Eschatological Meaning of the Constitutionalization of Abortion Rights in France
Socio-political Context
On March 4, 2024, in Versailles, at the direct summons of Macron (who stated, "I am committed to making women's abortion rights irreversible by inserting them into the Constitution"), French parliamentarians inscribed in the Constitution a "guaranteed freedom" that no majority in other democratic countries had ever radically sought to constitutionalize. The philosophy behind this inscription is that it will hinder any future attempts to "turn back," unlike what happened in the USA.
Emmanuel Macron's choice to inscribe abortion into the Constitution is a true and definitive cultural and "sacred" hallmark. Tocqueville was astonished at how irreligion continued to constitute the ultimate "general and dominant passion" inherited from the Revolution, while all other cultural expressions of the Revolution - including the constitution itself - had long since abandoned the hearts and minds of citizens.
The protests in the "banlieues," those of the "yellow vests," the farmers, the difficulties in public schools, and the shortage of staff in healthcare are the real emergencies, concrete and dramatic. A real "debacle," a devastating delegitimization has struck Macron, for his divisive and senseless policies.
But he knows that, with the European elections approaching, battles are won by expanding one's area of consensus, in France as elsewhere. Through the banner of rights, he wants to rebuild a bridge with his "insurgent left," which he lost after adopting a strict immigration policy.
The straightforward endorsement by the senators was surprising, considering that the upper house is controlled by the center-right neo-Gaullists allied with the centrists, or rather by the conservative opposition.
"I was very close to these situations and very involved," said Dr. Maurice Caillet in an interview, a famous former Freemason who converted to Catholicism in 1984, and passed away in 2020. "When it came to the old abortion law, because I was a gynecologist and I was committed to the left, in Freemasonry, and there I realized that when Giscard d'Estaing was elected - and it seemed that he was not a Freemason - but in his cabinet there was the grand master of the Grand Orient, named Proteau, at the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs there was Mrs. Veil, Dr. Pierre Simon, grand master of the Grand National Lodge of France. So, there was a grand master right next to the president, with the health minister, and so the law passed very easily because, at the time of the parliament's choice, the left-wing deputies voted in favor but the right-wing deputies, who were Freemasons, and unfortunately there were many, also voted in favor, and thus the government had a majority that it wanted. In conclusion, two Grand Masters were chosen as government advisors and had asked the 'brothers' to support that project. Madame Veil herself was surprised to have so few opponents. This was also done recently for the marriage for all (PACS) where unfortunately MEP deputies (Members of European Parliament) who are Freemasons voted for marriage for all." [1]
In Lourdes, where Caillet converted following a pilgrimage to seek his wife's healing, for the first time, during a weekday Mass, he heard the word of God, the same word used in initiation rites, rites linked to lodges. "This word of the Gospel was also used within Freemasonry, in a completely reversed perspective," he later said.
Many principles of Freemasonry are nothing but a kind of Christianity without Christ. Caillet's conversion began precisely when he discovered that "ask and it will be given to you, seek and you will find, knock and the door will be opened to you" was not a Masonic motto but rather the "word of the Lord Jesus."
His latest book, "I Was a Freemason," clearly shows that Masonic principles "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" are indeed a parody of Jesus' teachings.
Influencing public opinion, Caillet continues, is undoubtedly the mission of Freemasonry. Especially on the issues that Freemasonry addresses with politics, which it considers important for its designs.
During the discussion of the abortion- law, enormous pressure was exerted on the media to direct the opinion of the masses, but even more so on right-wing politicians, who in '74 did not strongly oppose it, and the law passed without problems. Today, issues such as divorces, gay marriages, contraceptives, libertinism, relativism are at stake. Hedonism, the desire for pleasure, the rejection of suffering. Man must be free to devote himself to pleasure. This is the "improvement," the progress that Freemasonry aims for.
There is, indeed, no contradiction between the male chauvinism of ‘Masonic obediences’, all rigorously male, and the so-called "liberation of women." The common point between the two is the desire to get rid of all obstacles for men to take advantage of women, without any constraint.
Female ‘Masonic obediences’, being in the minority, pursued unrestrained freedom without considering the consequences for their femininity and their real independence.
He emphasizes how all anthropological revolutions disguised as rights pass through the lodges because there are cross-power groups in parliaments working for this. But it should not be said.
However, as long as one remains vague, it fuels a conspiracy that becomes "literature" and plays into the hands of the lodges. But when those who were part of it reveal the intentions of the Masonic lobby, then it starts to become more annoying.
In his latest book, published in 2019, "Secret maçonnique ou vérité catholique," Serge Abad Gallardo, a former French government official, provides names and numbers of Masons in the Senate and the French National Assembly.
He reveals that behind all the inhuman laws of French history is the hand of the "aprons." Starting from the law in 1967 that legalized the contraceptive pill, promoted by Lucien Neuwirth, who was a Freemason, continuing - as we have already seen above in the testimony of Dr. Maurice Caillet - in 1975 with the Veil law, closely related to Masonic circles.
In 1978, euthanasia was promoted by the Mason Henri Caillavet.
In 2013, Christiane Taubira, whom Gallardo met in Guyana - where he had worked for several years - "and who is a Mason," passed the law on same-sex marriage.
"In my book," says Serge Abad Gallardo, "I provide some figures. Masons represent about 0.03% of the French population, yet 35% of French deputies and senators are Masons. Becoming a deputy or senator is 120 times more likely for a Mason than someone who is not. Then there is the so-called 'Fraternelle parlementaire,' an informal organization that brings together elected officials at the highest political levels. They come from all ‘Masonic obediences’, including some that are not necessarily allies, from both the right and the left. The former president of the association, Bernard Saugey (a Mason senator from the Republicans, a center-right political party), once said, 'If I perform my role well, left-wing and right-wing parliamentarians will vote together on social issues.' And now we have new proof of this, with the law on medically assisted reproduction, recently passed by the Senate. One solution to this serious threat to democracy would be to abolish secrecy and require politicians to publicly declare their Masonic membership. At least citizens would know who they are voting for." [2]
This thing makes us understand the meaning of the lobby, which is numerically insignificant but capable of conquering power and holding it without particular opposition.
"Every entity loses its reason for just being there when it is either defeated by an opposing entity or when it achieves the goal for which it exists," says a promising young Italian philosopher, Gaetano Masciullo.
And he continues: it seems evident that men and women today reason with Masonic (Gnostic) categories, without even knowing what Freemasonry is, without the need for any initiation in the lodges, as was once necessary. So, we no longer live in a Masonic era (historians speak of the century of Masonic triumph, the 18th and 19th centuries.). Today we are beyond, we live in a true post-Masonic era. What needed to be done has been done (...). The Italian Radical Party has always advocated all the worst in moral matters, from abortion to euthanasia, free drugs, free sex, homosexuality, and so on. Today, this party no longer exists, it is no longer needed, so to speak, because all parties across the board have now adopted, so to speak, the ‘Radical’ word.
There is no longer any need for the Radical Party because now all parties are fundamentally Radical in thought, and there is no longer any need for Freemasonry, even though it still exists because big interests are at stake.
But it is no longer necessary to make a revolution, now we are in a state of permanent revolution." [3]
Freemasonry is ultimately a cult to Lucifer, says Gallardo, citing about 200 Masonic documents. As explained by a Spanish author, an eminent expert on the subject, Ricardo de la Cierva (Masonry, Satanism, and Exorcism), "Satan does not need to be worshiped to achieve his goals. All he has to do is prevent man from following Jesus." [4]
Philosophical reading: the dialectic of contradiction
If we depict being as a circle, Maritain said, there are three different but complementary ways of relating to reality for knowledge: 1) the dianoetic one proper to philosophy and mathematics, which penetrates the circle starting from its circumference; 2) the peri-noetic one typical of natural sciences, which remains around the circumference; 3) the ana-noetic one proper to wisdom, which starts from the center of the circle and proceeds towards its circumference. [5]
French Justice Minister Eric Dupond-Moretti wanted to emphasize: "We will be the first country in the world to enshrine in the Constitution the freedom of women to control their bodies. This vote essentially reaffirms to those who do not yet know it that women in our country are free."
The definition of abortion as a faculty for women to "dispose of their bodies," made by Minister Éric Dupond-Moretti, is the key that thus opens the anagogic, or an analytic, or ana-noetic perspective, as Maritain calls it, or contemplative of the stakes, not only in France but in the entire West (including China, which has assumed a turbo-capitalist and Marxist paradigm, still a legacy of the vituperated West).
If I may digress slightly, Putin's Russia and Modi's India, this year elevated to the first country by population, with their respective "sacred" rites recently instituted to sanctify the throne-altar alliance (with the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate and the BAPS temple, respectively) represent the complementary Hegelian "right" of a similar dialectic-thought, not of Pauline friendship(man vs women, Christ vs Church), but of antithesis, contradiction, up to the destruction ("split" would say, Hegel, between master vs servant) of the negative, the adversary, the enemy (of the degenerate West or non-Hindu religions, Putin or Modi would say).
But let's consider the left dialectic philosophy, or rather, the logic of the French executive, which is inspired by Giachino da Fiore's inverted triadic model.
Karl Löwith demonstrated this very well in his volume "Meaning and End of History," and others along with him: there is no secularization without the theory of the three ages; and this also makes us understand something largely widespread that is never reflected upon, namely, that the entire nineteenth century is within the idea of the three ages of the world. Even in Auguste Comte, there are three ages of the world. And one wonders: why must these ages always be three and not four or five? There are three because the paradigm is theological, and even for Comte, the last age is the secular one. There is the religious era, the metaphysical one, and then finally, the scientific-positive one. Therefore, the third age is secular, it is the inheritance of the religious transformed into a secular moment. The theory of the three ages of the world is the eschatology or philosophy of history of the 19th century, and it is exactly borrowed from Joachim, whose name is again relevant - there is Henri De Lubac who has dedicated two great volumes to Joachim da Fiore and precisely the second of these retraces all the great influence of Joachim da Fiore in French, German, and Italian thought of the 19th and 20th centuries.
Especially in the nineteenth century, this paradigm of the three ages has an enormous influence; but it is Lessing who launches this paradigm. For Lessing, who we know to have belonged openly to Freemasonry - he also published dialogues, Ernst and Falk, dedicated to Freemasonry - the third age of the world means fraternity, as Freemasonry imagined it. So the third age of the world means the new church, the Invisible Church Kant spoke of in "Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason."
This great project cultivated by European intelligentsia coincides with that of the new religion. The new religion means the new church, it means the realized kingdom of God, it means the age of the spirit as it must be expressed, which is the age of reason.
Freemasonry then conceived itself as the new antichristian church that had to replace the Christian one; without these things, nothing is understood, and not to analyze conspiracies or indulge in conspiracy theories, but to put things back in their time. There is a philosophy of Freemasonry that has Lessing and Fichte as respected representatives, therefore one must understand in what context these authors speak of the eschatological, messianic, infra-temporal idea that these authors have, an idea that is cultivated precisely in Masonic fraternities.
When one speaks of the third age, of the new church, of the new religion, and so on, this is what is meant; otherwise, this idea would not have had such expansion if it had not had real footholds in the world; it would not have been the ideal of so many intellectuals if it had not been visually and visibly linked to real centers of power: philosophy is not outside the world, but it is in the world and also represents real forces. In Italy, this idea is expressed in Mazzini's civil religion, which draws on Saint-Simon's gospel of Lessing; or the trinitarian model is also present in Marx, albeit in outline: there is the idea of primitive agrarian community, there is the model of capitalism that corrupts and destroys the sociality of relationships, and there is the third age of the world which is communism that restores - through the mediation of industrial capitalism and the technique of modern science and therefore through the mediation of reason on a higher level - the idea of community, but no longer in the primitive form of village community and agrarian community. Therefore, even in Marx, and especially in the mature Marx, the trinitarian model is present, on the other hand, it is Hegel's legacy of the dialectical trinity of unity, division, and reconciliation. [6]
Theological Reading
But Freemasonry also wants to appropriate the mystery of the Incarnation, through the desecration of the Eucharist. Maurice Caillet testifies how in some lodges black masses are performed, unspeakably profaning the Holy Host.
Peter Kreeft says that abortion is the tragic parody of the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, in which the priest consecrates the bread and wine with the words, "This is My Body, given for you."
Erik Peterson, in the introduction to his "Book of Angels," says that the path of the Church leads from the earthly Jerusalem to the heavenly one. The essence of the Church consists in having its existence between the earthly polis and the heavenly one. [7]
Paraphrasing St. Augustine, we could say analogically that the state conceived in a gnostic way is a path from the earthly city to that of the underworld. The character of the Church consists in the fact that Christians abandon the earthly Jerusalem, do not know any lasting ‘polis', and seek like Abraham the future 'polis' built by God, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, where there are angels and saints, the firstborn enrolled as citizens in heaven, and above all the mediator of the new covenant, Jesus.
Similarly, the character of the anti-Christian secular state is determined by the fact that its citizens definitively abandon the triple norm of natural law (respect for life from conception to natural death, rejection of infidelity in affection, such as adultery, and respect for educational thought freedom) and know and impose on earth only positive law, constructed only by man, from the realm of man, the realm of freedom, of rights (regnum hominis, regnum libertatis). In this way, it approaches the kingdom of the underworld, where the supreme law is "Non-serviam", freedom without truth, without boundaries and authorities.
As the Church approaches a festive, heavenly, worshipful gathering of free men, strangers to the earth, gathered in heaven - since the heavenly Jerusalem is not only a city, nor only an indestructible kingdom, but also a temple and sanctuary into which Christ, the High Priest, has entered-, so the secular city is also a temple, into which, as a priest-parody, with its ministers or slaves, strangers to heaven, Lucifer, as the “brothers” prefer to call him, the murderer and liar par excellence, has similarly let them entered through a initiation ceremony.
Images of the sphere of political power blend with those coming from worship in two particular books of Sacred Scripture, the letter to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse, and these starting points, this archè, are sought in heaven by Christians and on earth by secular regimes. Just as the ekklesia profane, the assembly of citizens is an institution of the polis, made up of residents, of "brothers" with citizenship rights for the execution of positive, constitutional legal acts, the Christian ekklesia is the assembly of citizens with full rights of the heavenly city, who gather to carry out above all the supreme act of worship, the Eucharistic one. They are radically distinct and at the same time formally connected, especially by a sacrament, that is, by worship, by the liturgy that celebrates God the Redeemer (in the case of the ecclesial community) or Lucifer (in the case of the Masonic fraternity, that is, of the irreligious society par excellence, the one in which the personal God is absent), participation in worship which in the heavenly city is celebrated by angels, and the righteous who have reached perfection, citizens of heaven, and in the earthly one by demons, citizens of hell, with the wicked arrived at their destination.
They necessarily enter into a relationship with them, through the Eucharistic worship and abortion, respectively. The cultic manifestations of the two cities must therefore be understood either as participation of the demons and the damned in earthly worship, or, conversely, every earthly cult of the Church and the secular-emancipated-from-faith-State, as participation in the worship offered to God by the angels in heaven or to Lucifer by the demons in hell respectively.
Many paths are traversed by man to direct himself towards the angel or the demon, not as if he could claim to become an angel or a demon, but because the existence he lives is a precursor existence, and what we have not yet appeared (1 John 3:2). And if we do not direct ourselves towards the angel who stands before God, especially in the Eucharistic worship, we certainly turn to the angel who has turned away from God, to that object of worship in the lodges, Lucifer. Man has always existed like this: he goes out from himself and approaches the angel or the demon, touching the metaphysical boundaries where they stand, either below or above. [8]
"Il y a dans toute homme, à toute heure, deux postulations simultanées, l'une vers Dieu, l'autre verse Satan," writes Charles Baudelaire (Mon coeur mis à nu, n. XIX). [9]
Conclusion
“Avortement dans constitution. La clause de conscience des soignants est rejetée. La loi s'impose à la conscience qui oblige à donner la mort. La France a touché le fond. Elle est devenue un état totalitaire.” (Abortion in the constitution. The healthcare providers' conscience clause is rejected. The law imposes on the conscience to compel the taking of life. France has hit rock bottom. It has become a totalitarian state.) [10]
Now we should dismiss political correctness.
When one is confronted with an evil, perverted, nasty little kid smashing a chandelier with a hammer, why should he use gentleman's language? It's decadence; it's death wish; it's necrophilia; it's the end of sanity and civilization. [11]
“(So) let's start in... Auschwitz. That's the fruit of moral relativism.
If we want concrete evidence, we’ll let Mussolini answer that question. Listen to what he wrote: 'Everything I have said and done in these last years is relativism by intuition... If relativism signifies contempt for fixed categories and men who claim to be the bearers of an objective, immortal truth... then there is nothing more relativistic than fascistic attitudes and activity... From the fact that all ideologies are of equal value, that all ideologies are mere fictions, the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his ideology and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable.'
That was the hard version of relativism." [12]
The sexual revolution (animalism) and gnostic revolution (angelism) are leading to Brave New World Without God—the soft version of relativism.
(IA or digital revolution, by the way, could be, and saying so I will be politically correct, a dramatic easy-going way, or facilitating frame to the Gnostic, angelistic-vision of the Brave New Functionalistic post-human, post-Christian, post everything World, in which exists and is allowed only and only one question, How?, and nothing of course related to, Why?, [ 13] and even less, Who?)
So, the West (and France) is the first society in history whose mind (and law) molders are moral relativists. No other society in history has ever survived without rejecting moral relativism and believing in moral absolutes. There has never been a society of relativists, more than solipsists. Therefore, if this society not only doesn’t disprove one of the most universally established laws of history, and does not repent of its relativism and survive, but even enforce its relativism, it will certainly perish. [14]
A Final Thought
Cursed is the man who trusts in man." (Jeremiah 17:5)
Prophet Jeremiah, in the second liturgical week of Lent, tells us a word that at first glance is not very beautiful: cursed is the man who trusts in man.
It's a too-hard, strong word.
"Cursed", who is the subject that curses?
It is not God who curses.
God cannot curse.
But we use this word for the man who trusts in himself, who trusts in human reasoning, in positive laws and does not trust in teachings, in God's law, which prohibits killing, proclaiming evil as good, announced on the third Sunday of Lent, on the eve of the disastrous French supreme legal choice.
The man who trusts in himself, in his physical strength, in his wealth, in his intelligence, in his gnosis.
This man does not have the blessing and does not bring a blessing.
So if he does not bring blessing, what does he bring? Curse.
Those words of Jeremiah can help us see what happened to Judah: they trusted in themselves and did not seek advice from anyone, and we all know what happened to him. [15]
Acknowledgments:
[1] Cf:
[2] https://www.parrocchiavinchiaturo.it/2020/05/io-ex-massone-tornato-alla-fede-vi-spiego-perche-chiesa-e-loggia-sono-incompatibili-e-come-la-massoneria-condiziona-la-politica/
[3] Cf: https://oraetcogita.substack.com/p/part-four-a-new-study-on-freemasonry
[4] Cf. https://www.famillechretienne.fr/37153/article/ancien-franc-macon-serge-abad-gallardo-raconte-sa-conversion-etonnante; e, https://it.aleteia.org/2017/03/20/ex-massone-raccontare-libro-servire-lucifero-senza-sapere/
[5] Cf: https://disf.org/sul-mio-scaffale/9788837226435
[6] Cf.: M. Borghesi http://www.diesse.org/cm-files/2015/09/30/borghesi-fede-e-sapere-in-hegel.pdf
[7] Cf: Erik Peterson-Franco Manzi, Il libro degli angeli, Edizioni Liturgiche, Roma, 2008, p. 35 ss.)
[8] Cf. Erik Peerson, ibid, p. 81-82
[9] ibid., p. 82, nota 123.
[10] Mgr Michel Aupetit, post on “X”, February 28
[11] Cf. Peter Kreeft, A Refutation of Moral Relativism, Ignatius Press, 1999, pag. 51-52
[12] Mussolini's Diuturna, pages 374-77, quoted by Peter Kreeft, ibid., p.18
[13] Cf.McGilchrist, Iain, The Divided Brain and the Search for Meaning, 2012.
[14] Cf. Peter Kreeft, ibid., p.19
[15] Don Vigilio Covi, cf.