted its ugly head [Paris today!]” (Eric von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, “Leftism: From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Marcuse,” 1974, pp. 266-67).
SECOND, connecting the dots—in reverse order: now Paris, but earlier “gender theory, and LGBTQ activism with “gay marriage,” and the out-of-the closet homosexual lifestyle, and abortion—and initially contraception as the amputation of sex from marriage and procreation. About which, in 1948 the defeated minority from Anglican accommodation (the 1930 Lambeth Conference) still turned the lights on. And, anticipated Rourke’s fuller analysis:
“It is, to say the least, suspicious that the age in which contraception has won its way is not one which has been conspicuously successful in managing its sexual life. Is it possible that, by claiming the right to manipulate his physical processes in this manner, man may, without knowing it, be stepping over the boundary between the world of Christian marriage and what one might call the world of Aphrodite, THE WORLD OF STERILE EROTICISM?” (Cited in Wright, “Reflections on the Third Anniversary of a Controverted Encyclical,” St. Louis: Central Bureau Press, 1971, CAPS added).
One of the best articles yet on CWR with regard to our culture. Our atheistic culture “creates” in the only way left open to it – by de-creating. It’s odd and paradoxical yet this is exactly what they are attempting to do – destroy what God has created. Destroy the family; destroy sexual differences between males and females; destroy human life itself; prevent human reproduction because it points to God; to confuse, obfuscate, prevaricate, and change the meaning of words spoken.
The only way out of this morass is to speak the truth: to everyone, everywhere, and on all occasions no matter the consequences.
None of this was surprising. I do not look at Olympic ceremonies, etc. Waste of time they are. But I have for long accepted that the old saying in Spain that “God has more enemies in Madrid than anywhere else” is now outdated. Hollywood, Paris and London have now taken over. Paris is bad, Hollywood is even worse. We did not need an article to tell us that.
Sex is the fulcrum of decision for (or against) the Divine dominion over the human.
August 13, 1944, Jesus spoke rhetorically to Maria Valtorta about the not yet repented seductress Mary Magdalene: “You are filthy because you are repeating Eve’s sin and are offering your fruit to many Adams, by tempting them and taking them away from their Duty. You are a minister of Satan.”
The rationalizing of sexual anarchy is always quaint, but there is only one tyranny at work in the flesh, that all contend with. Anyone can become addicted to his own narcotic neosexual process. The enemy is the spirit of lust, which has many perverse faces. Lust is misdirected sexual excitement which pulls one far away from the Divine Will where there is only misery and suffering (because there is no door out). But of course, there is a door out, the human conscience, which not even sin can destroy completely.
Lust will justify itself with grand philosophies, but in the end it’s a kind of chemical stupidity, a willed bondage that body has to obey if one’s unclean spirit-adled heart goes on desiring it.
Notice the media, the culture NEVER utters the word lust. The game of amnesia is up precisely when it is named! But who names it?
Please try to find a better source of criticism than Maria Valtorta, whose POEM OF THE MAN-GOD was the second-to-last work placed on the INDEX OF FORBIDDEN BOOKS under the vigilant jand orthodox eye of Cardinal Ottaviani. The attitudes towards sex displaying in this book are twisted beyond my power to summarize in a comment box. I did do a long critique in these pages while back. https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2021/09/14/a-monument-to-pseudo-religiosity-a-case-against-the-poem-of-the-man-god/
Are we reading the same article? In Thomas Rourke’s article, there are no references at all to a Maria Valtorta or to a “Poem of the Man-God.” So I fail to see how your critique of this work has anything to do with this article.
It’s in response to another comment.
I was responding to jst’s quote from Valtorta several comments earlier.
Sandra, always find your comments helpful and insightful and greatly respect your history knowledge and expertise including your views of the “POEM OF THE MAN-GOD.”
Tom, you need to read the responses to Ms Meisel’s article on Valtorta, before you use the word “expertise”. That article crticized Valtorta for using the words Yahweh and Geova. It was, of course, impossible for Valtorta to have written the word Yahweh because the Italian language does not have the letters Y and W. Anyone with expertise would know that it was a translation issue given two translators for the book. That article had so many errors it should have gone on the Index after the fact.
We will have to agree to disagree Ms. Meisel. But you would (also) have to take up your position against St Padre Pio, St Teresa of Calcutta, Blessed Gabriele Allegra the only beatified scripture scholar of the 20th century and first English translator of the entire Catholic Bible into Chinese, four other Blesseds of the Church, 28 bishops imprimaturs to date, who have all affirmed the supernatural consolation of these dictations; Stephen Austin’s 1000-page research document which addresses every known criticism and doubt about the Poem.
Is that the same Carinal Ottaviani who after a 3 year study decided that Mein Kampf should not go on the Index? Some vigilence that was. And please be sure not to read the Three Musketeers because it was on the Index. The index is gone. You need to cool off on Valtorta because millions of us read her and love her.
This is not a reflection, but a painful testimony that has grown from reading this article, one of the best I’ve ever read, thank you!
As a teenager, fifty years ago, I attended a religious seminary and discovered, hidden in a young priest’s room, the works of De Sade, which I began to indulge in. This discovery caused me to lose my vocation.
(It was only recently that I found the courage to disclose this to the superiors, obviously, in this context, in a non-sacramental internal forum.)
I leave it to you, dear reader of CWR, to imagine my state of mind, which has persisted for half a century, and to especially ask for your prayers. It is the same state of mind as Alessandro Serenelli, the murderer of Saint Maria Goretti, or, if I may be permitted to compare lesser things to greater ones, of Rudolf Hoess, the commandant of Auschwitz, a former seminarian who, like me, had been to Lourdes.
(The words of Alessandro’s spiritual testament are also in mine, and I discovered that the author who published them online, from whom I drew this source, would become my wife!)
As for the Gospel I have chosen for my funeral, it is the story of the hemorrhaging woman, which includes the same phrase modified with an addition by Sister Gaudia – a missionary nun of Saint Faustina’s order, who holds the testimony of Father Władysław Lohn – a phrase she attributed to the confessor of the Auschwitz criminal, after his confession: “Go in peace, Rudolf, animal, God has forgiven you.”
I want to urge young people and parents to be vigilant, avoiding the deadly poison of pornography, of which those I mentioned were slaves, a poison that brings only endless pain and terrible consequences, even if its allure initially provokes an irresistible fever and vertigo. Instead, turn to the Church, the chaste bride of Christ, with trust and an open heart, always, alleluia!
Paolo, per your request, I will offer my Mass and Eucharist for your intention this coming Sunday.
“In the final analysis, an attack on God, creation and nature is what was going on at the Olympic’s opening ceremony, with the intent to further undermine the family and its foundations in the faith of Christians.”
That fact has been painfully obvious since day one of this farce, and to post a scholarly ‘dissertation’ like this on the incident – which inevitably lends some legitimacy to it – is (in the final analysis) an insult to the intelligence of Christians – ESPECIALLY Catholics like me.
We know what we saw, we know why they did it
So…this article is an insult to Catholics like you because it agrees with you? Not following the logic here.
This article is NOT an insult to Catholics like me – that is NOT what I meant. Your article merely states again what they did, and to me if that is brought up over and over – eventually what they did acquires a tinge of legitimacy, IOW it was a valid thing to do, no matter how many people were offended.
It is completely obvious that their primary purpose was to offend people like us, and they (obviously) succeeded. The ‘Vatican’ has ‘deplored’ it, but that is meaningless – to the best of my knowledge 10 or so days after the fact the Pope has said NOTHING, and I find that inexcusable.
He’s saying this is so simply wrong that trying to analyze it is wrong and a waste of resources. It’s like when someone says I’m not going to mention the name of the serial murderer because he/she wants their fame at any cost.
I can understand what he means – it’s an obvious serious sin and give the whole farce no credence or attention as it creates “legitimacy.”
Knowall – Thank you and well said.
Time for a quotation (or two) from P.G. Wodehouse to help clear the air- “He was a red-headed chap, and my experience of the redheaded is that you can always expect high blood pressure from them in times of stress. The first Queen Elizabeth had red hair, and look what she did to Mary Queen of Scots.”
Or my all time favorite – “All work and no play makes Jack a Peh Bah Pom Bahoo.”
He never lets me down, and – Grace a Dieu – the older I get the funnier he gets.
God Bless America
Christ once said “Father forgive them for they don’t know what they are doing “
Yes he did indeed say that, but these people KNEW what they were doing.
Thank you Terence for interjecting Wodehouse, who knew how to use humor to accentuate the absurdity in so many things absurd. The Paris folderol is no exception. The best response was to ignore it. It didn’t merit even a yawn. The sadly desperate folk will always be counted on doing something outrageou. Why Paris agreed to it is another story.
I, too, am confused about what exactly is your point.
Deacon – If you are speaking to me – Knowall’s 8/6 @ 6:33 puts it very well.
Reticent by nature to adopt broad classifications of human behavior because of the complexity of the intellect, Rourke’s diagram is nevertheless acceptable as a departure for discussion. Del Noce’s are similarly broad although have had the test enduring relevance
Sex is a powerful human instinct, “Del Noce was perhaps unrivaled in his lifting up eroticism to be a pillar of the civilization as a whole” [instinct here a literary device to emphasize its atavistic potential in Man, although instinct belongs to irrational animals whereas in Man the ‘sexual drive’ is subject to reason and therefore moral judgment]. Death of God is celebrated with erotic, irrational, perverse exhibitions that are Satanic inspired declarations of rebellion against the good and the beautiful, against God.
Here Rourke and Del Noce are in tandem as are many of us interested and aware of what’s occurred within our secular societies. The rest is an in depth analysis of the psychology of eroticism. My interest, my fervid concern is the parallel of what’s occurring within the Church. A portent. A form of counterpoint prior to crescendo.
Pope Francis, our High Politician, is silent. How can this pontificate take a policy position against a world class expression of the “gay new testament”? Mercy alone assures pontifical popularity. Blasphemy is a backwardist slogan and beneath the priorities of the personal magisterium of Pope Francis.
It seems that perhaps France is going back to its dark past of the French Revolution and its materialistic rationalism. At the same time the German Church is reverting to its dark past in anothet man centered reformation. Both are new manifestations of attacks by the evil one against Christ and his Church. It should neither surprise or depress us because we have already been warned. What should our response be? What would Jesus do?
The Olympic opening ceremonies were built around the French revolution and the time since. This was the France of the Tricolor, not the Lilies. (I did see one performer in 16th C costume and I may have missed others.) The headless Marie Antoinette was a truly ghastly touch that ought to have attracted more outrage than it did. None of this was an accident or the result of us “normies” misunderstanding “Art.”
“In October 1988 the French delegate to the European Parliament in Strasbourg, Bernard Antony, gave a long and historically well-founded speech in which he implored the assembly NOT to celebrate the Revolution in 1989, because it had been not only a sanguinary orgy but, in addition, bears co-responsibility for the Russian and German Revolutions of 1917 and 1933 respectively. It remains the cause of all the evils of our time, including conscription and the armies into millions, replacing the limited mercenary system—a real curse. (Those who have the same right must have the same duties!)
“[….] In our age of radical stultification through the mass media, however, and contrary to all warnings, the French Revolution is celebrated orgiastically. The average man in his hopeless limitations, clings to his beloved cliches. (I can imagine that on January 30, 2033, the MachtUbernahme (the assumption of power by the Nazis) will commemorate with public festivities.) Robbed of his cliches, he would be forced to think, to study, to consider and finally change his picture of history. But such elitist procedure cannot be asked from the poor wretch” (Erik von Kuenelt-Leddihn, “Two hundred Years since the French Revolution, 1789-1989: Sade, Robespierre and the Consequences,” unpublished address delivered in Seattle, Washington state, October 20, 1989).
SUMMARY: And so, today, 35 years after the bicentenary of the Revolution, celebrating mindless “fraternity” in place of beheaded paternity, orgiastic drag-queens blaspheming The Last Supper.
Heavy stuff, but much of it rings true. Also some great comments.
I too am once again surprised that Rome cannot find within itself stronger words to speak about the Olympic blasphemy. They seem to forget, with their emphasis on “many people were offended”, that the first offense was to God Himself, and it is His honor that they first and foremost ought to defend and counter, not the secondary matter of the millions of us Christians who were “offended”. This is also a flaw in many other Catholic statements which have been made, though, to their credit, straight-talking American bishops did a better job than most. Too bad Rome and its bishop can’t speak with such forcefulness.
Am I being unjust?
Not at all unjustly, Mark. Were the same band of thiefs pulling the strings in both Rome and Paris… would it be any different?
Would it be too outrageous to say that those who didn’t state that the blasphemy offends God reveals that these ordained people don’t believe in God. I gave a relative who is ordained and he/she always first says thus along Gid/Jesus are offended by such behavior. I call it the basics. You can’t get that then can’t get much else
Feast Days of today -Sts Albert , the Carmelite and St.Cajetan – lattter said to have taken care of ‘incurable ‘ syphilitics , brought on by contacts with natives after voyage of Columbus …thus he can be seen as Patron of such along with St.Magdalene ..St.Albert being a Carmelite also special charism of dealing with the area ..
Today’s readings about the Cananite woman – the endearing interaction of The Lord who likely even went there just for her sake , yet letting her to use the ‘violence ‘ of love to receive what she came in search of …how many such mothers and fathers each of us have – in the Church – including the holy souls ..and we too being same for those in our lives – even the offspring, both living and departed ones to be at times in that role… to consider each of us as a ‘universe ‘ connected to all – Adam to the last person in the Divine Will , to be brought to The Lord, with The Mother – esp. the ones who are in need in the areas where oneself is wounded …the carnal / demonic display being discussed too likely related to all such wounds to bring the desire in all to bring all the wounded to The Lord …with trust in His infinite mercy as well as holiness …to bring its joy to our First Parents on down .. good too that Vatican is reviewing apparitions and such , cautions that many of the wordings of the visionaries do not have to be taken verbatim …may the need of our times inspire many to look more into the means of powerful graces Lord promises for same -such as through the 24 Hour Passion meditations …
Many afflicted with obsessive thoughts might need to look at better diet , esp. correcting low Magnesium levels – tricky part about detecting same is the blood levels may not reflect low cell levels which are hard to measure even though many might be low in same and it can take many weeks for same to be corrected with supplements such as the inexpensive Magnesium chloride salt flakes on line. Plenty of articles on line.
https://spiritdaily.org/blog/news/whats-single-healthiest-food
Interesting one on benefits of red cabbage and one can make ‘chips ‘ out of same too in the air fryer – adding some blessed salt would be good too –
Vit C preventing scurvy in sailors in old days – may be a nation wide /school wide cabbage chips suppelment would help those who see red when it comes to loving and cherishing real babies and families , even if seems weird to some! 🙂
At its deepest level the Olympics opening showed the contempt of the Masonic state for Catholicism, a deep hatred that exploded in genocide and guillotining of the indiginous Catholics by an alien ideology in 1789.
That contempt is perpetuated culturally via the great attempts to islamise France; today’s Catholic throat cutters enjoy the protection of the State which will only ever denounce “isolated acts of terrorism.”
Pagan République and Islam are united in a common cause: the extinction of Catholic France. The monstrous demonstration of cultural hatred is a historic record of the Cancel-Catholic-Culture perpetuated from Rome and Paris like a compass in search of a square.