In the following series, we will discuss a subject of exceptional importance because it is one of the pillars on which societies and civilizations are built. It is a difficult and comprehensive subject, but we cannot and must not ignore it if we, as a Catholic Forum, want to participate fully in the contemporary debate on religion and society. We will talk about various aspects of the perception of human sexuality in general and of the so-called “sexual revolution” in particular. To this end, we will rely on well-documented facts and the attitude and teachings of the Church towards this. In a first article, let us make it clear where the main ideological cause lies of many contemporary plagues related to the sexuality experience.
The ARM: The Trinity Atheism, Rationalism and Materialism
It is historically easy to ascertain that the ways of thinking that belong to this “ARM” have led to the horrors of the French Revolution, Nazism, Stalinism, the totalitarian terror of Mao Tse-Tung and the mega-genocide of the Khmer Rouge. Nevertheless, they continue to have a well-run propaganda mill and its supporters hold many key positions in western societies. Societies belonging to Freemasonry, which drive these ideas, have succeeded in turning a large part of their objectives into legal texts in many countries. With their seemingly scientific way of reasoning, they have even mentally ruined many Christian theological circles.
The mindset that the ARM tries to introduce is reducing, disconnecting and leads to loss of identity. Reducing means simplifying a reality or a problem into something that is easy for the brain to grasp. That is e.g., the case with Darwinism, which wants to explain the whole complex evolutionary event from a coarse, simplistic, and inaccurate process: the natural selection. Decoupling means that a certain fact is extracted from its natural context and treated as a separate fact. For example, there are studies or surveys made on “good sex”, in which an aspect that is of a secondary nature, namely pleasure, becomes the defining factor. Applied to humans, reduction, and decoupling lead to the loss of a well-developed sense of identity. Through laws and social pressures, they try to systematically deprives persons of their personal beliefs (which they may keep them for the time being, but preferably only for themselves) and to reduce them to state robots. Up to and including an essential fact of a person’s physical identity, gender, is detached from the existential reality to which it belongs and housed in a fabrication of the ARM that is gradually palmed off as “gender theory” on our children.
The ARM developed a logic based on the axiom or the “belief” in the actual meaninglessness of existence. Since a life without meaning is not humanly viable, the ideologies that arise from it rely on some form of “utilitarianism”: the goal is to satisfy as many of our wishes as possible as efficiently as possible. Broadly speaking, they lead to collectivism (to give her bread and games to the greatest possible mass) or individualism (getting the maximum of self-satisfaction from one’s own life). They have a decoupled view of the world, in which rights and obligations are carefully separated, so that the relationship between the two is lost and in which, as appropriate, the emphasis is placed on one of the two.
In contemporary thinking about sexuality, one clearly notices the influence of this new logic. Sexuality is mainly viewed as a personal right. Its social, hygienic, and relational dimensions come second. The actual biological origin of sexuality, creating the ideal conditions for ideal reproduction, is carefully ignored. After all, this does not fit well into the picture of a pointless reality and puts a nasty brake on the possibilities of maximum lust satisfaction. One is only allowed to speak about people who contracted an STD in terms that equate them with ‘victims’. Who, like Archbishop Em. Mgr. Léonard, somewhere in a book cautiously dares to insinuate that these are not only people who got sick, but who also have responsibilities towards themselves, their partner(s) and society, also in their intimate relations, is treated by the media as a heartless monster. Even the modernist church media, infected by the ARM, thought they had to play this game and sprinkled the archbishop with the soiled blessed water of their disapproving comments.
Over the centuries, the Church has not always taken the same attitude towards sexuality. In her early years, she was probably strongly influenced by the teachings of St Paul who learned that one had to live “according to the spirit” and not “to the flesh”. But when the Church had also become a secular power, “the puppets started dancing” (a Dutch saying meaning that the problems started) and soon ended up in a libertine behavior that was accepted up to the highest ecclesiastical circles. This had far-reaching consequences, and it can only be attributed to God’s providence that the Church has been able to escape from it. More recently, in the Western world, there was the age of Victorian prudishness, in which everything related to sexuality was fraught with taboos and sexuality was automatically associated with sinfulness. This remained the common attitude in most Catholic circles until after the Second World War.
The explosive development of material possibilities that followed, made many dreams of “new times”, accompanied by “new insights”. The new material prosperity became the trojan horse, from which materialism could settle in the minds of our contemporaries. All taboos were discarded in just a few decades and replaced with the slogan “everything must be possible”. Science and technology developed in such a way that this wishful thinking seems within reach for many. New methods of contraception ensured that the desired disconnection between sexuality and reproduction became also in practice easily feasible. For cases where this turned out not to be true, new laws, based on the ethical doctrines of the ARM, cleared the last moral obstacles, together with the undesirable “reproductive products”. The democratic State, in which the law of the best “disinformed” used to apply, ensured that the consequences of the resulting immoral behavior are borne by the entire working population, including those whose consciences have not yet been deformed and who do not agree with this course of events at all.