[ARCHIVED]
Much has been written in recent days about the Paris Olympics opening ceremony. A spokesman for the Russian Church referred to the display as a "cultural and historical suicide." The U.S. House Speaker Michael Johnson called it a "mockery" and an "insult." An Italian politician called it "sleazy" (squallidi) and "insulting billions of Christians." And Slovakia's deputy prime minister who was supposed to represent his country at the closing ceremony called the opening a "symbol of degenerate decadence" and announced his boycott. Against the backdrop of such robust reactions, the French Bishops Conference issued a very meek and humble statement, rivaled in its hushed tone only by the Pope's expression of sadness on behalf of the Holy See. In their statement, the French bishops mentioned - rather obliquely - that some scenes unfortunately included in the ceremony were hurtful, excessive, and provocative. Are the French attempting to heed Christ's precept in Matthew 11:29 or are they onto something else?
The fact of the matter is that the opening ceremony, like most opening ceremonies, traditionally celebrated the spirit of the host nation - l'esprit de la nation, so to speak. It just so happens that the spirit of the French nation is openly and militantly atheist. Modern-day France is not only an heir of the French Revolution, shaped and inspired by it, but may be seen as continuing to exist in a state of revolution from 1789 until today. Since the "original" revolution, France has had two other major revolutions, and is now called the Fifth Republic, following the collapse of the Fourth one in 1958, just as the previous three republics and two Bonapartist empires had. In less than two hundred years, France has had seven regime changes - that is to say, the revolutionary spirit is not only a historical phenomenon but a contemporary reality for the French and has been a defining force of their national self-identity.
The trouble is that this revolutionary self-identity that was birthed in the First French Revolution was baptized in the blood of its victims, including many Christians. To be sure, the French Reign of Terror did not claim only Christians as its victims, but Christianity was viewed as anti-revolutionary in principle. Hundreds of Catholic priests were executed, tens of thousands were driven into exile, sacred objects desecrated and defiled, holy relics destroyed and dumped into the the Seine like rubbish. Of more than forty thousand churches, most were shut down, destroyed, or converted to profane uses - a situation that has not changed until this day. All of this was accompanied by militant de-Christianization, including the banning of the very word "Sunday" among other acts, and the institution of the short-lived but epitomic state-sponsored Cult of Reason.
It should, of course, be noted that many other nations had their own recent periods of persecutions against Christians - the Nazis and the Soviets, for example. While this is true, Germany has renounced Nazism; and whatever else may be said about modern Russia, it is no longer Communist and has renounced both Bolshevism and Stalinism. The 1972 Munich Olympics opening ceremony did not include actors portraying executed Jews or celebrate "community tolerance" by reenacting scenes of gas chambers and crematoria in concentration camps. The 2014 Sochi Olympics did not show off the execution of the last Russian Tsar as a national achievement or proudly re-enact the destruction of Christ the Savior Cathedral. Neither did the 1980 Olympics in Moscow celebrate these horrors or have Komsomolets re-enacting scenes from the New Testament. But the French not only presented to the world an actor playing the beheaded Marie Antoinette - complete with billowing red smoke, fountains of blood, and the revolutionary 'Ah! Ça Ira' - but also a re-enactment of the Last Supper by transvestites. Verily, verily, vive la révolution!
Perhaps, of all the parties offended by the Paris opening ceremony, only the French bishops actually understood the reality of the situation. Expecting anything other than bloodthirst and impiety from the French is just as silly as expecting that the ancient Romans not enjoy their bloody circus or street torches made of crucified Christians. One may see these acts as evil, but it would be silly to expect anything different from a society defined by such things. There is one caveat with respect to the French, however. Quite unlike the ancient Romans, the modern French do not seem particularly brave. It may have occurred to the organizers to have the same transvestites re-enact a scene or two from the life of the Prophet Mohammad, but the very real possibility of not only Marie Antoinette being beheaded, likely, had its effect. Although, I may be wrong. In a move that perhaps escaped the attention of the mujahedeen, what appeared to be a very young girl present at "'La Cène sur la scène sur la Seine" was scooped up into the arms of a transvestite in what could have been an oblique allusion to the marriage of the Prophet Mohammad and Aisha. But more likely, it was just a nod to pedophilia, as this move was followed by what can only be described as a stylized orgy of the gyrating transvestites. Also, the lesbian activist in the center of the composition could have been a depiction of a "fat Buddha" (Budai) in yet another bid for inclusivity. This is not impossible, albeit, unlikely.
Be that as it may, the scene was meant to reveal some meaning upon which the organizers agreed. None of it was accidental or unintentional. Every move and every act on that stage was choreographed and rehearsed for many months. There is now some confusion about the intended meaning, as the initial stories have changed in a public relations damage control effort, but it largely does not matter whether the French intended to mock Christianity or to merely show off their new gods in a setting that is easily recognized by any Westerner as referring to something sacred. Either way, what they presented to the world is their new religion, a new god who has replaced Christ. Deciphering symbols in someone else's work is never an easy or certain task, since it is impossible to know the mind of the creator of the work, but it is not an altogether useless or impossible exercise. Symbols are effective precisely because they are shared in common; this is why we are able to immediately recognize the Last Supper symbolically represented on stage, albeit, in a mocking or perverted way. Thus, drawing on common symbols that can be found in Western culture, we can begin to interpret, at the very least, the superficial level of meaning of what the organizers tried to convey.
First and foremost, Barbara Butch at the center of the table represents the new god (or goddess, as it were). Barbara is a famous fat-acceptance and LGBT activist, as well as a DJ. Besides the obvious central spot she occupied at the table, a well known song "God Is a DJ" by Faithless may come to mind: "If God is a DJ, life is a dance floor / Love is the rhythm, you are the music..." and so on. Barbara was in fact displaying the "heart" mudra with her fingers in what may have been a statement that "love is the rhythm." A professional DJ, Barbara Butch surely should know this song quite well. With the sound mixer on the table in front of her, the "goddess" could be understood as giving rhythm and movement to her transvestite "disciples" and the crowd - thus, playing the role of the choragus, one of the terms used in Christian hymnology for the life-giving action of the Holy Spirit. Her headdress also identified her as a divine figure. Whether it was meant to be reminiscent of the nimbus of the Christ, or of the Buddha, or - more likely, considering the stars on the head dress - of the Virgin Mary, is not particularly important, as it recognizably represents an aspect of divinity. Fully intentional or not, someone had to make the decision to dress this new "goddess" in a blue garment - the color traditionally associated in Catholic iconography with Mary the Queen of Heaven. Lastly, Barbara's wrists were bound in what appeared to be torn chains, as if she had broken her shackles. Perhaps, the meaning of this accessory was to state that this "goddess" had been shackled until now but has freed herself? Is this the Paleolithic Venus hidden in dark corners of pre-historic caves? Is this the forgotten goddess of the last Ice Age who is now freed and resurrected? In the absence of a definitive explanation from the organizers about their creative process, one can only guess. It is perhaps worth returning to the fact that none of the choices of characters, costumes, accessories, or stage choreography were random or accidental. A team of well-known and talented professionals worked on this show for a very long time, and each detail was meticulously selected and rehearsed.
Continuing with the scene of La Cène, the new "goddess" is surrounded by her "apostles." Despite the organizers' damage-control claims that the scene was to represent community tolerance and inclusion, it naturally appears that some categories of people were notably absent. Rather than including literally all, the new religion of tolerance does not tolerate those whom it deems intolerable. Instead, it calls all to be imitators of its "apostles" (cf. 1 Cor 11:1). These "apostle"-activists, having received their "great commission," diligently spread their voice through all the earth and their words to the end of the world (cf. Ps. 19:4) - whether at the Olympics, or library story hours, mass media, film, and yes, in some churches - just as Saint Paul once preached in synagogues. The fact that the new religion follows the same general patters as did the Christian religion is likely not due to mockery or not primarily mockery. On the one hand, how else would one spread a message but by sending out activists and spreading it? On the other hand, the Western culture is steeped in Christianity, and even militant atheists cannot but use the symbols and patterns readily available in the culture.
Finally, the table is laden with choice foods (cf. Job 36:16) - all are invited to partake of the offering. The new "communion" is revealed when the cover is lifted and a naked blue man begins to sing. If we are to understand the blue man as representing Dionysius, as the organizers seem to insist, then the new communion is to partake of the god of wine, sex, festival, and theater. This new "wisdom" raises up her voice, "on the heights beside the way, in the paths she takes her stand; beside the gates in front of the town, at the entrance of the portals she cries aloud..." (Prov 8:2-3). But, what does this new "wisdom" proclaim? Here is a translation of the refrain of the song sung by the blue man - perhaps, some may find this profound:
Nakedddddd, simply all naked
Nakedddddd, simply all naked
simply all naked
simply all naked
simply all naked
simply all naked
It is unwise to discount secularism and atheism as mere benign, tolerant, and inclusive gayety (or frociaggine, as the Roman pontiff so eloquently put it) - it is not and cannot be. Humans may be sapiens, but first and foremost, we are adorans. Whether due to the design of the Creator or forces of natural selection - choose what you will - we relate to the world not through reason but through worship. Scientists may use the scientific method in their laboratories, but none uses it in daily life - our life is not a laboratory experiment. In the French Republic, the short-lived experiment with the Cult of Reason was very quickly replaced by the Cult of the Supreme Being. Perhaps, worshiping Reason did not take because it would have been akin to worshiping molecules or chemical reactions. We do not seek reason; we seek meaning. By now, state-sponsored religion has morphed into a Cult of Transvestites and Naked Debauchery. Having rejected Christ (or Odin, or Zeus, or Toutatis), people cannot suddenly begin to live by rational reason alone, but rather they find something or someone else to worship - such is the natural mode of our existence in and relation to the world and to society. Take away God, and people immediately begin to worship dictators, politicians, singers, movie stars, athletes, activists, or even naked blue men.
The "apostles" and adherents of the new religion are quite open about their enemy or main competitor. The two sides in the culture war are the "liberals," identified most recently with the Cult of Naked Debauchery, and the "conservatives" identified - at least in the West - with traditional Christianity. If only Christianity could be suppressed and driven out of the public sphere, the masses would be free to gyrate to the music of the new Cult. Of course, the French (and anyone else) is free to gyrate to any music of their choosing and to worship at any altar. But let us not be ignorant of what is happening or pacified by public relations' pretenses that the obvious use of the image of the Last Supper was not and had nothing at all to do with Christianity or Christians. To paraphrase the Gospel of Matthew, he who hath eyes to see, let him see.