Many books and essays have looked at the many cultural, social, and historical aspects of the Sexual Revolution. But few have delved into the destruction and suffering caused by that revolution, and have provided a careful, direct, and caring Christian response to the pain and misery all around us now, decades later. Nathanael Blake’s new book Victims of the Revolution: How Sexual Liberation Hurts Us All (Ignatius Press, 2025) does exactly that, with a combination of scholarship, wisdom, and authentic Christ-centered compassion.
Blake is a Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, DC, and is a regular columnist for The Federalist, WORLD Opinions, Catholic World Report, and other publications. He received his doctorate from the Catholic University of America and resides in Virginia with his wife and children.
He corresponded recently with me about his book, which he first told me about when he visited me at my home in Oregon in December 2022.
Olson: What is your book about, and why did you write it?
Nathanael Blake: The sexual revolution has broken its promises, inflicting misery and suffering rather than the pleasure and freedom it promised. As its evil effects become ever more undeniable, Christians can show a hurting world why our understanding of human persons and sexuality is the basis of a better way to live.
Olson: You write near the start that your “book is a social critique grounded in the Christian natural law tradition.” Can you unpack that a bit? And what might you say to potential readers who are not Christian or are dismissive of natural law?
Blake: Christianity teaches that there is a God-given moral order in our nature, and that we can therefore know and articulate many moral truths despite our sin, even without divine revelation. These natural law truths direct us toward our well-being and flourishing, both individually and collectively.
The Christian natural law tradition was inaugurated by the Apostle Paul’s letter to the church in Rome, beginning with his description of sexual deviance as a defiance of the natural law inherent in God’s creation. Today, the Catholic Church has a well-known affinity for natural law theorizing, and Reformed theology has recently seen a revival of natural law thinking.
Thus, the Christian natural law tradition offers a way to diagnose what has gone wrong with our relational and sexual culture, and to explain it even to those who are not Christians. Those who reject Christianity are thereby confronted with the challenge of providing a more convincing account of human nature and moral truth, one that better explains what has gone wrong in our culture.
Olson: You state that the “new regime of sexual liberalism reigns almost unchallenged,” but that “it has failed on its own terms.” What are some of the characteristics of this reign—not just obvious ones but less obvious? How does your book provide ways to identify and challenge this regime?
Blake: Some aspects of sexual liberalism’s dominance are indeed obvious, such as the normalization of cohabitation and divorce, or the legal recognition of “same-sex marriage.”
However, sexual liberalism has also reshaped our culture in myriad more subtle ways, and so Christians need to consider the material and cultural factors that influence people’s sexual and relational decisions. For example, a culture of delayed marriage will make chastity more difficult, and fornication (followed by other evils, such as abortion) more alluring.
And yet many Christians accept or even encourage economic and educational approaches that strongly incentivize delaying marriage. But if we want young men and women to remain chaste, we should make it easier to get married and start a family sooner, rather than accepting a norm of marriage as something to only consider around 30 or later.
Christians who want to challenge sexual liberalism need to identify and address the material and cultural conditions that make it seem inevitable for so many people.
Olson: It has become common in some Christian circles to deride “the culture wars” and to insist they are of no value. What do you think of that position and approach?
Blake: Culture wars matter, and Christians should participate in them. Though there are portions of our culture wars that are trivial, or about which Christians may reasonably disagree, there are also fights over essential matters that it would be sinful to ignore.
Christians cannot be indifferent to whether it is legal to kill human beings in utero. We cannot write off the nature of marriage or the distinction between male and female. We should care very much whether our governments know the difference between good and evil.
Addressing these matters wisely will require prudence and charity, but that is not the same as quiescence. To fail to speak the truth on these matters, and to decline to vote and legislate according to the truth, is to fail to love our neighbors as ourselves and to care for their good in this life and that which is to come.
Olson: You refer to some secular critiques of the sexual revolution, but remark that “these authors are not radical enough.” What are the weaknesses in those approaches?
Blake: Three authors in particular (Mary Harrington, Louise Perry, and Christine Emba) have recently published books challenging elements of the sexual revolution. They all made some excellent points, especially about how sexual liberation has hurt women, but each of them stopped short of entirely rejecting the sexual revolution.
In particular, they did not want to criticize homosexuality, or to unequivocally condemn the evil of abortion, or to say that fornication is sinful. And they lacked a positive vision of what human sexuality should be rooted in. Emba (an evangelical turned Catholic convert turned lapsed Catholic) came closest, but she ended up offering a Thomistic approach that was so watered-down that it left almost the entire menu of sexual sin still available, so long as people were kinder and gentler about it.
Ultimately, these critiques of the sexual revolution failed to offer a compelling alternative that is grounded in a more accurate understanding of human nature and well-being. Articulating such an alternative is a large part of what I have tried to do in my book.
Olson: One of your key points is that the sexual revolution has failed, sometimes epically. What are some of those failures? And who are the victims—to reference the title of the book—of the revolution?
Blake: The sexual revolution promised freedom, happiness, authenticity, and—of course—more and better sex.
And yet Americans are lonelier and more likely to live alone than ever before. We have fewer children than we say we want, and fewer than we need to avoid the travails of an aging, declining population. Americans also report having less, and less satisfying, sex than prior generations. The dating and sexual landscapes are increasingly fraught and unhappy.
Sexual liberation did not keep its promises, and it has injured, even ended, many lives. There are the men and women alone and unhappy in a culture that taught them how to selfishly pursue short-term pleasure, but not how to build and sustain a committed relationship. There are the millions upon millions of tiny humans killed because their lives would have been inconvenient. There are the people, and especially the children, mutilating their bodies in the impossible quest to change sex.
Not everyone has been hurt so dramatically, but everyone has to contend with a culture that urges us toward sin and destruction, rather than righteousness and flourishing.
Olson: What are some of the ways that the revolution has harmed and even destroyed essential relationships? And how can that be addressed and changed?
Blake: The sexual revolution set out to abolish the restrictions, commitments, and duties that restrained sexual desire and indulgence. Romantic and sexual partnerships, including marriages, became dissolvable at will, and so, therefore, did parent-child relationships.
But the results have been immiserating, rather than liberating. This is because human happiness is not found by pursuing maximal sexual pleasure (which tends to be a self-defeating endeavor, anyway), but through deep, loving relationships that can only be developed and sustained with commitment. We are meant for love, and in this life most of us are called to experience our deepest loves through the vocations of marriage and parenthood, which unite the two halves of the human race in a union that continues it.
The Church must proclaim this truth, and believers must model it to a world that needs it amidst the desolation and loneliness wrought by the sexual revolution.
Olson: “America,” you write, “is broken because it is haunted.” How is our country haunted, and why is it broken?
Blake: Abortion is the violence inherent in the sexual revolution. For there to be consequence-free sex, the humans inconveniently conceived during sex (which is, after all, ordered toward begetting new people) have to be gotten rid of.
But this elimination of the unwanted consequences of sex has consequences of its own. Abortion hardens the hearts it doesn’t stop. It has distorted our law and politics. It responds to the asymmetric realities of human reproduction with selfish violence rather than solidarity, and it thereby encourages us to treat women as defective men whose natural fertility has to be bloodily suppressed. It has reshaped relationships, discouraging commitment and replacing the foundational love of the natural family of mother, father, and child with a lethal battleground of competing selfishness.
Olson: In just the past couple of decades, we went from what I call the “Reign of Gay” to the “Tyranny of Trans.” What are the logical connections between the two? And what do you make of those who are “gay” who are pushing back against trans ideology?
Blake: The gay-rights movement insisted that male and female do not matter, except as objects of personal sexual preference. And if there is no intrinsic significance or purpose to our embodiment as male and female, but only subjective desire, then there is no reason why the physical realities and social recognition of male and female should not be altered or ignored at will. After all, if male and female don’t matter in marriage and family, then they don’t matter anywhere. It is nonsensical to say that it doesn’t matter if a baby has an extra daddy and no mommy, but to then get up in arms about daddy trying to become mommy.
As a matter of practical politics, we should gratefully welcome the aid of allies in the fight against gender ideology. But we must not stop proclaiming the truth about men and women in order to placate any allies, and especially those of convenience. Instead, we should challenge them—if they don’t like our account of what it is to be human, and the significance of our embodiment as male and female in marriage and sexuality—to come up with their own, superior account.
Olson: Why are so many “straight” people supportive—often fanatically—of transgenderism and “being queer”? How can this irrationality be countered and addressed?
Blake: First, the cultural pressures are significant, and the personal pressure is often even more intense—many people who identify as LGBT will threaten suicide if not affirmed, or they’ll cut off contact with friends and family who do not approve of their behavior.
Second, those who have embraced the sexual revolution in their own lives will often struggle to condemn its next steps. LGB set the stage for the T, and decades of increasing acceptance for divorce and fornication prepared the way for the LGB.
When it comes to the sexual revolution, the slippery slope has proven more prophetic than fallacious, and the slide down will not be stopped by looking for a firm foothold halfway down. Instead, what we need now is to articulate and model a Christian alternative that is rooted in the truth about our nature as men and women, what our sexuality is meant for, and how we are to flourish in the family vocations most of us are called to.
Olson: The early Christians, you note, led a sexual revolution in the first centuries of the Church. What lessons can be learned from their approach and example? How do Christians best revolt against the current secular orthodoxies and build a culture of chastity, life, and authentic love?
Blake: Christianity cared for and protected the victims of a pagan sexual culture that regarded many people—including slaves, prostitutes, and unwanted babies—as disposable in the pursuit of sexual pleasure. Amidst an exploitative culture, Christianity offered both eschatological hope and a model for a better way to live in this world.
This is still what Christianity offers. As the evils and false promises of sexual liberation become more apparent, Christian sexual morality may once again be seen not as a scolding killjoy but instead as a guardian of human well-being in this world and a guidepost directing us toward our fulfillment in the world to come, when the Church is united to Christ.
Olson: Any final thoughts?
Blake: The sexual revolution is undermined by its own triumph. The more it conquers, the more apparent its evils become, and the more opportunity Christians have to show that there is a better way to live.
(Editor’s note: This interview was published originally on the “What We Need Now” site and is republished here with kind permission.)
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.
Thank you. Very interesting.
In the pro-life movement we used to say: We will out-populate them. Perhaps AI will prove us wrong with automated artificial womb facilities. CWR had an interesting article on growing spare clones to refit me with new parts, as if I was an old airplane or something.
Am praying for Pope Leo and all our Bishops to unify and guide us on such matters. Stay Catholic and hold out for the objective Truth of Our lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
As long as the anti-life forces remain in control of education, we will not out populate them. The Anti-life forces do a much better job of indoctrinating children into their lifestyles and opinions than the pro-family/pro-life forces.
The anti-life forces are also in control of the massive entertainment industry, which encompasses all styles of music (including classical and even gospel), dance, drama, television, film, and live theater, along with visual art. Many entertainment professionals (not just the performers, but all the “behind the scenes” professionals like directors, producers, stage managers, writers, and of course, those who invest in the production, are expected to go along with/support the liberal philosophy, and anyone who rebels can be blacklisted, which essentially means finding a job waiting tables–teaching in a school is not always an option, as the education industry also expects its workers and professionals to go along with the liberal policies.
But Christian isolationism is not an acceptable position for Christians, as we are told by our Lord to go into the WORLD and preach the Gospel.
No doubt teachers have a large influence, for good or ill. My suspicion is that social media has more influence, rarely for good. Nonetheless , consider these glimmers of hope:
1. Homeschooling is happening. 3 million in USA:
https://nheri.org/research-facts-on-homeschooling/#:~:text=There%20were%20about%203.1%20million,%2D2020%20to%202020%2D2021.
2. The school choice movement is growing – pro-choice cuts both ways! Perhaps this is what vouchsafe means:
https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-private-school-choice-2024/
Alas, colleges can turn a child to the dark side. I’m not saying they always do–it doesn’t–but homeschool children are not immune to the gutter culture in which we find outselves.
no, the public colleges that used to be so much for free speech and IDEAS are not anymore; if you’re not a sheep following the liberals you need not matriculate
Excellent — and much needed — information.
It’s quite clear. The evil one has used its tried and true method — sexual sin — to bring humanity to the brink of destruction.
Hopefully Mr. Blake’s clarion cry will be taken up by others.
And here’s an idea. Let’s have this book be required reading for everyone working in the Dark Vatican.
A needed rundown of the moral collapse to keep us, I suppose awake rather than slide into wokeness. What’s missing due to my own prejudice as to cause of the calamity is the pill. The green light to random promiscuity and sensual intoxication more addictive than cocaine. The moment we separated the pleasures of the conjugal act from its divinely ordained function all hell literally broke loose and no one seems able to stop it. We know God can indeed solve the issue but most tremble at how.
Blake makes the usual good arguments, Olson the expected good leading questions to drive at the heart of the problem. Culture’s rapid deterioration and obvious self annihilation is answered, Christian revival the answer. We all struggle with how to get there – while most are aware of the technicalities [including virtual sex technology the new fulcrum], most are unaware of a redeeming solution. Except to continue to address the dilemma and continue to fight against by faith and reason.
The 1960’s and 70’s = The Age of Deconstruction
The 2020’s and beyond = The Age of Restoration
I hope so, or it’s likely that my children will grow old and have no one with training to care for them if they are afflicted with the maladies of old age! We’re already seeing critical shortages of nurses and nursing aides, along with other health care professionals (lab, X-ray, respiratory, PT, etc.) not only in nursing homes, but in hospitals and clinics, too!
Nathanael Blake is right: the “slippery slope” wasn’t a fallacy. It was a prophecy. And now, we are living its fulfilment. The sexual revolution did more than undermine moral norms; it eroded our very capacity to see the human person.
As Rémi Brague observes, Christianity didn’t invent a new morality. The Ten Commandments remained. But it did answer the real question: *to whom do they apply*? That’s the heart of the matter. The problem isn’t knowing what is good—it’s knowing “for whom” the good is owed.
“We didn’t break the Ten Commandments—we stopped seeing who they were for.”
In the ancient world, whole categories of human beings were invisible: the malformed infant, the unborn child, the slave, the voiceless woman. Philosophers did not protest. Progress had not yet given them eyes. It was Christianity—not merely as a moral system, but as a revolution of perception—that made the invisible visible. It saw the image of God where others saw waste, burden, or property.
Today, we have embryology. We know when life begins. But we act as if we don’t. We manipulate the body while denying its meaning. We’ve learned to name rights but forgotten how to recognize persons.
As Brague notes, this blindness is not new—it is simply modern. Some cultures still name only their own as “men,” treating others as subhuman. So too does the West, in more subtle form: it redefines personhood by desire, function, or consent, and excludes those who cannot meet the criteria.
Christianity’s answer is not moralism but vision. It says: *look again*. See the child, the fetus, the disabled, the poor, the inconvenient, the aging. They are not infra-humans. They are your neighbors. And the Commandments are for them.
This is not nostalgia. It is a call to recover what only faith can fully offer: the ability to see man as man—because we have seen God made man.
Until that vision is restored, the slide continues.
About the Ten Commandments, St. Iranaeus gives us this deep perspective: “From the beginning [!], God had implanted in the heart of man the precepts of the natural law. Then he was content to remind him of them. This was the Decalogue.”
A reminder “from the beginning!” One comment plus a relevant interreligious digression:
FIRST, helping us to shed the duplicity of Fiducia Supplicans, Pope Leo XIV reminds us of regular (not “irregular”) “families,” and of “Humanae Vitae”: “https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/06/01/pope-leo-xiv-tells-families-they-are-the-cradle-of-humanitys-future-at-jubilee-celebration/
SECOND, if not an avenue of interreligious dialogue with Islam as a religion, at least as an insight for understanding ordinary “followers of Islam,” do we have some congruence between universal Natural Law and what the Hadith affirms as “fitrah”…
“There is not a child that he or she is born upon this ‘fitrah,’ this original state of the knowledge of God [from the beginning?]. And his parents make him a Jew, a Christian, or a Zoroastrian . . . and if they are Muslims, Muslim.” Fitrah as the “natural disposition, constitution, temperament, e.g., what is in a man at his creation [from the beginning?], a sound nature, natural religion (and) the germ of Islam.” The Muslim self-understanding has Islam as prior to all historical religions and even prior to history—like inborn Natural Law—such that everyone is perceived as originally and eventually a Muslim, even if we don’t know it. The fateful disconnect in the Muslim mind is that the last six—and prohibitive—of the Ten Commandments (for example, the sixth and ninth!) are nowhere explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an. And, further, that Muslims are led to accept as identical with the inborn Natural Law the sweeping package-deal Qur’an (which is thought to be of the very essence of God). Theoretically, Islam is scandalized by Western materialism and the Sexual Revolution.
But, at least for personal and possible one-on-one empathy, we have a contact point in parts of the inborn and universal Natural Law—“from the beginning.” Somewhat as St. Paul had in mind regarding the Gentiles in his pre-Islamic setting in human history (Romans 2:14).
SUMMARY: Moments of true “fraternity” among persons, but not pluralism/equivalence of religions. Nor confusion between the “beliefs” of natural religions and “faith” in the person of Jesus Christ—the fulfillment of the whole Law.
In our culture, marriage is often delayed into a couple’s 30’s, due to college, graduate school, getting established in a career,etc. To expect total celibacy during the decade of the 20’s is unrealistic. People will end up having sex in some form during those years.
Another problem is that many young men today are very immature. We have 30 year old men living in their mother’s basement playing video games. They refuse to grow up. Thus many young women are having to deal with young men who are immature and commitment adverse. Often, young men today do not really become adults until they’re 30’s.
We have a problem. We need for our young men to grow up and be adults in their 20’s.
We read: “People will ‘end up’ having sex” and that we have backed into “a problem.”
“End up?” Clever double entendre, but yes, today we do have “a problem.” And, with pride of place at the high end of “chronological snobbery” (C.S. Lewis), we have “realistic” and techy foreceps and dispensers for small balloons and pills. And, as anti-backwardists, we use big words attentive to only the future, as in “global demographic winter.”
But, meanwhile, non-amnesiacs look back:
“Late marriages and small families became the rule, and men satisfied their sexual instincts by homosexuality or by relations with slaves and prostitutes. This aversion to marriage and the deliberate restriction of the family by the practice of infanticide and abortion was undoubtedly the main cause of the decline of ancient Greece, as Polybius pointed out in the second century B.C. And the same factors were equally powerful in the society of the Empire. . . .” (Christopher Dawson, “The Patriarchal Family in History,” The Dynamics of World History, 1962).
SUMMARY: shedding both red-faced male immaturity and the sacramental life in a fallen world, the red-hat “Fiducia Supplicans” is dispensed as a “realistic” fig leaf.
“We need for our young men to grow up and be adults in their 20’s.”
Mr. William, you could not be more correct in your statement. I refer to such cases of arrested development in our young men (and women) as “kidults.” And yes, as you state, we have a problem.
Catholics should take a page from the Mormons and expect ALL Catholic men at age 18 to put two years into missionary work. Instead, at age 18 we send them into extended adolescence for four years at a university. Then, they return home to Mommy and spend the next 8-10 years in Mommy’s basement. What a recipe for disaster. But do NOT blame the kids. Blame the parents for ennabling all this.
My first thought too about parents enabling this kind of behavior. If you have a 30 year old unemployed son living rent free in your basement it’s on you.
Did Jesus not live with his parents until 30 or so?
It has nothing to do whether you are living with your parents when you’re 30. 20 something’s on their own without any virtue formation is not a solution.
Parents elucidating every young man’s call to fatherhood( natural or ministerial) and holiness is essential to solving this problem.
I note in a couple of comments above that the young men are hanging out in Mom’s basement.
Where is Dad?
I note that Pope Leo has recently mentioned Humanae Vitae in a not-dismissive tone.
Disappeared comment:
Re Fr. Morella above – Ah, yes. The pill. Lambeth 1930 (reverse order). The rebellion against Humanae Vitae.
The elephant in the room.
Two things need to happen with regard to young starting at about age 15:
#1. They need to be told in no uncertain terms to avoid having sex with anyone outside marriage. Especially to be emphasized is the warning to NEVER have sex with someone your serious about marrying as it will always cloud your judgment.
#2. Adolescents need to have YEARS OF INSTRUCTION regarding how to go about choosing a spouse. They should be instructed in the specifics of what qualities to look for, the danger signs, the need preferentially to marry a practicing Catholic, what to look for in the potential spouse’s family, etc. Leaving the most important decision to make in life up to one’s emotions is a seriously flawed approach and apt to result in divorce. Adolescents need to be told that dating partners are ALWAYS putting their best image forward. What you’re seeing is not necessarily what you’ll be getting 5, 10 or 20 years down the road. Lastly, remember: Apples don’t fall far from the trees on which they grew.
Why no mention of the fact that those who support the “sexual revolution”, have been permitted to remain physically within The Body of Christ, while denying The Spirit Of Divine Law, making it appear as if they are in communion with Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, when we are all aware that they have visibly manifested the fact that they deny Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, And The Teaching Of The Magisterium grounded in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture , The Word Of Perfect Divine Eternal Love Incarnate , Our Savior, Jesus The Christ, regarding sexual morality? As we speak, we still do not know for certain where Pope Leo XIV is going to take us, as if the counterfeit magisterium , may prevail, destroying Christ ‘s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church from within so that only a remnant remains. So many souls will be lost if we allow their hearts to be hardened. To whom shall we go, when those who deny sin is sin have claimed the Papacy for their own, created a god in their own image?
“Penance, Penance, Penance.”
The Catechism Of The Catholic Church on The Sacrament Of Penance
“It is Called The Sacrament Of Conversion because it makes Sacramentally present, Jesus’ Call To Conversion, The First Step In Returning To The Father From Whom One Has Strayed By Sin. It is Called The Sacrament Of Penance, since it Consecrates The Christian sinner’s personal and Ecclesial steps of Conversion, Penance, and Satisfaction. It is Called The Sacrament Of Confession, since the disclosure of confession of sins is an essential element of this Sacrament. In a profound sense, it is also a “confession “, an acknowledgment an Praise of The Holiness of God and of His Mercy toward sinful men”, who desire to repent , and believe in The Power And Glory Of Salvational Love, God’s Gift Of Grace And Mercy.
675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. 573 The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth574 will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of His Messiah come in the flesh. 575
Allowing those who support the sexual revolution to subsist within The One Body Of Christ, and thus promote the sexual objectification of the human person, due to the sin of lust , while denying the inherent Dignity of the human person created in The Image Of God, to Live in Loving communion with God, The Ordered Communion Of Perfect Divine Eternal Love, The Most Holy Blessed Trinity, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, The Spirit Of Divine Eternal Love Between The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Who Proceeds From Both The Father And His Only Begotten Son, is the iniquity that has led to The Great Apostasy, the denial of The Divinity of The Most Holy Blessed Trinity, and thus the denial that it is Only The Spirit Of Perfect Divine Eternal Love Who Gives us Life, and can take us from death into Life Everlasting.
The end goal of the atheist materialistic over population alarmist globalists is the objectification of the human person, and thus the denial of the inherent Dignity of every beloved son or daughter.
Pope Benedict warned us in his Christmas Address of 2012, just before he had to flee the wolves that were at his door:
“When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defence of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.” – Pope Benedict’s Christmas Address 2012
The sexual revolution is known as May 68 in the RF (Republic of French Freemasonry). If I May, there is a link between the second cultural revolution of the 60s and Vatican II.
According to Archbishop Marcel Lefevbre it was orchestrated by the Luciferian Grande Orient lodge, with not a little help from an agent within the council chamber filtering scandals via the newspaper LaCroix – its editor being a freemason at the time. This
Orchesteated cultural revolution followed hard on the heels of that in China: a double whamy, even if the strategy applied was different.
The state usurpation of the moral authority of the Church in bedroom politics has been consistent with George Orwell’s IngSoc, whereby the State lays down the rules. This lead naturally to the child ablation of reproductive organs with State over-riding parental authority.
In Orwell’s 1984 all that remains of the Church is an old image on a wall and a nursery rhyme.
The sexual revolution is perhaps best understood within the context of the seizing of Old World Order’s terrains ? It was central to the fall-out of Vatican II – overturning the Old World Order’s liturgical order as bequeathed by the Apostles, and surplanting it with the 16th century protestant table. It thus took 400 years for the secret societies to finally achieve their objective to obliterate Old World Order (Christendom) via May 68, the Conciliarism that unwittingly and wittingly enabled it by proning revolution in the press, and the Post-Conciliarism that violently implements it (on-going process) at varying speeds of incomprehensible acts at odds with scripture and sacred tradition and increasingly indissociable from New World Order or as Orwell called it “Ing soc” for which “reality is the mind of the party.” That party is New World Order, and to have a glass of wine at the party table, the Catholic hierarchy have only to continue stripping the Catholic Church of every vestige of Old World Order for the party and by the party, stamping out authentic Catholicism wherever it rears its apostolic head.
One might add that the Novos Ordo apostasy heeded the warning shots fired at JFK and chose jumping onboard NWO…
This vidéo clip of the reason JFK was shot should be seen by aĺl Catholics striving to understand what happened to their Church:
https://youtu.be/ljnVfSGHYhA?feature=shared
From the Cracked Nut perspective, occasional post-conciliar “Catholic Moments” like Humanae Vitæ stand out precisely because they are exceptional back-peddlings… what was normal Catholic behaviour from Rome before 1962 becomes stunning in the aftermath and great betrayal of post-conciliar New Church, with its New Speak, New Liturgy, and New friends…
The sexual revolution at its very basic level abused the Creator’s system for His propagation of human life. The Civil Law abandoned the Judeo-Christian understanding of the essence of human life and placed itself above the word of God almost certainly for a lot more than thirty pieces of silver!