Pope Benedict Vs. Francis: Part 12

AM+DG

The English Denzinger site (which was run by (20) priests, and which (strangely??) has not been active for a few years, was invaluable and priceless in terms of comparing everything Francis claimed to what authentic Church Teaching says.

The following is an example of one article I had saved. It is very long, so I will post just a few bits every day. The following continues from yesterday’s post.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Benedict XVI…

…judges Francis’ words that it was not an offense accepting the Cross in the form of a communist symbol

  • Marxism’s great deception: change becomes destruction

God’s glory and peace on earth are inseparable. Where God is excluded, there is a breakdown of peace in the world; without God, no orthopraxis can save us. In fact, there does not exist an orthopraxis which is simply just, detached from a knowledge of what is good. The will without knowledge is blind and so action, orthopraxis, without knowledge is blind and leads to the abyss. Marxism’s great deception was to tell us that we had reflected on the world long enough, that now it was at last time to change it. But if we do not know in what direction to change it, if we do not understand its meaning and its inner purpose, then change alone becomes destruction – as we have seen and continue to see. (Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. Lecture at the Bishops’ Conference in Benevento (Italy) on the topic: “Eucharist, Communion and Solidarity”, June 2, 2002)

  • Marx and communism: a road towards all-encompassing change

The nineteenth century held fast to its faith in progress as the new form of human hope, and it continued to consider reason and freedom as the guiding stars to be followed along the path of hope. Nevertheless, the increasingly rapid advance of technical development and the industrialization connected with it soon gave rise to an entirely new social situation: there emerged a class of industrial workers and the so-called “industrial proletariat”, whose dreadful living conditions Friedrich Engels described alarmingly in 1845. For his readers, the conclusion is clear: this cannot continue; a change is necessary. Yet the change would shake up and overturn the entire structure of bourgeois society. After the bourgeois revolution of 1789, the time had come for a new, proletarian revolution: progress could not simply continue in small, linear steps. A revolutionary leap was needed. Karl Marx took up the rallying call, and applied his incisive language and intellect to the task of launching this major new and, as he thought, definitive step in history towards salvation—towards what Kant had described as the “Kingdom of God”. Once the truth of the hereafter had been rejected, it would then be a question of establishing the truth of the here and now. The critique of Heaven is transformed into the critique of earth, the critique of theology into the critique of politics. Progress towards the better, towards the definitively good world, no longer comes simply from science but from politics—from a scientifically conceived politics that recognizes the structure of history and society and thus points out the road towards revolution, towards all-encompassing change. (Benedict XVI. Encyclical Spe salvi, no. 20, November 30, 2007)

  • Marx’s real error is materialism

With great precision, albeit with a certain onesided bias, Marx described the situation of his time, and with great analytical skill he spelled out the paths leading to revolution—and not only theoretically: by means of the Communist Party that came into being from the Communist Manifesto of 1848, he set it in motion. His promise, owing to the acuteness of his analysis and his clear indication of the means for radical change, was and still remains an endless source of fascination. Real revolution followed, in the most radical way in Russia. Together with the victory of the revolution, though, Marx’s fundamental error also became evident. He showed precisely how to overthrow the existing order, but he did not say how matters should proceed thereafter. He simply presumed that with the expropriation of the ruling class, with the fall of political power and the socialization of means of production, the new Jerusalem would be realized. Then, indeed, all contradictions would be resolved, man and the world would finally sort themselves out. Then everything would be able to proceed by itself along the right path, because everything would belong to everyone and all would desire the best for one another. Thus, having accomplished the revolution, Lenin must have realized that the writings of the master gave no indication as to how to proceed. True, Marx had spoken of the interim phase of the dictatorship of the proletariat as a necessity which in time would automatically become redundant. This ‘intermediate phase’ we know all too well, and we also know how it then developed, not ushering in a perfect world, but leaving behind a trail of appalling destruction. Marx not only omitted to work out how this new world would be organized—which should, of course, have been unnecessary. His silence on this matter follows logically from his chosen approach. His error lay deeper. He forgot that man always remains man. He forgot man and he forgot man’s freedom. He forgot that freedom always remains also freedom for evil. He thought that once the economy had been put right, everything would automatically be put right. His real error is materialism: man, in fact, is not merely the product of economic conditions, and it is not possible to redeem him purely from the outside by creating a favourable economic environment. (Benedict XVI. Encyclical Spe salvi, no. 20-21, November 30, 2007)

  • Marxism: illusory panacea that promised the remedy for all social problems

Marxism had seen world revolution and its preliminaries as the panacea for the social problem: revolution and the subsequent collectivization of the means of production, so it was claimed, would immediately change things for the better. This illusion has vanished. In today’s complex situation, not least because of the growth of a globalized economy, the Church’s social doctrine has become a set of fundamental guidelines offering approaches that are valid even beyond the confines of the Church: in the face of ongoing development these guidelines need to be addressed in the context of dialogue with all those seriously concerned for humanity and for the world in which we live. (Benedict XVI. Encyclical Deus caritas est, no. 27, December 25, 2005)

  • John Paul II reclaimed for Christianity the impulse of hope which had faltered before Marxism

When Karol Wojtyła ascended to the throne of Peter, he brought with him a deep understanding of the difference between Marxism and Christianity, based on their respective visions of man. This was his message: man is the way of the Church, and Christ is the way of man. With this message, which is the great legacy of the Second Vatican Council and of its “helmsman”, the Servant of God Pope Paul VI, John Paul II led the People of God across the threshold of the Third Millennium, which thanks to Christ he was able to call “the threshold of hope”. Throughout the long journey of preparation for the great Jubilee he directed Christianity once again to the future, the future of God, which transcends history while nonetheless directly affecting it. He rightly reclaimed for Christianity that impulse of hope which had in some sense faltered before Marxism and the ideology of progress. He restored to Christianity its true face as a religion of hope, to be lived in history in an ‘Advent’ spirit, in a personal and communitarian existence directed to Christ, the fullness of humanity and the fulfillment of all our longings for justice and peace. (Benedict XVI. Homily on the Beatification of the Servant of God John Paul II, May 1, 2011)

  • Liberation Theology: an experience of facile millenarianisms

[Journalist]: As regards my colleague’s question, there are still many exponents of liberation theology in various parts of Brazil. What is the specific message to these exponents of liberation theology?
[Benedict XVI]: I would say that with the changes in the political situation, the situation of liberation theology is also profoundly different. It is now obvious that these facile millenarianisms – which as a consequence of the revolution promised the full conditions for a just life immediately – were mistaken. Everyone knows this today. The question now concerns how the Church must be present in the fight for the necessary reforms, in the fight for fairer living conditions. Theologians are divided on this, especially the exponents of political theology. With the Instruction published at that time by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, we sought to carry out a task of discernment. In other words, we tried to rid ourselves of false millenarianisms and of an erroneous combination of Church and politics, of faith and politics; and to show that the Church’s specific mission is precisely to come up with a response to the thirst for God and therefore also to teach the personal and social virtues that are the necessary conditions for the development of a sense of lawfulness. (Benedict XVI. Interview during the flight to Brazil, for the occasion of the Fifth General Conference of the Bishops of Latin America and the Caribbean, May 9, 2007)

…judges Francis’ pro-communist ideas expressed in the Meetings with Popular Movements

  • Marxists reject true charity since they consider it a means of preserving the status quo and slowing down a potential revolution

Christian charitable activity must be independent of parties and ideologies. It is not a means of changing the world ideologically, and it is not at the service of worldly stratagems, but it is a way of making present here and now the love which man always needs. The modern age, particularly from the nineteenth century on, has been dominated by various versions of a philosophy of progress whose most radical form is Marxism. Part of Marxist strategy is the theory of impoverishment: in a situation of unjust power, it is claimed, anyone who engages in charitable initiatives is actually serving that unjust system, making it appear at least to some extent tolerable. This in turn slows down a potential revolution and thus blocks the struggle for a better world. Seen in this way, charity is rejected and attacked as a means of preserving the status quo. (Benedict XVI. Encyclical Deus Caritas est, December 25, 2005)

  • Marxist panacea: collectivization of the means of production as the remedy for all social problems

Marxism had seen world revolution and its preliminaries as the panacea for the social problem: revolution and the subsequent collectivization of the means of production, so it was claimed, would immediately change things for the better. This illusion has vanished. In today’s complex situation, not least because of the growth of a globalized economy, the Church’s social doctrine has become a set of fundamental guidelines offering approaches that are valid even beyond the confines of the Church: in the face of ongoing development these guidelines need to be addressed in the context of dialogue with all those seriously concerned for humanity and for the world in which we live. (Benedict XVI. Encyclical Deus caritas est, no. 27, December 25, 2005)

  • Marx’s real error is materialism – it was and still remains an endless source of fascination. But it is not possible to redeem man only through the economy

With great precision, albeit with a certain onesided bias, Marx described the situation of his time, and with great analytical skill he spelled out the paths leading to revolution—and not only theoretically: by means of the Communist Party that came into being from the Communist Manifesto of 1848, he set it in motion. His promise, owing to the acuteness of his analysis and his clear indication of the means for radical change, was and still remains an endless source of fascination. Real revolution followed, in the most radical way in Russia. Together with the victory of the revolution, though, Marx’s fundamental error also became evident. He showed precisely how to overthrow the existing order, but he did not say how matters should proceed thereafter. He simply presumed that with the expropriation of the ruling class, with the fall of political power and the socialization of means of production, the new Jerusalem would be realized. Then, indeed, all contradictions would be resolved, man and the world would finally sort themselves out. Then everything would be able to proceed by itself along the right path, because everything would belong to everyone and all would desire the best for one another. Thus, having accomplished the revolution, Lenin must have realized that the writings of the master gave no indication as to how to proceed. True, Marx had spoken of the interim phase of the dictatorship of the proletariat as a necessity which in time would automatically become redundant. This ‘intermediate phase’ we know all too well, and we also know how it then developed, not ushering in a perfect world, but leaving behind a trail of appalling destruction. Marx not only omitted to work out how this new world would be organized—which should, of course, have been unnecessary. His silence on this matter follows logically from his chosen approach. His error lay deeper. He forgot that man always remains man. He forgot man and he forgot man’s freedom. He forgot that freedom always remains also freedom for evil. He thought that once the economy had been put right, everything would automatically be put right. His real error is materialism: man, in fact, is not merely the product of economic conditions, and it is not possible to redeem him purely from the outside by creating a favourable economic environment. (Benedict XVI. Encyclical Spes salve, no. 20-21, November 30, 2007)

…judges Francis’ ideas on faith being revolutionary

  • Christians should deepen their knowledge of the faith and live consistently with it

For the future of the Church in Latin America and the Caribbean it is important that Christians have a deeper knowledge and adopt an appropriate lifestyle as Jesus’ disciples, simple and joyful with a firm faith rooted in the depths of their heart and nourished by prayer and the sacraments. In fact, the Christian faith is nourished above all by the Sunday celebration of the Eucharist, in which is brought about a unique and special community encounter with Christ, his life and his Word. […] In a special way, the frequently recurring phenomena of exploitation and injustice, corruption and violence, are a pressing appeal to Christians to live their faith consistently and to strive to receive a firm doctrinal and spiritual formation, thereby helping to build a more just, more human and more Christian society. (Benedict XVI. Address to the participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Commission For Latin America, January 20, 2007)

…judges Francis’ ideas on the Church closed and ailing

  • You cannot be a good servant to others if you neglect your soul

‘Take heed to yourselves’ (Acts 20:28): this too is a word to the priests of all times. A well-intentioned activism exists but in which a person forgets his own soul, his own spiritual life, his own being with Christ. In the Breviary Reading for his liturgical Memorial, St Charles Borromeo tells us every year anew: you cannot be a good servant to others if you neglect your soul. ‘Watch over yourselves.’ Let us also be attentive to our spiritual life, to our being with Christ. As I have often said, prayer and meditation on the Word of God is not time wasted for the care of souls, but is the condition for us to be able to be really in touch with the Lord, and thus to speak of the Lord to others from experience. ‘Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you guardians, to feed the Church of the Lord’ (Acts 20:28). (Benedict XVI. Lectio Divina, meeting with the Parish Priests of the Rome Diocese, March 10, 2011)

  • Missionary zeal is proof of a radical experience of ever renewed fidelity

I therefore say to you, dear friends of the Movements: act so as to ensure that they are always schools of communion, groups journeying on in which one learns to live in the truth and love that Christ revealed and communicated to us through the witness of the Apostles, in the heart of the great family of his disciples. May Jesus’ exhortation ceaselessly re-echo in your hearts: ‘Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven’ (Mt 5: 16). Bring Christ’s light to all the social and cultural milieus in which you live. Missionary zeal is proof of a radical experience of ever renewed fidelity to one’s charism that surpasses any kind of weary or selfish withdrawal. Dispel the darkness of a world overwhelmed by the contradictory messages of ideologies! There is no valid beauty if there is not a truth to recognize and follow, if love gives way to transitory sentiment, if happiness becomes an elusive mirage or if freedom degenerates into instinct. (Benedict XVI. Message to the participants of the Second World Congress on Ecclesial Movements and New Communities, May 22, 2006)

  • A Pastor supervises not as a bureaucrat but as one who sees from God’s viewpoint

Perhaps these are the two central concepts for this office of ‘shepherd’: to nourish by making the Word of God known, not only with words but by testifying to it for God’s will and to protect it with prayer, with the full commitment of one’s life. Pastors, the other meaning which the Fathers saw in the Christian word ‘episkopoi’ is: someone who supervises not as a bureaucrat but as one who sees from God’s viewpoint, who walks towards the heights of God and in the light of God sees this small community of the Church. This is also important for a pastor of the Church, for a priest, an ‘episkopos’ who sees from the viewpoint of God, who tries to see from on high with God’s criterion, not according to his own preferences, but rather as God judges; to see from God’s heights and thus loving with God and through God. (Benedict XVI. Lectio Divina, meeting with the parish priests of the Rome Diocese, March 10, 2011)

  • Pastors must make themselves examples to the flock, knowing how to resist enemies

It is the shepherd’s task to feed and tend his flock and take it to the right pastures. Grazing the flock means taking care that the sheep find the right nourishment, that their hunger is satisfied and their thirst quenched. The metaphor apart, this means: the word of God is the nourishment that the human being needs. Making God’s word ever present and new and thereby giving nourishment to people is the task of the righteous Pastor. And he must also know how to resist the enemies, the wolves. He must go first, point out the way, preserve the unity of the flock. Peter, in his discourse to priests, highlights another very important thing. It is not enough to speak. Pastors must make themselves ‘examples to the flock’ (5: 3). When it is lived, the word of God is brought from the past into the present. It is marvellous to see how in saints the word of God becomes a word addressed to our time. […] This is what being a Pastor means a model for the flock: living the word now, in the great community of holy Church. (Benedict XVI. Homily, June 29, 2009)

 …judges Francis’ words in his first appearance

  • The indissoluble bond between romanum and petrinum implies and requires universal concern

Thus, humbly attached to Christ, our One Lord, together we can and must encourage that ‘exemplarity’ of the Church of Rome which is genuine service to our Sister Churches across the world. The indissoluble bond between romanum and petrinum implies and indeed requires the Church of Rome’s participation in the universal concern of her Bishops. […] Rome is a very large Diocese and truly a very special one, because of the universal concern that the Lord has entrusted to his Bishop. (Benedict XVI. Address to the Clergy of Rome, May 13, 2005)

…judges Francis’ ideas on the norms of the Church

  • The Code of Canon Law contains the norms for the good of the person and of the communities of the whole Mystical Body

The Congress that is being celebrated on this important anniversary treats a theme of great interest because it highlights the close link that exists between canon law and Church life in accordance with the desire of Jesus Christ. On this occasion I am therefore anxious to reaffirm a fundamental concept that imbues canon law. The ius ecclesiae is not only a body of norms formulated by the Ecclesial Legislator for this special people who form the Church of Christ. It is, in the first place, the authoritative declaration on the part of the Ecclesial Legislator of the duties and rights that are based in the sacraments and are therefore born from the institution by Christ himself. This series of juridical realties treated by the Code forms a wonderful mosaic in which are portrayed the faces of all the faithful, lay people and Pastors and all the communities, from the universal Church to the particular Churches. […] Moreover, the Code of Canon Law contains the norms formulated by the Ecclesial Legislator for the good of the person and of the communities of the whole Mystical Body which is the Holy Church. […] The Church thus recognizes in her laws the nature as well as the means and pastoral function for pursuing her own end, which – as is well known – is the achievement of the ‘salus animarum’. (Benedict XVI. Address on the occasion of the 25th Anniversary of the promulgation of the Code of Canon Law, January 25, 2008)

  • The laws of the Church set us free to adhere to Jesus

Since canon law outlines the rules necessary for the People of God to orient themselves effectively to their own end, one understands how important it is that this law be loved and observed by all the faithful. Church law is first and foremost lex libertatis: a law that sets us free to adhere to Jesus. It is therefore necessary to be able to present to the People of God, to the new generations and to all who are called to make canon law respected, its concrete bond with the life of the Church, in order to safeguard the delicate interests of the things of God and to protect the rights of the weakest, of those who have no other means by which to make their presence felt, and also in defence of those delicate ‘goods’ which every member of the faithful has freely received – the gift of faith, of God’s grace, first of all -, which the Church cannot allow to be deprived of adequate protection on the part of the Law. (Benedict XVI. Address to the participants in the Study Congress on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the promulgation of the Code of Canon Law, January 25, 2008)

Why talk of schism?  So cunning, so deceptive…so …

AM+DG

Beware.

I was shocked when I heard it but I knew I shouldn’t have been. He knows what’s coming; what’s inevitable – people are waking up to him. He had to get his foot in first.

My initial thoughts were: What is he talking about? He is the one who is schismatic. Schism means to break away from Christ’s Church which holds all His Teachings. We (those faithful to Christ’s teachings ) are sticking to the Truth handed down by Christ and the apostles. They are creating the schism – in fact the false prophet (or anti -pope, imposter,) and his Freemason friends  are the ones who are slowly, brick by brick, dismantling the church – the structure and the doctrines/teachings – all that makes us Catholic. They are slowly building their own new church. But we, on the other hand are sticking to the original true Church – to Christ’s teachings. They are the schismatics.But you know, it is a very clever tactic. It is called  tu quoque.  

This means to  charge your accuser with whatever it is you’ve just been accused of rather than refuting the truth of the accusation made against you. In fact, FP/PF is a devious political opponent who commits many logical fallacies and straw man arguments.

It will come to the point where the faithful will have to choose to follow Christ’s teachings, not those of the Usurper’s church. This is already happening now but who knows what is in store for us after this next synod? When people speak with their feet and return to the safety of traditional priests, he will be able to say: ‘See? I told you so. They are leaving the Catholic faith.’ Many of  these poor souls will then be so confused. They don’t really know the correct teachings of the church anymore. They will want to STAY,  thinking they must remain loyal, but not realizing that to be Catholic they have to stay loyal to Christ’s teachings . If the pope isn’t true to Christ’s teachings, then he isn’t Catholic!

He reels them in with his twisted and forked tongue: “I pray that there be no schism” but “I am not afraid”. He said “I pray that there will be none, because what is at stake is people’s spiritual health”. He adds truth to lies. He is the one ruining the people’s spiritual health. 

And I think he is afraid. The more souls he loses to the Truth, the fewer that will be led in to the One World Religion and the fewer that will worship the Anti-Christ. He does not want people to see through this great deception.

He said: “Let there be dialogue, let there be correction if there is an error, but the schismatic path is not Christian,” he said. His critics were putting ideology over Catholic doctrine and deserved sympathy, not hostility.”

It is all upside down and back to front. There has been pointed out to him many errors by some very highly regarded and lettered bishops ( eg Dubia ) but he refuses to answer any of them, let alone correct them. He doesn’t accept correction and frequently ignores it!

“..ideology over Catholic Doctrine..” He means his critics (the conservative, traditionalist faithful Catholics who are loyal to the Truth) are ideologists and not Catholic. He is implying that he is being true to Catholic doctrine, when in actual fact, he is the one destroying it. It is again, upside down and back to front. And ideology and doctrine are not opposed to one another. And traditional Catholics always hold doctrine as vitally important in forming ideology. Whereas, PF tramples doctrine and destroys it, in order to espouse his own false ideologies.

He is very clever at deflecting anything negative. For example, “The social things that I say are the same things that John Paul II said, the same things. I copy him. But they say, ‘the Pope is a communist.’” We know how he twisted Pope John Paul II’s words by omitting parts of it and making it suit his own agenda in ‘Amoris Laetitia’. In his case, he actually is a communist  and focuses on humanism and other Marxist ideas.

The sad part is that people will fall for it!! Even if they don’t recognize how he is destroying Catholic doctrine and usurping God’s Commandments – why aren’t they horrified at his lack of charity when speaking of those who pose a threat to him and at his very coarse language at times??  St Francis of Assisi in his prophecy of the two popes called him ‘not a true pastor, but a destroyer”

We all know who fits this description of one who turns everything upside down and inside out, who deceives: it is the King of lies. This so-called pope’s actions are of a diabolical nature.

All this talk of schism. Where did this come from? It’s not all just getting his foot in first. Why mention it now? It’s not as if anyone is currently a real threat to him. There is too much fear amongst the clergy for anyone to move on anything, although there is plenty of evidence.

No, this is because of what he is about to launch!

 

 

https://catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2019/09/11/the-schism-controversy-is-just-one-of-the-big-issues-on-the-popes-plate/

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/09/11/pope-says-not-afraid-split-catholic-church-accuses-critics-stabbing/

 

*This post has been a joint effort by Remnant Survivor and Remnant child of Mary

Marxism, Society and the Papacy

+AMDG+

  1. The November 2013 Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium was similar to the Repubblica interview in that the Pope (Francis) focuses on two great issues” that, he says, “will shape the future of humanity.” “These issues are first, the inclusion of the poor in society, and second, peace and social dialogue,” he wrote.

 

  1. Venerable Archbishop Fulton Sheen :index

On the book ‘Communism and the Consciousness of the West’ by Bishop Fulton Sheen he wrote this in the 1940’s.
He (i.e. the antichrist) will tempt Christians with the same three temptations with which he tempted Christ:

The temptation to turn stones into bread as an earthly Messiahs will become the temptation to sell freedom for security, making bread a political weapon which only those who think his way may eat.

The temptation to work a miracle by recklessly throwing himself from a steeple will become a plea to desert the lofty pinnacles of truth where faith and reason reign, for those lower depths where the masses live on slogans and propaganda.

He wants no proclamation of immutable principles from the lofty heights of a steeple, but mass organization through propaganda where only a common man directs the idiosyncrasies of common man. Opinions not truths, commentators not teachers, Gallup polls not principles, nature not graceto these golden calves will men toss themselves from their Christ.

The third temptation in which Satan asked Christ to adore him and all the kingdoms of the world would be His, will become the temptation to have a new religion without a Cross, a liturgy without a world to come, a religion to destroy a religion, or a politics which is a religionone that renders unto Caesar even the things that are God’s.

 

3. Dr Anca-Maria Cernea, Association of Catholic Doctors of Bucharest,

spoke at the Rome Life Forum on 7 May 2016. This was reported on May 16, 2016 in Voice of the Family. The article can be seen entitled “Cultural Marxism: A Threat to the Family”.

http://voiceofthefamily.com/dr-anca-maria-cernea-cultural-marxism-a-threat-to-the-family/

In this article Dr Anca-Maria describes communism and it’s marxist ideologies and it’s attack on western culture. She describes the history of attacks on society from the legalization of abortion by Lenin back in 1920, no-fault divorce, radical sexual education, gay rights movement. She describes  howMarx expresses a profound hatred for God and for the entire human race. Marx doesn’t deny God’s existence, he is jealous of God; he hates Him and wants to take His place …. , and testimonies about strange ceremonies that Marx used to perform in his house, all of which indicate that he was definitely a worshiper of the devil.”

She sums up the threats into two categories:

  1. The war against family and against innocent human life and
  2. The Church and the war against family and innocent human life

Excerpts are below:

“The attack against the family and human life is part of a wider revolutionary attempt to re-design human society and human nature.

Its motivation is spiritual. It is a form of revolt against God, against His moral Law and the order of His Creation.

It’s not a spontaneous phenomenon. It’s a war, wedged by a gnostic-revolutionary ideology against the Judeo-Christian Civilization. It has been planned, and carried out over more than a century, leading to the situation we have now”

“Pope Leo XIII in the 19th century saw that communist ideology was an error of religious nature.

He called it “sect” of “socialists, communists, or nihilists” and he condemned it.

Pius XI in Divini Redemptoris (1937) said that communism concealed “a false messianic idea” and a “deceptive mysticism”.

But later on, until Centesimus Annus, the Popes no longer insisted on the religious nature of this error.”

“Our Lady of Fatima warned against “Russia’s errors”, which would spread all over the world.  And that is what happened since 1917.

The basic idea is the same as the serpent’s proposal to Adam and Eve, to eat the forbidden fruit, to ignore God’s commandment – “the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Gen 3:5).

“It appears nowadays to be even more revolutionary than classical Marxism – it pretends to reinvent the family, the sex identity and human nature, while classical Marxism was pretending to re-invent society on the basis of a violent take-over of property.”

“There has been no justice in Russia for the crimes of communism.

Moreover, there is no proof that the huge KGB structure that had infiltrated the whole world has been dissolved”

“The Russian government is anything but Christian. Russia still has not converted.

Our Lady has named “Russia”, not “the Soviet Union”.

So the devotion to Our Lady of Fatima is now timelier than ever. Russia and the whole world affected by Russia’s errors urgently need consecration to Our Lady. And conversion.”

“The Popes have constantly condemned communism since its earliest days.

Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius XI and Pius XII have all radically rejected communism.

And they have also explicitly warned that communism was a threat to the family.

During the Second World War and in the 50s, this unyielding anticommunism expressed by the Pope and the Church has inspired the resistance to communism of millions of Catholics in Europe.”

And the Second Vatican Council did not issue a condemnation of communism – in spite of the fact that many Council Fathers had insisted for it.

Along the 2000 years of Church history, the purpose of all Councils (except Vatican II) was to react to error and warn against it. Councils condemned errors. That’s how Catholic theology has been formulated.

But Pope John XXIII said the Church in his time preferred mercy and was not going to pronounce condemnations.”

Some Catholic bishops went on fighting communism – the most outstanding example is the Polish Church under the leadership of Cardinal Wyszyński.

But not all Catholic bishops in the world did the same. Some even actively promoted communism inside the Church for instance, under the form of liberation theology in Latin America, a very successful KGB operation.”

“In the Catholic Social Doctrine after Vatican II, the rejection of Marxism became less radical, at the same time as hostility to economic freedom increased. The language of the encyclicals moved from normal Christian language to ideologically contaminated media language.

The family is the first and best institution for fighting poverty and social exclusion.

If we want to help people out of poverty, we should start by defending the family – and Christian morality, because Catholic charity cannot be separated from evangelization.”

“Clear language is an important condition for victory in the spiritual and in the cultural battles:

“Let your yes mean yes, and your no mean no. Anything more than this comes from the evil one. (Mt 5:37)”

“The shepherds’ duty is to make this distinction clear.

They should preach the Kingdom of God and His justice, not socialist “justice”, understood as government control over economy, or income redistribution.

They should preach peace as offered by Christ, not as stated by the UN.”

“The Church shepherds should preach real freedom, which is liberation from sin, from the slavery of Satan. Veritas liberabit vos. Real freedom means salvation, and thus can never be bad or excessive.”

“The real priority for the Church should be to lead us in the spiritual battle, to save souls, to tell the whole world, now that we have just one year left until the centenary of Fatima:

“Repent of your sins and turn to God, for the Kingdom of Heaven is near.” (Mt 3:2) The Kingdom of God, which is not from this world.

Paradise cannot be achieved on earth, good and evil will still coexist in earthly realities, until the Lord Himself will come in glory to judge the world and sort everything out.

But at least a certain degree of normality can be brought about through evangelization and conversion of persons and societies.

That’s the best we can do to “fix the world”.

When there is enough holiness and virtue in our communities, when enough people share the same objective moral criteria (the Ten Commandments), then we don’t need to rely on almighty government bureaucrats to keep society from becoming a lawless jungle.

Then people can trust each other, and citizens, as well as society as a whole, may enjoy freedom.

Then the institutions stick to their job and do it decently, the family is safe, and the culture of life wins over the ideologies of death.

Then civilization is morally strong, and apt to successfully defend itself from barbarism – and also to preach the Gospel to the barbarians and convert them to Christianity.

That’s how the Church has created Christian culture and civilization, that’s what the Church should keep doing.