Great article! I didn't know this.

The image on that video is not from 1916, though, to judge from the clothing. It looks more like the 40s or 50s. But you see how things get worse and worse if they are not corrected. Now we are in a free fall.

Including at weddings. How sad that a couple who receive the Holy Sacrament go to profane dancing after. 

This is reminiscent of the thread on “rock” and “pop” music.  Let common and Catholic sense reign.  Just as there are acceptable tunes in a very broad category, the same applies to the broad category of dancing.  There’s a huge difference between dancing the Macarena, folk dancing, square dancing——-and twerking, pole dancing, and giving a lap dance! 

I was once condemned by a “pious” woman for doing the Macarena at a family-friendly neighborhood block party.  She cited St. John Vianney as proof I’d committed a serious mortal  sin.   

Now, if I’d been clad in Daisy Dukes, pasties, and shiny red six inch high heels, twerking on top of the bar surrounded by salivating men…totally different! 

Not to nitpick, but what is an example of a mortal sin that would not be "serious"?

Not directing this towards you, but in the past 40+ years, there's been a lot of confusion about "serious" sin, "grave" sin, and "mortal" sin.  I'd really like to see sins that cause the loss of the state of grace be referred to as "mortal sins" and in no other way.  I saw it coming a long time ago that the long game of the Newchurchers is to create a new category of "grave but not mortal" sin, giving license to contraceptors, fornicators, invalidly "marrieds", self-pleasurers, and even active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs to be able to feel like they have not lost their salvation and may receive communion as "medicine for the sick", to create a safe space of "more than venial, but not mortal".  That way they can live in such a state without fearing hell on account of it.  Am I right?

It reminds me of those Catholics who will point to the Protestant-made "satanic panic" videos on rock music or other subjects as if they were inherently evil in themselves (impossible, given all things that exist are good to some degree), rather than being used as a tool by the powers of evil.

So, the focus here is on the interactions between boys/girls or men/women.

Would a dance where just one gender participated be sinful?

To me, that's what I think of as INHERENTLY sinful, if it would be sinful regardless of extraneous circuмstances.

Then, does this criterion extend to certain types of dances that would be with mixed gender and yet are so designed as to incite very little tedency to impurity?

Of course, there are others today that are probably little more than fornication with clothes on.

I imagine that there's a gradation of sinfulness here, and at what point (with what type of dance) does it cross over into grave sin?  Or, even, at what point does it cross over into even venial sin?

Another aspect might be subjective.  If young teens are dancing, with their raging hormones, probably a much greater occasion of sin than if a some octogenarians were dancing, etc.

So there's a very subtle blend of subjective considerations here.

And even when dancing alone, a woman could make herself a temptation, and yet part of that might be due to her attractiveness and her grace/athleticism, where a less attractive woman who's out of shape migth cause no occasion of sin.

Apart from the aspect of sin, I for one by nature despise dancing.  It's completely contrary to my temperament.  I consider it undignified, in any form ... even if it were some "high-class" ballroom dance.  I find it to be incompatible with holiness.

So, could you imagine either Our Lord or Our Blessed Mother dancing ... even if it were in the most modest manner possible and not in mixed company?  To me it speaks to a certain frivolity, and the motions of the body seem to draw one's mind and nature down toward the carnal, the animal, and the material world.  That might be just me, and this doesn't speak to sin, but I personally detest dancing.  I only ever danced once in my entire life.  I tried for about 2-3 minutes, found it to be so incredibly awkward and undignified (not just because I wasn't particularly good at it) ... and then immediately left the dance feeling as though I had degraded myself, and never danced again (I was about 18 in my first year of college).  It's not that I'm particularly uncoordinnated, as I was a pretty strong athlete in the day with good coordination, balance, and strength.  It was just the gyrations and movements that I somehow found degrading and undignified ... I don't know, somehow animalistic.

I would like ti bring this discussion down to earth.

Is there any dance you can think of that might not be sinful?
You probably can't name one.
Is anyone dancing that today?
No.

So when someone asks you is dancing sinful you say: almost every dance is sinful.

We are talking of course about mixed dances which are basically all dances.

If  you want to lean left and right in your room and call that a dance nobody is talking about that.

The ones i just mentioned in the bible quotes.

Furthermore, there is no dance that is sinful. This is a form of gnosticism to say so for it conflates concupiscence with the object.

.
It is a sin to put oneself in the occasion of sin. Dances are an occasion of sin. This is not gnosticism, but simple Catholic morals.

Its akin to saying sex is a sin, or beauty is a sin or women are a sin for they can all lead to concupiscence.

Tell that to all the saints quoted in the article above, as well as the Holy Office. They said dancing is a sin. They didn't say sex is a sin, or that being beautiful is a sin, or that being a woman is a sin.