Sunday, 22 February 2026

 

Modernity as Metaphysical Collapse

Fleeting amusement might be found in observing how international elites will account for their conflicting commitments if transgendered athletes compete in the Rio Olympics next month – i.e. men competing in women’s events, as has already happened in localized competitions. But there is no real consolation in realizing that people do not easily renounce their illusions. It’s still better to seek consolation in the love of wisdom.

I’ve been making my way through a collection of writings by the late Italian philosopher Augusto Del Noce (1910-1989), mainly from the early 1970s, available now in English for the first time in a compilation entitled The Crisis of Modernity. It is not an elementary book, not one that I, at any rate, glide through, but it’s studded with gems that orient the reader towards the sources of our current predicament.

Some of his themes are familiar and the direness of our situation isn’t a new revelation. But his depth and originality are helpful, not because his assessment of the Western soul is rosy, but because it rings true. He regards tottering modern society – variously termed: affluent, permissive, or technocratic – in bleak terms. It is “necessarily mendacious,” and like Marxism itself, presupposes rather than results in atheism.

What emerges, perhaps above all, is that our current crisis is fundamentally metaphysical in nature. Modernity is a grand project of negation: the very order of being – as classically understood – has been shunned for theories that emphasize right praxis in time; history has become the lens through which things are assigned value. Fulfillment “lies in front of us, not above us,” and whoever speaks of eternal metaphysical truths is branded a reactionary.

With a defining air of superiority to what came before, modernity necessarily entails a radical break with the past – which Del Noce stresses is viewed, baselessly, as irretrievable. There can be no going back to the old way of thinking because it has been surpassed. But going back to what, specifically? To the supernatural, to religious transcendence: this means that “the religious event of the Incarnation stops being regarded as the decisive turning point of historical existence,” as Sergio Cotta, one of his Italian contemporaries, put it.

He regards the “eclipse of authority” characteristic of our age as the greatest reversal ever to have befallen humanity. Authority, at root, means to make something grow, but today it’s understood mainly as a form of repression – indeed as something that impedes growth. The wholesale spurning of authority has only ushered in a mad dash for power – a dreadful substitution.

Augusto Del Noce

Ultimately, it can be boiled down to “the disappearance of the idea of the Father.” This in turn is closely linked to the repudiation of tradition, of handing down (tradere) what matters most – not any old regional custom, but “the order of eternal and metaphysical values” – to the next generation.

            We moderns are allowed only one source of real knowledge – science – and so the void caused by the ban on metaphysics has been filled with a scientism. Del Noce asserts that such scientism is based upon hatred for religious transcendence. Intrinsically totalitarian, scientism is “an unproven radical negation of traditional values” and so must rely upon subjugating the will of its adversaries (since it cannot prevail by reason), and upon confining them in “moral ghettos.”

And scientism’s “point of arrival,” he explains at length, is none other than the sexual revolution. To cut a long story short, here’s how you know if you are on the wrong side of history: it’s no longer a question of class warfare (bourgeoisie versus proletariat) but whether or not you are prepared to wage war upon sexual “repression.” History is the judge, Marx once said, and the proletariat its executioner. That role has now shifted to progressives urging the “repressed of the world” to unite.

            The social institution most culpable of transmitting repressive morality is, of course, the traditional monogamous family, and as Del Noce notices, “sexual liberation is not desired per se, but rather as a tool to break down the family.”

The obstacle to universal happiness, which allegedly is now within reach, is not a matter of class but of character. From this vantage point, it seems reasonable that those holding the wrong values should be isolated and ostracized. And this high-stakes radicalism would advance – as del Noce foresaw, with some flair, in 1972:

The remaining believers in a transcendent authority of values will be marginalized and reduced to second-class citizens. They will be imprisoned, ultimately, in “moral” concentration camps. But nobody can seriously think that moral punishments will be less severe than physical punishments. At the end of the process lies the spiritual version of genocide.

A century ago both Mussolini and Gramsci spoke of “socialism as the ‘religion destined to kill Christianity’.” But it later became apparent that total revolution could only be achieved if Marxist revolution became sexual revolution. Or as the Surrealists recognized: “the decisive battle against Christianity could be fought only at the level of the sexual revolution.” Emphasis in the original.) In sum, the ”erotic offensive” amounts to a “campaign of de-Christianization.”

Del Noce wouldn’t be shocked with the onset of the transgender phenomenon and the current mania for “self identifying” as something other – anything other (gender, race, species) – than what one is. It’s all part of what he saw as the secularization of Gnosticism (rather than of Christianity), whereby it is the self that creates, and freedom consists of negating “the given.” Add a touch of the Hegelian “elimination of the Divine image” and voila: you get the quest for liberation through the disintegration of every form of order, what he called the “great refusal” of 1968.

Given his diagnosis, it comes as no surprise that he doesn’t put much stock in political solutions to the real dangers we are facing. The remedy lies in restoring classical metaphysics, and yes, he says it, a “religious reawakening.”

 

If reparations matter, the Church of England must face its anti-Catholic past

More
Related
5 min read
share

If the Church of England is serious about its commitment to pay reparations in atonement for past wrongs, there is an obvious community it should attend to: British and Irish Catholics. After all, the Anglican Church was founded precisely to suppress and replace the Catholic Church, first in England and later in Ireland.

While the Church of England has widely publicised its regret over past links to the slave trade, Anglican leaders have not mentioned the Catholic community. In an acute piece of analysis for this publication, Joseph Shaw raised the question of the moral seriousness of the reparations debate – it is hard to take seriously if the Church of England does not consider its obligations to right the wrongs perpetrated against Catholics. Without ignoring Shaw’s rebuttal of those arguing for reparations for links to slavery, based on the Church of England’s own reasoning the most obvious case for reparations is to the Catholic faithful.

The Church of England’s present reparations debate relates to its study of Queen Anne’s Bounty, a fund established in 1704 to aid poor Anglican clergy. A 2022 report found that the bounty was supported in part through investments in transatlantic chattel slavery. That report was commissioned (an interim report states) “to know its past better in order to understand its present”. It took place within a broader context of a reckoning with Britain’s past involvement in the slave trade. Responding to the report, the Church of England pledged to repair the damage wrought by slavery, which it argued continues to have a negative impact on the life outcomes of people of colour.

When the report was released in 2022, the then Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, issued an apology for the Church’s links to “this abominable trade”, which took men, women and children “created in God’s image and stripped them of their dignity and freedom”.

“The fact that some within the Church actively supported and profited from it is a source of shame,” Welby continued. “It is only by facing this painful reality that we can take steps towards genuine healing and reconciliation – the path that Jesus Christ calls us to walk. This is a moment for lament, repentance and restorative action. I pray for those affected by this news and hope that we may work together to discern a new way forward.”

Facing up to the evils of one’s past can only be commended. As an Irish Catholic, the legacy of religious persecution is still embedded in our national life, and our forebears were also “stripped of their dignity and freedom”. I only wish the Church of England would take a hard look at the history of its institution in relation to the persecution of Catholics and religious minorities. Imagine if the Church of England were to investigate the degree to which not only “some within it”, but the whole institution, “actively supported and profited” from the persecution of Catholics. The results would be hard to contain in a single report.

The 2022 report on slavery does not mention that the bounty is itself derived from funds intended for the Pope, but which were diverted by King Henry VIII to finance the Crown instead. Prior to King Henry’s intervention, newly appointed bishops, clergy, abbots, etc, paid a tenth of their first year’s earnings directly to the Pope after being appointed. While King Henry initially halted the collection of such payments, Thomas Cromwell obtained an Act of Parliament to restore the payments, this time to the Crown and ultimately for the benefit of the established Church.

This is but one example of how the Church of England benefited massively from the confiscation of Catholic property and wealth. In a manner far more direct than its links to the slave trade, its own wealth and power were built on the persecution of the Catholic community. The legacy of the Church of England’s actions – or those actions carried out by the Crown on its behalf – has been one of great suffering and hardship for Catholics in many ways. Across Ireland and the British Isles, Catholics were outlawed from practising their Faith on pain of death: they were barred from taking up public office unless they converted, had property confiscated and saw beautiful churches and religious artefacts – which they had scrimped and saved to fund – destroyed or seized.

To this day, many old beautiful churches and cathedrals still in use by the Churches of England and Ireland were forcibly confiscated from Catholics. One of the most egregious examples is surely Dublin, Ireland’s capital. It was only in 2025, when St Mary’s Pro-Cathedral was elevated by Pope Leo XIV, that for the first time since the Reformation Dublin Catholics had a cathedral in which to worship. In all that time, the Church of Ireland has made use of not one but two former Catholic cathedrals, St Patrick’s and Christ Church. Catholics hoped in vain for many centuries to see these returned to the long-beleaguered community.

In facing this “painful reality”, as Welby put it, imagine if the Church of England took steps towards “genuine healing and reconciliation” with Catholics. What would that look like? As we move towards the 200th anniversary of Catholic Emancipation in Great Britain and Ireland, there could hardly be a better time for the Church of England to take a cold, hard look at itself.

The desired result here, for Catholics at least, is not the establishment of a reparations fund, but the healing of a divide within Christendom. If the Church of England were serious about reparations, then it should seek to repair the greatest evil perpetuated by its institution: the lamentable division in the Body of Christ. Only when Catholics are able to welcome the Church of England back into the fold could they call themselves satisfied – this would be a true and just reparation.

Sunday, 15 February 2026

 

Steve Bannon 

courted Epstein 

in his efforts to 

‘take down’ Pope Francis

The late Pope Francis, left, and former White House adviser Steve Bannon.

Steve Bannon, a former White House adviser to US President Donald Trump, discussed opposition strategies with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein against Pope Francis, with Bannon saying he hoped to “take down” the pontiff, according to newly released files from the US Department of Justice.

Messages sent between the pair in 2019, released in the massive document dump last month, reveal Bannon courted the late financier in his attempts to undermine the former pontiff after leaving the first Trump administration.

Bannon had been highly critical of Francis whom he saw as an opponent to his “sovereigntist” vision, a brand of nationalist populism which swept through Europe in 2018 and 2019. The released documents from the DOJ appear to show that Epstein had been helping Bannon to build his movement.

“Will take down (Pope) Francis,” Bannon wrote to Epstein in June 2019. “The Clintons, Xi, Francis, EU – come on brother.”

Pope Francis was a significant obstacle to Bannon’s brand of nationalist populism. In 2018, the former Trump aide described Francis to The Spectator as “beneath contempt,” accusing him of siding with “globalist elites” and, according to “SourceMaterial,” urged Matteo Salvini, now Italy’s deputy prime minister, to “attack” the pontiff. For his part, Salvini has used Christian iconography and language when pursuing his anti-immigrant agenda.

Rome and the Vatican have been important for Bannon. He set up a Rome bureau when he ran Breitbart News and has been involved in trying to establish a political training “gladiator school” to defend Judaeo-Christian values not far from the Eternal City.

Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon speaks at Atreju 2018, a conference of right wing activists, on September 22, 2018, in Rome, Italy. Bannon was in Rome to drum up support for The Movement, his organization designed to help right-wing political parties in Europe.
Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon talks with Giorgia Meloni, leader of the Brothers of Italy, before speaking at Atreju 2018, a conference of right wing activists, as aids block cameras from viewing through the bushes behind on September 22, 2018 in Rome, Italy. Meloni, known for her conservative ideals, is now prime minister of Italy.

Francis, meanwhile, was a counterweight to the Trumpian worldview, strongly critiquing nationalism and making advocacy for migrants a hallmark of his pontificate.

The recently released DOJ files reveal Bannon messaged Epstein on several occasions in his efforts to undermine the late pope.

In his messages with Epstein, Bannon references “In the Closet of the Vatican,” a 2019 book by French journalist Frédéric Martel that lifted a lid on secrecy and hypocrisy at high levels of the church. Martel created a storm with his book by claiming 80% of the clergy working in the Vatican are gay, while exploring how they keep their sexuality secret.

The whole question of homosexuality in the church has been a lightning rod for some conservatives, who see it as evidence of a deeper, systemic crisis in the church, with some linking it to the wider sexual abuse scandals. Most experts and researchers view any conflating of sexual orientation with abuse as scientifically inaccurate.

Bannon showed an interest in turning Martel’s book into a film after meeting the author in Paris at a five-star hotel. In the messages, Bannon appears to suggest that Epstein could be the film’s executive producer. “You are now exec producer of ‘ITCOTV’ (In the closet of the Vatican),” Bannon wrote.

It is not clear how serious the proposal from Bannon to Epstein was, and, in the exchange, Epstein doesn’t mention the offer and asks about Bannon filming Noam Chomsky, the philosopher and public intellectual. Martel said when he met Bannon at the Hotel Le Bristol he told him that he could not agree to any film deal as his publishers controlled the film rights and had already signed a deal with another corporation. He told CNN that he thinks Bannon wanted to “instrumentalize” the book in his efforts against Pope Francis.

Steve Bannon and Jeffrey Epstein in a handout image from the estate of the late financier and convicted sex offender, released by Democrats on the House Oversight Committee in Washington, DC, on December 12, 2025.

The Epstein files show Epstein, on April 1, 2019, emailed himself “in the closet of the vatican,” and later sent Bannon an article titled “Pope Francis or Steve Bannon? Catholics must choose” to which Bannon replies “easy choice.”

Austen Ivereigh, a biographer of the late pope, said Bannon thought he could use Martel’s book to embarrass and damage Pope Francis, while claiming to “purify” the church. “I think he badly misjudged the nature of the book – and Pope Francis,” Ivereigh told CNN.

Yet, as it now turns out, it appears that Bannon was messaging Epstein several years after his 2008 conviction for child sex offenses and just before he was arrested for the sex trafficking of minors.

Rev. Antonio Spadaro, a Vatican official who collaborated closely with Pope Francis, told CNN Bannon’s messages show a desire to fuse “spiritual authority with political power for strategic ends.”

The late pope, Spadaro explains, resisted such a link: “What those messages reveal is not merely hostility toward a pontiff, but a deeper attempt to instrumentalize faith as a weapon – precisely the temptation he sought to disarm.”

The period of 2018 to 2019 saw intense opposition to Francis, which culminated in an August 2018 dossier released by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the former papal ambassador to the US, accusing him of failing to deal with abuse committed by Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. A Vatican inquiry later cleared Francis.

But Bannon’s desire to make a film out of Martel’s book saw him lose an ally in the Vatican. Cardinal Raymond Burke, a prominent conservative critic of Francis, said: “I am not at all of the mind that the book should be made into a film.”

Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon makes his way through crowds surrounded by his entourage after speaking at Atreju 2018.

Burke was also portrayed in an unflattering way in Martel’s book. Burke’s split with Bannon came when he cut ties with Dignitatis Humanae, a conservative institute founded by Benjamin Harnwell, a British political adviser and a close associate of Bannon’s based in Italy.

Harnwell had been working with Bannon to set up an academy to train nationalist-populist leaders in an 800-year-old former monastery called “Certosa di Trisulti” in the province of Frosinone, 47 miles south-east of Rome. Harnwell is engaged in an ongoing legal battle with Italy’s culture ministry over the monastery’s conversion, with a hearing taking place on February 11.

In 2019, the Italian government revoked a lease given to Harnwell’s institute for the monastery, stating irregularities, non-payments and misrepresentations by Harnwell. In 2024, however, a Roman court cleared him, and he is seeking to win back the lease.

The Epstein files also reveal that Bannon forwarded an email to Epstein in July 2018 with an article from Italian newspaper “La Repubblica” headlined “Bannon the European: He’s opening the populist fort in Brussels.” Bannon was forwarding an English translation of the article, which had originally been sent by Harnwell.

Harnwell told CNN that Epstein was “not involved in Trisulti.”

Director of the Dignitatis Humanae Institute Benjamin Harnwell at the Trisulti Monastery Certosa di Trisulti in Collepardo on May 2, 2019. Harnwell was behind a would-be "gladiator school" for populists in Italy.
The Trisulti Monastery Certosa di Trisulti in Collepardo on May 2, 2019.

Elsewhere in the files, Epstein jokes with his brother, Mark, about inviting Pope Francis to his residence for a “massage” during the US papal visit in 2015. Three years later, he messages Bannon to say he’s trying to “organize a trip for the pope to the Midde East,” adding “headline – tolerance.”

When Bannon shares with Epstein an article about the Vatican condemning “populist nationalism,” Epstein quotes John Milton’s biblical poem “Paradise Lost,” when Satan has been cast out of heaven.

“Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven,” Epstein tells Bannon.

CNN has contacted a representative of Bannon for comment. Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing in relation to Epstein or any allegation of sexual misconduct.