Tag Archives: Marxism

Is America Being Played? Vic Biorseth thinks so…

The End Game?

By Vic Biorseth, Friday, September 14, 2012

Thinking Catholic Strategic Center

Could the end game have begun already, so soon after the great Tea Party awakening, and the general realization of what the game is about? Before the whole population is even aware that there is a game?

“Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts and minds of men?” was the line deeply intoned by the voice over the radio in an old, old, but much beloved regular radio show from a bygone era. We might well ask that very question about what’s going on in the geopolitical world today, at this moment in time. Nothing is what it appears to be. I don’t know for certain all that’s going on behind the scenes, but I do know this:

We are being played.

We have spoken elsewhere in this site about the sneaky, underhanded linkup between Marxism and Islam to cooperate in the cause of increasing global chaos and instability. In a bygone era Islam quietly shook hands with National Socialism and stood with them to oppose the civilized world, so no one should be surprised by this newer uneasy alliance between more sophisticated forms of Marxism, and more sophisticated forms of Islam.

But, Marxism is rabidly atheistic, and Islam is ferociously theocratic, you say; close alliance between them is therefore impossible. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” say both Marxism and Islam. They will work out their religious differences later, after they have cooperated in destroying all other opposition. When their common enemies are no more, then they may turn their guns on each other; but that is for tomorrow, not today. One step at a time.

Some clues have been dropped in the embassy attacks in Egypt and in Libya:

Masks used in the Occupy Wall Street activities were used in the storming of the embassies; what’s the linkage between the OWS movement and the American embassy attacks in North Africa? What were those American OWS masks doing over there?
It is reported and pretended that some movie disrespectful of Mohammed incited the “spontaneous” mob action, but it has been shown that the most important parts of the action was a very carefully planned, timed, choreographed and orchestrated attack, and not spontaneous at all.

The attacks are reported and pretended to be anti-movie and not anti-USA mob action; but what the rioters chanted for the cameras was “Obama, Obama, we are all Osama!” Indicating vengeful bloodthirst for Obama, over Obama and Biden publicly spiking the football over the killing of Osama.

Most of the claims for the movie causing all of this, rather than any planned event or series of events planned to begin on September 11, seem to come from our side of the ocean, not theirs. Most of the Moslems had never seen the movie or any trailer, although some had heard of it; could some Marxists have whispered in their ears?

I smell the tactics of Saul Alinsky in all of this.

The current upper echelons of American government are permeated with Alinskyites. (Alinskyites are the sneakiest, most treacherous forms of Marxists, who always work under deep cover, and who are never what they appear to be.) For example, our Secretary of State, Madam Hillary, wrote her college thesis on Saul Alinsky. For another example, our President, Comrade Obama, peace be upon him, is another Alinskyite. The only non-academic job he ever held was with an Alinskyite organization called the Deveolping Communities Project, where he was employed as a Communist Agitator. Excuse me, I meant to say Community Organizer. (The two terms are synonymous.) You might say that Madam Hillary and Comrade Obama majored in Alinsky.

And what, exactly, did Professor Saul Alinsky (RIP) teach?

  • How to bring down America and topple the American government, from the inside, using deep treachery.

In Refuting Marx we said that Karl Marx, influenced by the evil and treacherous writings of Machiavelli and by the Hegelian Dialectic, sought to incite and induce chaos and revolution on a global scale, to bring down governments using armies of mal-informed “useful idiots” incited by committed agent provocateurs, all of whom were expendable for the cause of the Revolution. This is the evil “The Ends Justify The Means” idea advancing into Western, supposedly Judao-Christian, mainstream thought. And there it continues to grow and spread. “All is fair in love and war” is an example commonplace derivative notion, seen in song, literature and entertainment. But all is Not fair, in anything. The Ends do not justify any and all means.

But after suffering so many failures and set-backs in attempts at direct “popular” revolution, Marxism survived – and thrived – as a strategy of world conquest by going largely underground and becoming even more treacherous, and even more deceptive, and even more evil. Advances in strategy and tactics included Alinsky’s get on the inside and destroy the system from within, in which the revolutionary or his recruited agent-provoacateur would put on a suit and tie, act civilized, play the game according to the rules, by all appearances, but maintain the revolutionary destructive zeal. The Cloward-Piven strategy was developed and deployed, by which armies of Useful-Idiots would be recruited and “Community Organized” into large groups that might

  • apply in massive application submissions for various government and/or corporate programs – disability; college tuition grants; rent subsidies; more benefits; higher pay; retirement; better insurance; any large government or large corporation “charitable” program, in order to overload the system and cause it to break down.
  • find and put into practice large-scale voter fraud prgrams at various elections around the country.
  • incite hostility toward “the system” and/or “the man” and/or the sitting government in various targeted minority groups, and identify new groups ripe for infiltration and recruitment to the cause.
  • organize seemingly disorganized public spectacles, such as the OWS movement, and provide some loose organization, targets and incentives to anarchists.

“Popular” revolution is quite impossible in America; therefore, Marxism has had to become far more treacherous, sneaky and underhanded here than anywhere else on earth. But the goal remains the same: to bring down the government and replace it with a typical Marxist dictatorship.

In Refuting Mohammed we said that Islam declared war on us, and on the whole of the non-Islamic world, long before we existed as a nation. Before Columbus sailed. Before the Reformation. Mainstream, mainline Islam declared war on the whole non-Islamic world somewhere around the year of our Lord 600. Read here what the Moslem is instructed – by the irrevocable word of Allah, spoken through the lips of his prophet Mohammed, recorded forever in the Koran – to do to us non-Moslems:

  • So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. – Koran Sura 9:5.
  • Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection. – Koran Sura 9:29.

Again, this is mainstream Islam. It is not the Moslem Brotherhood, or any of the groups they gave birth to, such as Al Queda. It is Islam. That is to say, the Moslem Brotherhood is absolutely mainstream, in Islam. It is not a matter of interpretation. No Moslem may oppose or disagree with those words. That is what they are instructed to do, and how they are instructed to behave toward us.

Now, Islam is a theocracy; a radical combination of Church and state, in which ecclesial law and civil law are all contained in one book: the Koran. No law – including our own Constitution – is above the Koran, in the house of Islam. Islam thus seeks not only to convert us out of our own religions, but to rule us via the Koran, and to hell with our Constitution. Others may argue and quibble about Sharia law, and different manifestations of it in different lands – but I’m telling you that the real threat is not Sharia, and not any terrorist group coming out of Islam; the real threat to America, to Israel, and to the whole world, is Islam itself.

Once Islam was militarily beaten back and driven out of Europe, it never recovered its former military capabilities of conquest; nevertheless, the imperative to grow itself and conquer the world remained a vital commandment in the Koran. So, Islam, like Marxism, found other ways.

As we said in Refuting Mohammed, Islam has never changed it’s commitment to continue the march to Ummah. In WWII Islam aligned with the Nazi-Fascist branch of Marxism because of its treatment of the Jews. Over time, Moslems have become Machiavellian in nature. They have adopted The Ends Justify The Means, and become underhanded, sneaky and treacherous, just like the Marxists. In dar al-harb, where we infidels live, Moslems are the most peaceful, wonderful, loving examples of people to be found in the Islamic faith. Until they gain a little more population and a little more power. The Islamic attitude changes, radically and brutally, when and where Islam is in control.

The final goal of Islam is the same as the final goal of Marxism: Borderless, nation-less, one world global government, which is to say, a world dictatorship.

The history of Islam is a history of war and of conquest; the ideology/religion of Islam is one of brutal domination, subjugation, forced submission, misogyny, abuse, torture and murder.

When they gain a strong control of an area of total or near total Islamic population, such as in Dearborn Michigan, they become increasingly beligerent toward the non-Islamic host government, to the point that the host nation may actually have to fight to regain legal control of its own territory. It has become, for them, Dar Al-Islam – the house of Islam – and they will not give it up without a fight to the death. There, so long as they are the occupiers, the only law that may be applied is Islamic law.

If you think it is not the same in Dearborn Michigan as in the various Islamic controlled areas in the environs of Paris France, you are very sadly mistaken.

In Refuting Obama we indicated that Comrade Obama, peace be upon him, is not like us, and is not even like the most rabidly Marxist of his American compatriots and allies. He wasn’t raised here, and he doesn’t really understand America or Americans. He is, by instinct, much more of a raw Marxian than an Alinskyite. Where the Clintons masterfully work the slow, steady Progressive method of advancing the Revolution, Comrade Obama wants all chaos, all instability, all break-down, right now. He wants to bring it on. He is more the old-time Revolutionary, and much less the Progressive or the mere Liberal. While the ultimate goal for all of them is the same, he wants to achieve it all, right now.

Many are puzzled as to why he seems so embarrassingly stupid in his approach to American politics; lately he seems to be committing political suicide almost every time he opens his mouth, or when he does not speak when he clearly should speak. But I don’t think he cares too much about whether he wins the 2012 election; he’ll take it if that’s all he can get, but he would much rather be dictator than President. He will do whatever he thinks he has to do to win the election, but that is not the first thing on his agenda. He would much rather be dictator over a ruined, empoverished, destroyed, burning and warring America than a properly elected President over a strong and prosperous American nation that he loathes and despises.

To that end, he is spending us into economic collapse, printing money to make it worthless, cutting defense and interfering with military effectiveness, insulting and alienating allies, encouraging and befriending enemies, saddling us with impossible and nonsensical law, overriding the Constitution and bypassing Congress at every turn, and generally making a shambles of the American system of government. He is pissing us off, on purpose. Agitation is the name of the game. Instability, anger, chaos and hostility are the necessary ingredients of a radical transformation of the system, which is what he intended from the beginning.

Expanding our view to encompass the geopolitical situation, we see that the rest of the world is in a much more precarious state than America, even as bad as our own situtation is. While we are well along the way down the increasingly steep economic slippery slope, many European nations are now over the cliff. Every time they get some sort of bail-out – which is to say, every time they stupidly try to borrow their way out of debt – the stock market goes up, proving again that the stock market condition has no real world relationship to the state of the world economy, or to any nation’s economy. Each bail-out makes the condition worse, not better, and makes the inevitable crash even more unbearable for the population. There is not enough money existing in the world to pay off all that debt, and they keep trying to borrow more just to continue to exist as nations. (And so do we, with all of our ideological Marxists in high office.)

How will all those nations ever get out from under the collapsing Euro? How will they all reestablish their own currencies, and their own national identities? Will European nations, and even the European Union itself, descend into civil war?

When we look to the Obama inspired and encouraged Arab Spring, or Moslem Spring, or Springtime of Democracy all across North Africa and the Middle East, we, for the most part, miss the similarity to the Springtime of Revolution ushered in by the publication of Marx’s Communist Manifesto in 1848, when some 50 nations experienced violent Communist revolution. The ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it. We miss, or miss-interpret, the growing relationship between Marxism and Islam at our own mortal peril.

The more recent violence involving the storming of American embassies, the murder of an American ambassador and other Americans, the burning of American flags, the raising of Al Queda flags, and the trashing of American property is blamed, by our government, on a movie trailer that very few people have ever seen.

Again, I smell Alinsky.

I have little doubt that this movie trailer, or some description of it, was used to incite some Moslem useful idiots to violence; but these were planned attacks, perhaps part of a larger strategy, timed to begin on September 11. It would not surprise me to learn that the movie itself was made, or made available, or somehow abrogated by Alinskyites as an excuse to be used by our predominantly Alinskyite government leadership to both condemn Judao-Christianity and excuse outraged Moslems. It’s a double whammy for them. It’s a more sophisitcated advance of the revolutionary cause.

At any rate, civil war and broader war is ongoing, or on the brink, in the world of Islam.

The risky business of revolution is what this is all about, and Comrade Obama, peace be upon him, is a greater risk taker than any of his fellow Democrats. He is more of a Lenin than an Alinsky. The risks are high; they always are; but so are the potential rewards.

The Egyptian chant “Obama, Obama, we are all Osama!” would indicate that there are some Moslems who would like Obama’s head on a pike. No big deal; revolution is risky business. There are other Moslems who find him useful. Among Democrats, the Clintons would probably like his head on a pike; and he would like theirs on a pike. But at the moment, they work together in the greater interest of the common cause.

Among the Moslems, the Shia and the Sunni despise each other; yet, they will join together against the rest of the world, just as they did under Saladin. When the rest of the world is under submission, they may turn back to war with each other; but first, they will obey the Koran and conquer the non-Islamic world.

So it has always been in the world of Marxism. Stalin is credited with personally signing millions of death warrants of fellow Communist Party faithful in his purges. There can be only one dictator.

Dictatorship requires revolution; when revolution is not popularly supported, it requires subterfuge, chaos, destabilization and perhaps war. The bigger the war the bigger the opportunity. World War would offer the grand prize. Always, after such grand, multiple-nation conflagrations – the Islamic Conquest; the Crusades; the Reformation; World War I; World War II; there is a major reshuffling of power in the world. Marxist would-be dictators and Moslem would-be Caliphs all hope to capitalize on the situation and make themselves the one who winds up on top.

Failing that, they might become a lesser dictator of a lesser country, or, a high-ranking bureaucrat, or politiocrat, or close adviser to the grand high leader. Chaos, disorder and terror must come first. Out of chaos comes opportunity. Out of chaos comes the Machiavellian champion to restore order and assume the throne. Marxism and Islam, both, see that as the path to dictatorship. They will cooperate, for a time, to achieve it. And Comrade Obama, peace be upon him, is prepared to go either way in the end. He can play the Marxist, and he can play the Moslem; what he actually is, is what they all are: the Selfist.

They make fools of the world. While many followers of Marxist ideology, and many followers of Islam, may believe in God, or at least in some higher ideal, none of their leaders do. It’s all a sham. They believe only in themselves. Everyone beneath them are merely different layers and types of useful idiots; mere expendable tools to be manipulated and used for special purposes and then discarded.

What are we to do about all this? Steady as she goes.
do Not keep your head down; keep your eye on the ball. Do not be distracted from the fact that Comrade Obama, peace be upon him, intends the destruction of all that we hold dear. This predictable election year “October Surprise” may be a war; perhaps even a world war. Historically American voters rally round the President in any such national emergency.

Don’t do it. Don’t be fooled.

We have got to get through this next election in the normal way; even if he suspends the Constitution and declares martial law; even if he suspends the election on an emergency basis; somehow, we have got to make it through this next election, or America is lost forever.

He doesn’t really know what’s going to happen any more than we do. Chaos is unpredictable. His only leg up is that he is the chief instigator of the chaos, but he cannot predict what that chaos will ultimately bring about.

Steady as she goes; keep your eye on the ball.

Fast; pray; prepare.

The Lord will sustain us.

Reference Material/TCSC

The Pillars of Unbelief: Six modern thinkers who’ve harmed the Christian mind — Part III: Karl Marx (1818-1883)

SOURCE: (3) The Pillars of Unbelief – Karl Marx

By Peter Kreeft

Among the many opponents of the Christian faith, Marxism is certainly not the most important, imposing or impressive philosophy in history.

But it has, until recently, clearly been the most influential. A comparison of 1917, 1947 and 1987 world maps will show how inexorably this system of thought flowed so as to inundate one-third of the world in just two generations — a feat rivaled only twice in history, by early Christianity and early Islam.

Ten years ago, every political and military conflict in the world, from Central America to the Middle East, turned on the axis of communism vs. anti-communism.

Even fascism became popular in Europe, and is still a force to be reckoned with in Latin America, largely because of its opposition to “the specter of communism,” as Marx calls it in the first sentence of his “Communist Manifesto.”

The “Manifesto” was one of the key moments in history. Published in 1848, “the year of revolutions’ throughout Europe, it is, like the Bible, essentially a philosophy of history, past and future. All past history is reduced to class struggle between oppressor and oppressed, master and slave, whether king vs. people, priest vs. parishioner, guild- master vs. apprentice, or even husband vs. wife and parent vs. child.

This is a view of history even more cynical than Machiavelli’s. Love is totally denied or ignored; competition and exploitation are the universal rule.

Now, however, this can change, according to Marx, because now, for the first time in history, we have not many classes but only two — the bourgeoisie (the “haves,” owners of the means of production) and the proletariat (the “have-nots,” non-owners of the means of production).

The latter must sell themselves and their labor to the owners until the communist revolution, which will “eliminate” (euphemism for “murder”) the bourgeoisie and thus abolish classes and class conflict forever, establishing a millennium of peace and equality. After being utterly cynical about the past, Marx becomes utterly naive about the future.

What made Marx what he was? What are the sources of this creed?

Marx deliberately turned 180 degrees around from the (1) supernaturalism and (2) distinctiveness of his Jewish heritage to embrace (1) atheism and (2) communism. Yet Marxism retains all the major structural and emotional factors of biblical religion in a secularized form. Marx, like Moses, is the prophet who leads the new Chosen People, the proletariat, out of the slavery of capitalism into the Promised Land of communism across the Red Sea of bloody worldwide revolution and through the wilderness of temporary, dedicated suffering for the party, the new priesthood.

The revolution is the new “Day of Yahweh,” the Day of Judgment; party spokesmen are the new prophets; and political purges within the party to maintain ideological purity are the new divine judgments on the waywardness of the Chosen and their leaders. The messianic tone of communism makes it structurally and emotionally more like a religion than any other political system except fascism.

Just as Marx took over the forms and the spirit of his religious heritage, but not the content, he did the same with his Hegelian philosophical heritage, transforming Hegel’s philosophy of “dialectical idealism” into “dialectical materialism!” “Marx stood Hegel on his head,” the saying goes. Marx inherited seven radical ideas from Hegel:

Monism: the idea that everything is one and that common sense’s distinction between matter and spirit is illusory. For Hegel, matter was only a form of spirit; for Marx, spirit was only a form of matter.

Pantheism: the notion that the distinction between Creator and creature, the distinctively Jewish idea, is false. For Hegel, the world is made into an aspect of God (Hegel was a pantheist); for Marx, God is reduced to the world (Marx was an atheist).

Historicism: the idea that everything changes, even truth; that there is nothing above history to judge it; and that therefore what is true in one era becomes false in another, or vice versa. In other words, Time is God.

Dialectic: the idea that history moves only by conflicts between opposing forces, a “thesis” vs. an “antithesis” evolving a “higher synthesis.” This applies to classes, nations, institutions and ideas. The dialectic waltz plays on in history’s ballroom until the kingdom of God finally comes — which Hegel virtually identified with the Prussian state. Marx internationalized it to the worldwide communist state.

Necessitarianism, or fatalism: the idea that the dialectic and its outcome are inevitable and necessary, not free. Marxism is a sort of Calvinistic predestination without a divine Predestinator.

Statism: the idea that since there is no eternal, trans-historical truth or law, the state is supreme and uncriticizable. Marx again internationalized Hegel’s nationalism here. Militarism: the idea that since there is no universal natural or eternal law above states to judge and resolve differences between them, war is inevitable and necessary as long as there are states.

Like many other anti-religious thinkers since the French Revolution, Marx adopted the secularism, atheism and humanism of l8th century “Enlightenment,” along with its rationalism and its faith in science as potentially omniscient and technology as potentially omnipotent. Here again the forms, feel and function of biblical religion are transferred to another god and another faith. For rationalism is a faith, not a proof. The faith that human reason can know everything that is real cannot be proved by human reason; and the belief that everything that is real can be proved by the scientific method cannot itself be proved by the scientific method.

A third influence, on Marx, in addition to Hegelianism and Enlightenment rationalism, was economic reductionism: the reduction of all issues to economic issues. If Marx were reading this analysis now, he would say that the real cause of these ideas of mine was not my mind’s power to know the truth, but the capitalistic economic structures of the society that “produced” me. Marx believed that within man thought was totally determined by matter; that man was totally determined by society; and that society was totally determined by economics. This stands on its head the traditional view that mind rules body, man rules his societies, and society rules its economics.

Finally, Marx adopted the idea of the collective ownership of property and the means of producing it from previous “utopian socialist” thinkers. Marx says, “The theory of communism may be summed up in the single phrase: abolition of private property.” In fact, the only societies in history that have ever successfully practiced communism are monasteries, kibbutzes, tribes and families (which Marx also wanted to abolish). All communist governments (such as that of the U.S.S.R.) have transferred ownership to the state, not to the people. Marx’s faith that the state would “wither away” of its own accord once it had eliminated capitalism and put communism in its place has proved to be astonishingly naive. Once power is seized, only wisdom and sanctity relinquish it.

The deepest appeal of communism, especially in Third World countries, has been not the will to communalism but “the will to power,” as Nietzsche called it. Nietzsche saw more deeply into the heart of communism than Marx did.

How does Marx deal with the obvious objections to communism: that it abolishes privacy and private property, individuality, freedom, motivation to work, education, marriage, family, culture, nations, religion and philosophy? He does not deny that communism abolishes these things, but says that capitalism has already done so. For example, he argues that “the bourgeois sees in his wife a mere instrument of production.” On the most sensitive and important issues, family and religion, he offers rhetoric rather than logic; for example: “The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed correlation between parent and child, becomes all the more disgusting….” And here is his “answer” to religious and philosophical objections: “The charges against communism made from a religious, a philosophical and, generally, from an ideological standpoint are not deserving of serious examination.”

The simplest refutation of Marxism is that its materialism simply contradicts itself. If ideas are nothing but products of material and economic forces, like cars or shoes, then communist ideas are only that too. If all our ideas are determined not by insight into truth but by the necessary movements of matter if we just can’t help the way our tongues happen to wag — then the thoughts of Marx are no more true than the thoughts of Moses. To attack the grounds of thought is to attack one’s own attack.

But Marx sees this, and admits it. He reinterprets words as weapons, not as truths. The functions of the words of the “Manifesto” (and, ultimately, even of the much longer, more pseudo-scientific “Capital”) is not to prove what is true but to encourage the revolution. “Philosophers have only interpreted the world; the thing to do is to change it.” Marx is basically a pragmatist.

But even on this pragmatic level there is a self-contradiction. The “Manifesto” ends with this famous appeal: “The communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!” But this appeal is self defeating, for Marx denies free will. Everything is fated; the revolution is “inevitable” whether I choose to join it or not. You cannot appeal to free choice and at the same time deny it.

There are strong practical objections to communism as well as these two philosophical objections. For one thing, its predictions simply have not worked. The revolution did not happen when and where Marxism predicted. Capitalism did not disappear, nor did the state, the family or religion. And communism has not produced contentment and equality anywhere it has gained power.

All Marx has been able to do is to play Moses and lead fools backward into the slavery of Egypt (worldliness). The real Liberator is waiting in the wings for the jester who now “struts and frets his hour upon the stage” to lead his fellow “fools to dusty death” the one topic Marxist philosophers refuse to face.


Kreeft, Peter. “The Pillars of Unbelief — Marx” The National Catholic Register, (January – February 1988).

To subscribe to The National Catholic Register call 1-800-421-3230.


Peter Kreeft, Ph.D., is a professor of philosophy at Boston College. He is an alumnus of Calvin College (AB 1959) and Fordham University (MA 1961, Ph.D., 1965). He taught at Villanova University from 1962-1965, and has been at Boston College since 1965.

Hearing voices, it’s time for them to go… Video

Register, and this time vote American…

Yes, Tito… First the House in ’10, then the Senate and the Presidency in ’12.





Proper Catechesis.

This from: http://www.Thinking-Catholic-Strategic-Center.com

Submitted by:
Susan Greve; Georgetown, Ohio USA; Friday, June 04, 2010


In the secular order, we see that Marxism, under the softer miss-guiding title of Liberalism, is peacefully nibbling away at free commerce and the liberty of man until he wakes up to find himself in a Communist world. “World Revolution” called for by Marxism failed miserably, and so, chameleon-like, Marxism changed colors and strategies, and is again in ascendancy.

 We also see that Islam, under the softer and miss-guiding title of Religion of Peace, is peacefully nibbling away at sovereignty of nations and freedom of religion until man wakes up to find himself enslaved under Islamic Sharia law. “Military Conquest” called for by Islam failed miserably, and so, chameleon-like, Islam changed colors and strategies, and is again in ascendancy.

In the ecclesial order, we see that Falsehood, the servant of Evil, hidden beneath miss-education, propaganda and false crises such as a human population problem, running out of natural resources problem, anthropomorphic global climate problem, permanent unsolvable pollution problem, rich versus poor problem, “scientific” naturalness of homosexuality problem, global health care problem, global hunger problem, etc., etc., etc., promotes the subordination of moral norms and even the very notion of Sin.

Thus we see “Catholics” practicing contraception, looking aside and not opposing abortion, accepting as normal the abominable, and generally behaving as stupid sheep who do not know any better. And thus we see the rise of the “nominal Catholic”.

All of this, in the secular order and in the ecclesial order, is due to lack of education, improper education, miss-education, and programs of purposeful deceit and fraud. We need to return to basics. Pius X told Catholics how to do it.

Thank you Susan Greve for reminding us.


Pius X; April 15, 1905:


Venerable Brethren,
Health and the Apostolic Blessing.

At this very troublesome and difficult time, the hidden designs of God have conducted Our poor strength to the office of Supreme pastor, to rule the entire flock of Christ. The enemy has, indeed, long been prowling about the fold and attacking it with such subtle cunning that now, more than ever before, the prediction of the Apostle to the elders of the Church of Ephesus seems to be verified: “I know that . . . fierce wolves will get in among you, and will not spare the flock.”[1] Those who still are zealous for the glory of God are seeking the causes and reasons for this decline in religion. Coming to a different explanation, each points out, according to his own view, a different plan for the protection and restoration of the kingdom of God on earth. But it seems to Vs, Venerable Brethren, that while we should not overlook other considerations, We are forced to agree with those who hold that the chief cause of the present indifference and, as it were, infirmity of soul, and the serious evils that result from it, is to be found above all in ignorance of things divine. This is fully in accord with what God Himself declared through the Prophet Osee: “And there is no knowledge of God in the land. Cursing and lying and killing and theft and adultery have overflowed: and blood hath touched blood. Thereafter shall the land mourn, and everyone that dwelleth in it shall languish.”[2]

2. It is a common complaint, unfortunately too well founded, that there are large numbers of Christians in our own time who are entirely ignorant of those truths necessary for salvation. And when we mention Christians, We refer not only to the masses or to those in the lower walks of life – for these find some excuse for their ignorance in the fact that the demands of their harsh employers hardly leave them time to take care of themselves or of their dear ones – but We refer to those especially who do not lack culture or talents and, indeed, are possessed of abundant knowledge regarding things of the world but live rashly and imprudently with regard to religion. It is hard to find words to describe how profound is the darkness in which they are engulfed and, what is most deplorable of all, how tranquilly they repose there. They rarely give thought to God, the Supreme Author and Ruler of all things, or to the teachings of the faith of Christ. They know nothing of the Incarnation of the Word of God, nothing of the perfect restoration of the human race which He accomplished. Grace, the greatest of the helps for attaining eternal things, the Holy Sacrifice and the Sacraments by which we obtain grace, are entirely unknown to them. They have no conception of the malice and baseness of sin; hence they show no anxiety to avoid sin or to renounce it. And so they arrive at life’s end in such a condition that, lest all hope of salvation be lost, the priest is obliged to give in the last few moments of life a summary teaching of religion, a time which should be devoted to stimulating the soul to greater love for God. And even this as too often happens only when the dying man is not so sinfully ignorant as to look upon the ministration of the priest as useless, and then calmly faces the fearful passage to eternity without making his peace with God. And so Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: “We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect.”[3]

3. There is then, Venerable Brethren, no reason for wonder that the corruption of morals and depravity of life is already so great, and ever increasingly greater, not only among uncivilized peoples but even in those very nations that are called Christian. The Apostle Paul, writing to the Ephesians, repeatedly admonished them in these words: “But immorality and every uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as become saints; or obscenity or foolish talk.”[4] He also places the foundation of holiness and sound morals upon a knowledge of divine things – which holds in check evil desires: “See to it therefore, brethren, that you walk with care: not as unwise but as wise. . . Therefore, do not become foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.”[5] And rightly so. For the will of man retains but little of that divinely implanted love of virtue and righteousness by which it was, as it were, attracted strongly toward the real and not merely apparent good. Disordered by the stain of the first sin, and almost forgetful of God, its Author, it improperly turns every affection to a love of vanity and deceit. This erring will, blinded by its own evil desires, has need therefore of a guide to lead it back to the paths of justice whence it has so unfortunately strayed. The intellect itself is this guide, which need not be sought elsewhere, but is provided by nature itself. It is a guide, though, that, if it lack its companion light, the knowledge of divine things, will be only an instance of the blind leading the blind so that both will fall into the pit. The holy king David, praising God for the light of truth with which He had illumined the intellect, exclaimed: “The light of Thy countenance, O Lord, is signed upon us.”[6] Then he described the effect of this light by adding: “Thou hast given gladness in my heart,” gladness, that is, which enlarges our heart so that it runs in the way of God’s Commandments.

4. All this becomes evident on a little reflection. Christian teaching reveals God and His infinite perfection with far greater clarity than is possible by the human faculties alone. Nor is that all. This same Christian teaching also commands us to honor God by faith, which is of the mind, by hope, which is of the will, by love, which is of the heart; and thus the whole man is subjected to the supreme Maker and Ruler of all things. The truly remarkable dignity of man as the son of the heavenly Father, in Whose image he is formed, and with Whom he is destined to live in eternal happiness, is also revealed only by the doctrine of Jesus Christ. From this very dignity, and from man’s knowledge of it, Christ showed that men should love one another as brothers, and should live here as become children of light, “not of revelry and drunkenness, not in debauchery and wantonness, not in strife and jealousy.”[7] He also bids us to place all our anxiety and care in the hands of God, for He will provide for us; He tells us to help the poor, to do good to those who hate us, and to prefer the eternal welfare of the soul to the temporal goods of this life. Without wishing to touch on every detail, nevertheless is it not true that the proud man is urged and commanded by the teaching of Christ to strive for humility, the source of true glory? “Whoever, therefore, humbles himself. . . he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.”[8] From that same teaching we learn prudence of the spirit, and thereby we avoid prudence of the flesh; we learn justice, by which we give to every man his due; fortitude, which prepares us to endure all things and with steadfast heart suffer all things for the sake of God and eternal happiness; and, last of all, temperance through which we cherish even poverty borne out of love for God, nay, we even glory in the cross itself, unmindful of its shame. In fine, Christian teaching not only bestows on the intellect the light by which it attains truth, but from it our will draws that ardor by which we are raised up to God and joined with Him in the practice of virtue.

5. We by no means wish to conclude that a perverse will and unbridled conduct may not be joined with a knowledge of religion. Would to God that facts did not too abundantly prove the contrary! But We do maintain that the will cannot be upright nor the conduct good when the mind is shrouded in the darkness of crass ignorance. A man who walks with open eyes may, indeed, turn aside from the right path, but a blind man is in much more imminent danger of wandering away. Furthermore, there is always some hope for a reform of perverse conduct so long as the light of faith is not entirely extinguished; but if lack of faith is added to depraved morality because of ignorance, the evil hardly admits of remedy, and the road to ruin lies open.

6. How many and how grave are the consequences of ignorance in matters of religion! And on the other hand, how necessary and how beneficial is religious instruction! It is indeed vain to expect a fulfillment of the duties of a Christian by one who does not even know them.

7. We must now consider upon whom rests the obligation to dissipate this most pernicious ignorance and to impart in its stead the knowledge that is wholly indispensable. There can be no doubt, Venerable Brethren, that this most important duty rests upon all who are pastors of souls. On them, by command of Christ, rest the obligations of knowing and of feeding the flocks committed to their care; and to feed implies, first of all, to teach. “I will give you pastors according to my own heart,” God promised through Jeremias, “and they shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine.”[9] Hence the Apostle Paul said: “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel,”[10] thereby indicating that the first duty of all those who are entrusted in any way with the government of the Church is to instruct the faithful in the things of God.

8. We do not think it necessary to set forth here the praises of such instruction or to point out how meritorious it is in God’s sight. If, assuredly, the alms with which we relieve the needs of the poor are highly praised by the Lord, how much more precious in His eyes, then, will be the zeal and labor expended in teaching and admonishing, by which we provide not for the passing needs of the body but for the eternal profit of the soul! Nothing, surely, is more desirable, nothing more acceptable to Jesus Christ, the Savior of souls, Who testifies of Himself through Isaias: “To bring good news to the poor he has sent me.”[11]

9. Here then it is well to emphasize and insist that for a priest there is no duty more grave or obligation more binding than this. Who, indeed, will deny that knowledge should be joined to holiness of life in the priest? “For the lips of the priest shall keep knowledge.”[12] The Church demands this knowledge of those who are to be ordained to the priesthood. Why? Because the Christian people expect from them knowledge of the divine law, and it was for that end that they were sent by God. “And they shall seek the law at his mouth; because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts.”[13] Thus the bishop speaking to the candidates for the priesthood in the ordination ceremony says: “Let your teaching be a spiritual remedy for God’s people; may they be worthy fellow-workers of our order; and thus meditating day and night on His law, they may believe what they read, and teach what they shall believe.”[14]

10. If what We have just said is applicable to all priests, does it not apply with much greater force to those who possess the title and the authority of parish priests, and who, by virtue of their rank and in a sense by virtue of a contract, hold the office of pastors of souls? These are, to a certain extent, the pastors and teachers appointed by Christ in order that the faithful might not be as “children, tossed to and fro and carried about by every wind of doctrine devised in the wickedness of men,” but that practicing “the truth in love,” they may, “grow up in all things in him who is the head, Christ.”[15]

11. For this reason the Council of Trent, treating of the duties of pastors of souls, decreed that their first and most important work is the instruction of the faithful.[16] It therefore prescribes that they shall teach the truths of religion on Sundays and on the more solemn feast days; moreover during the holy seasons of Advent and Lent they are to give such instruction every day or at least three times a week. This, however, was not considered enough. The Council provided for the instruction of youth by adding that the pastors, either personally or through others, must explain the truths of religion at least on Sundays and feast days to the children of the parish, and inculcate obedience to God and to their parents. When the Sacraments are to be administered, it enjoins upon pastors the duty to explain their efficacy in plain and simple language.

12. These prescriptions of the Council of Trent have been summarized and still more clearly defined by Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, in his Constitution Esti minime. “Two chief obligations,” he wrote, “have been imposed by the Council of Trent on those who have the care of souls: first, that of preaching the things of God to the people on the feast days; and second, that of teaching the rudiments of faith and of the divine law to the youth and others who need such instruction.” Here the wise Pontiff rightly distinguishes between these two duties: one is what is commonly known as the explanation of the Gospel and the other is the teaching of Christian doctrine. Perhaps there are some who, wishing to lessen their labors, would believe that the homily on the Gospel can take the place of catechetical instruction. But for one who reflects a moment, such is obviously impossible. The sermon on the holy Gospel is addressed to those who should have already received knowledge of the elements of faith. It is, so to speak, bread broken for adults. Catechetical instruction, on the other hand, is that milk which the Apostle Peter wished the faithful to desire in all simplicity like newborn babes.

13. The task of the catechist is to take up one or other of the truths of faith or of Christian morality and then explain it in all its parts; and since amendment of life is the chief aim of his instruction, the catechist must needs make a comparison between what God commands us to do and what is our actual conduct. After this, he will use examples appropriately taken from the Holy Scriptures, Church history, and the lives of the saints – thus moving his hearers and clearly pointing out to them how they are to regulate their own conduct. He should, in conclusion, earnestly exhort all present to dread and avoid vice and to practice virtue.

14. We are indeed aware that the work of teaching the Catechism is unpopular with many because as a rule it is deemed of little account and for the reason that it does not lend itself easily to the winning of public praise. But this in Our opinion is a judgment based on vanity and devoid of truth. We do not disapprove of those pulpit orators who, out of genuine zeal for the glory of God, devote themselves to defense of the faith and to its spread, or who eulogize the saints of God. But their labor presupposes labor of another kind, that of the catechist. And so if this be lacking, then the foundation is wanting; and they labor in vain who build the house. Too often it happens that ornate sermons which receive the applause of crowded congregations serve but to tickle the ears and fail utterly to touch the hearts of the hearers. Catechetical instruction, on the other hand, plain and simple though it be, is the word of which God Himself speaks through the lips of the prophet Isaias: “And as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and return no more thither, but soak the earth and water it, and make it to spring and give seed to the sower and bread to the eater: so shall my word be, which shall go forth from my mouth. It shall not return to me void, but it shall do whatsoever I please and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it.”[17] We believe the same may be said of those priests who work hard to produce books which explain the truths of religion. They are surely to be commended for their zeal, but how many are there who read these works and take from them a fruit commensurate with the labor and intention of the writers? The teaching of the Catechism, on the other hand, when rightly done, never fails to profit those who listen to it.

15. In order to enkindle the zeal of the ministers of God, We again insist on the need to reach the ever-increasing numbers of those who know nothing at all of religion, or who possess at most only such knowledge of God and Christian truths as befits idolaters. How many there are, alas, not only among the young, but among adults and those advanced in years, who know nothing of the chief mysteries of faith; who on hearing the name of Christ can only ask? “Who is he. . . that I may believe in him?”[18] In consequence of this ignorance, they do not consider it a crime to excite and nourish hatred against their neighbor, to enter into most unjust contracts, to do business in dishonest fashion, to hold the funds of others at an exorbitant interest rate, and to commit other iniquities no less reprehensible. They are, moreover, ignorant of the law of Christ which not only condemns immoral actions but also forbids deliberate immoral thoughts and desires. Even when for some reason or other they avoid sensual pleasures, they nevertheless entertain evil thoughts without the least scruple, thereby multiplying their sins above the number of the hairs of the head. These persons are found, we deem it necessary to repeat, not merely among the poorer classes of the people or in sparsely settled districts, but also among those in the higher walks of life, even, indeed, among those puffed up with learning, who, relying upon a vain erudition, feel free to ridicule religion and to “deride whatever they do not know.”[19]

16. Now, if we cannot expect to reap a harvest when no seed has been planted, how can we hope to have a people with sound morals if Christian doctrine has not been imparted to them in due time? It follows, too, that if faith languishes in our days, if among large numbers it has almost vanished, the reason is that the duty of catechetical teaching is either fulfilled very superficially or altogether neglected. It will not do to say, in excuse, that faith is a free gift of God bestowed upon each one at Baptism. True enough, when we are baptized in Christ, the habit of faith is given, but this most divine seed, if left entirely to itself, by its own power, so to speak, is not like the mustard seed which “grows up. . . and puts out great branches.”[20] Man has the faculty of understanding at his birth, but he also has need of his mother’s word to awaken it, as it were, and to make it active. So too, the Christian, born again of water and the Holy Spirit, has faith within him, but he requires the word of the teaching Church to nourish and develop it and to make it bear fruit. Thus wrote the Apostle: “Faith then depends on hearing, and hearing on the word of Christ”;[21] and to show the necessity of instruction, he added, “How are they to hear, if no one preaches?”[22]

17. What We have said so far demonstrates the supreme importance of religious instruction. We ought, therefore, to do all that lies in our power to maintain the teaching of Christian doctrine with full vigor, and where such is neglected, to restore it; for in the words of Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, “There is nothing more effective than catechetical instruction to spread the glory of God and to secure the salvation of souls.”[23]

18. We, therefore, Venerable Brethren, desirous of fulfilling this most important obligation of Our Teaching Office, and likewise wishing to introduce uniformity everywhere in so weighty a matter, do by Our Supreme Authority enact the following regulations and strictly command that they be observed and carried out in all dioceses of the world.

19. I. On every Sunday and holy day, with no exception, throughout the year, all parish priests and in general all those having the care of souls, shall instruct the boys and girls, for the space of an hour from the text of the Catechism on those things they must believe and do in order to attain salvation.

20. II. At certain times throughout the year, they shall prepare boys and girls to receive properly the Sacraments of Penance and Confirmation, by a continued instruction over a period of days.

21. III. With a very special zeal, on every day in Lent and, if necessary, on the days following Easter, they shall instruct with the use of apt illustrations and exhortations the youth of both sexes to receive their first Communion in a holy manner.

22. IV. In each and every parish the society known as the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine is to be canonically established. Through this Confraternity, the pastors, especially in places where there is a scarcity of priests, will have lay helpers in the teaching of the Catechism, who will take up the work of imparting knowledge both from a zeal for the glory of God and in order to gain the numerous Indulgences granted by the Sovereign Pontiffs.

23. V. In the larger cities, and especially where universities, colleges and secondary schools are located, let classes in religion be organized to instruct in the truths of faith and in the practice of Christian life the youths who attend the public schools from which all religious teaching is banned.

24. VI. Since it is a fact that in these days adults need instruction no less than the young, all pastors and those having the care of souls shall explain the Catechism to the people in a plain and simple style adapted to the intelligence of their hearers. This shall be carried out on all holy days of obligation, at such time as is most convenient for the people, but not during the same hour when the children are instructed, and this instruction must be in addition to the usual homily on the Gospel which is delivered at the parochial Mass on Sundays and holy days. The catechetical instruction shall be based on the Catechism of the Council of Trent; and the matter is to be divided in such a way that in the space of four or five years, treatment will be given to the Apostles’ Creed, the Sacraments, the Ten Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer and the Precepts of the Church.

25. Venerable Brethren, We decree and command this by virtue of Our Apostolic Authority. It now rests with you to put it into prompt and complete execution in your respective dioceses, and by the power of your authority to see to it that these prescriptions of Ours be not neglected or, what amounts to the same thing, that they be not carried out carelessly or superficially. That this may be avoided, you must exhort and urge your pastors not to impart these instructions without having first prepared themselves in the work. Then they will not merely speak words of human wisdom, but “in simplicity and godly sincerity,”[24] imitating the example of Jesus Christ, Who, though He revealed “things hidden since the foundation of the world,”[25] yet spoke “all . . . things to the crowds in parables, and without parables . . . did not speak to them.”[26] We know that the Apostles, who were taught by the Lord, did the same; for of them Pope Saint Gregory wrote: “They took supreme care to preach to the uninstructed simple truths easy to understand, not things deep and difficult.”[27] In matters of religion, the majority of men in our times must be considered uninstructed.

26. We do not, however, wish to give the impression that this studied simplicity in imparting instruction does not require labor and meditation – on the contrary, it demands both more than any other kind of preaching. It is much easier to find a preacher capable of delivering an eloquent and elaborate discourse than a catechist who can impart a catechetical instruction which is praiseworthy in every detail. No matter what natural facility a person may have in ideas and language, let him always remember that he will never be able to teach Christian doctrine to children or to adults without first giving himself to very careful study and preparation. They are mistaken who think that because of inexperience and lack of training of the people the work of catechizing can be performed in a slipshod fashion. On the contrary, the less educated the hearers, the more zeal and diligence must be used to adapt the sublime truths to their untrained minds; these truths, indeed, far surpass the natural understanding of the people, yet must be known by all – the uneducated and the cultured – in order that they may arrive at eternal happiness.

27. And now, Venerable Brethren, permit Us to close this letter by addressing to you these words of Moses: “If any man be on the Lord’s side, let him join with me.”[28] We pray and entreat you to reflect on the great loss of souls due solely to ignorance of divine things. You have doubtless accomplished many useful and most praiseworthy works in your respective dioceses for the good of the flock entrusted to your care, but before all else, and with all possible zeal and diligence and care, see to it and urge on others that the knowledge of Christian doctrine pervades and imbues fully and deeply the minds of all. Here, using the words of the Apostle Peter, We say, “According to the gift that each has received, administer it to one another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.”[29]

28. Through the intercession of the Most Blessed Immaculate Virgin, may your diligent efforts be made fruitful by the Apostolic Blessing which, in token of Our affection and as a pledge of heavenly favors, We wholeheartedly impart to you and to your clergy and people.

Given at Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on the fifteenth day of April, 1905, in the second year of Our Pontificate.



1. Acts 20:29.
2. Osee 4:1-3.
3. Instit., 27:18.
4. Eph. 5:34.
5. Eph. 5:15-16.
6. Ps.4:7.
7. Rom. 13:13.
8. Matt. 18:4.
9. Jer. 3: 15.
10. I Cor. 1:17.
11. Luke 4:18.
12. Mal. 2:7.
13. Ibid.
14. Roman Pontifical.
15. Eph. 4:14, IS.
16. Sess. V, cap. 2, De Reform.; Sess. XXII, cap. 8; Sess. XXIV, cap. 4 & 7, De Reform.
17. Is.SS:10-11.
18. John 9:36.
19. Jude 10.
20. Mark 4:32.
21. Rom. 10:17.
22. Ibid., 14.
23. Constitution, Etsi minime, 13.
24. II Cor.1:12.
25. Matt. 13:35.
26. Ibid., 34.
27. Morals, I, 17, cap. 26.
28. Ex. 32:26.
29. I Pet. 4:10.




Respond to this article at the link below :
Proper Catechesis


This article and comments may be found on the web site at the link below:


Want to actually ‘fight Marxism’ with your CCHD monies this year? — Help Rebuild the Church in Ukraine

 Editor Note: Both the Soviet Union and Germany tried to annihilate the national identity of Poland during and following WWII, and the same can be said of the lingering Soviet system found within the Ukraine today. 

The Ukrainian Catholic Education Foundation is a non-profit organization dedicated to rebuilding the Church in Ukraine by supporting various projects, especially the only Catholic university in the former Soviet Union, the Ukrainian Catholic University. For more information, visit http://www.ucef.org     

 Read the story below, then donate. Freedom is threatened and still Our Lady wills that Atheistic Communism be defeated and worship of her son and only true God be restored…  

 Ukraine: Soviet system lingers on

In Ukraine, the stench of the Soviet era lingers on. Life in Ukraine offers a dismal but fascinating panorama of how difficult it is to shake off the blight of Communism.  

By Matthew A. Rarey  

Bolshevism evolved into religion, some kind of materialistic pagan religion, which worships Lenin and his like as demigods, while considering lies, deceit, violence, the oppression of the poor, the demoralizing of children, humiliation of women, destruction of the family… and the reduction of all the nation to extreme poverty as the principles of its rule—although all these principles are false.—Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky, leader of the Ukrainian Greek Catholics (1936)
A great and holy man made this grim and blunt pronouncement three years before Stalin drenched all Ukraine in red, his veracity confirmed in violence. To understand Ukraine today, we must briefly revisit its pre-Communist history.  

Writing these cautionary words in his eighth decade, Metropolitan Sheptytsky (d. 1944) was the long-serving spiritual leader of the largest Eastern Rite within the Catholic Church, the dominant Rite in Ukraine, and rightly so: Ukraine is the crossroads of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and the Ukrainian Greek Catholics are Eastern in spirituality but Western in faith, the Kievan Church having re-entered into communion with Rome in the sixteenth century, a first big step toward closing the chasm created by the Orthodox schism in the 11th century.  

Sheptytsky was a prophet in his own right as well, clearly perceiving the threat from the armed ideology that would soon persecute his entire country, the eastern two-thirds already having suffered Communist rule since being incorporated into the Soviet Union shortly after the Russian Revolution in 1917. The western third, where Sheptytsky lived, then lay within the political boundaries of Poland—the part that would be ceded to Stalin in 1939 as part of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Treaty.  

History would prove Sheptytsky right. Grim and blunt was the apt way to describe Communism, a grim and blunt ideology that would bludgeon an historically Christian people for the better part of the last century, leaving millions of Ukrainians dead in body (Stalin’s forced-famine in the 1930s, deportations to the Gulag, swifter forms of execution) and untold more dead or wounded in spirit. Today the “walking dead” have a less than salutary effect on civil life.  

On the plus side, post-Soviet Ukraine is a free and independent country for the first time in centuries. (Being a largely flat-landed country, strategically located and historically flanked by great powers, has not been propitious for Ukrainian statehood.) This freedom is a source of hope. The so-called Orange Revolution in 2004, when a presidential election widely perceived as rigged for the pro-Russian candidate was overturned by a peaceful popular uprising, seemed to tap into that hope. Today, however, that hope no longer inspires such infectious popular enthusiasm. But why? Because Ukraine bears the bruises of Bolshevism, some of which signify grave internal damage—damage so severe that, save for a rebaptism of the human spirit in the Christian faith that united the Ukrainians as a people in the tenth century, it may lead to the Ukrainians doing to themselves what Stalin was not able to accomplish: the debilitation, if not the death of Ukraine.  

Sobering social trends  

I spent two months in Ukraine in early 2008, volunteering at the Ukrainian Catholic University (UCU) at the invitation of the Ukrainian Catholic Education Foundation (UCEF), a non-profit organization dedicated to rebuilding the Catholic Church in Ukraine. (Upon my return, I was hired by the UCEF to help spread the good word about the Good News being promoted in Ukraine: a mission, in fact, inspiring people and reaping tangible benefits far beyond the borders of that pivotally important country bridging East and West.) I came impelled by the desire to learn and report about a unique and powerful apostolate on the Church’s Eastern Front that I had heard about while working in Washington, DC. I was intrigued by UCU, the only Catholic university in the former Soviet Union, fighting for the faith in a culture corrupted by Communism and tempted by Western secularism. This small but dynamic university is helping train a new generation of lay and religious leaders re-evangelizing Ukraine in all aspects of daily life.  

After returning from an enlightening tour-of-duty in a land that has known much darkness, and where the long, sinister night of the 20th century continues to cast shadows deep and wide, I wrote several pieces for religious and secular publications about the how UCU and the Church in Ukraine are rebuilding religious and civil society, particularly by addressing the causes of the demographic crisis and the assault of Western-style secularism: like all of Ukraine’s major problems and challenges, causes neither economic nor political in nature, but moral and religious. Most of those articles may be found on the UCEF’s website: http://www.ucef.org.  

Using demographic data about Ukraine released not only by the national government but sources such as the UN, these articles were informed by a personal perspective of Ukrainian life in the western third of the country, principally its main city, Lviv, where UCU is located.  

What do the data reveal about Ukraine? The more sobering trends include:  

One of the lowest birthrates in the world, 1.2 per woman, that threatens to country’s population of 47 million by the year 2050—a demographic crisis President Victor Yushchenko last year declared a “critical threat to national security”;  

the highest rate of HIV/AIDS infection in Europe: as of mid-2008, almost 130,000 registered cases of HIV infection and 13,000 deaths due to AIDS, actual numbers likely being far higher due to public ignorance of the causes of the disease;  

40,000 alcohol-related deaths per year, and, according to the World Health Organization, some 700,000 Ukrainians annually treated in hospitals for alcohol dependency. The situation may grow worse as Ukraine struggles through the global financial crisis that is hitting its post-Soviet economy especially hard: the national currency having lost half its value against the US dollar last year as the lifeblood of the economy, heavy industrial output, drains as world demand plummets;  

a divorce-to-marriage ratio as high as 3:4 in eastern parts of the country, although that drops as low as 3:10 in western parts;  

as many as 33 million abortions performed since legalization in 1955, averaging six per woman: according to the Ukrainian legal code, “only a physical personal [having] the right to life,” a “physical person” being one who “exists only after birth”; and abortion being a common means of birth control in a country where condoms have not caught on as in Western Europe;  

corruption pervading all levels of society, from politics to law enforcement to business—so common, expected, and generally accepted that statistics about corruption do not exist.  

If only the personal perspective I gained on the ground had informed the articles I wrote shortly after returning, however, they would have painted a rosier picture of Ukraine. Certainly there was evidence of nationwide problems: eg, a drunken woman savagely beaten (by her husband?) in a busy public market in Lviv while shoppers, including a policeman, went along their business; the scantily clad young women for whom looking like anorexic prostitutes must have some pay-off, but certainly not in terms of self-respect; everyday stories of police and politicians who would rather take bribes than enforce the law; the young married women taking in an English class I helped teach who said they would rather have more and better material goods than more children, or any children at all.  

Why is the western Ukraine different?  

Western Ukraine, however, is better off than the rest of the country, largely due to fortunate historical circumstances that prevented its mores from enduring attacks as long and vicious as in the east.  

Churches packed on Sundays and holy days are the joyous outward expression of private belief persecuted and forced underground during Soviet rule. Public displays of Christian belief abound, such as statues of the Virgin Mary, Christmas manger scenes, and huge crucifixes venerated by young and old alike. And the good work being done by religious associations—particularly the resurgent Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, which was banned during most of Soviet rule—is evident in myriad social ministries, from orphanages to alcohol-addiction programs to classes introducing engaged couples to the concept of marriage as a sacrament rather than a legal arrangement, commercial in nature and dissolved at whim. And although one may charge this writer with bias, the Ukrainian Catholic University is helping lead a re-evangelization of Ukraine—mainly in the familiar west, but with forays into the east as well—through its various institutes addressing social problems in very practical ways, but mainly through the work of its graduates: courageous young people who are helping Ukraine overcome a century of totalitarianism by serving virtuously in church, government, and business.
What explains the different milieu of the western half of the country? In short, western Ukraine enjoyed a 25-year respite from Communism, and Communism at its most wicked. It was incorporated into Poland after the First World War, and it did not fall decisively to the Soviets until 1944. Eastern Ukraine was not so fortunate. Absorbed into the Soviet Union in the years just after Red October, it endured the birth pangs of Bolshevism, from the Soviets’ brutal enforcement of militant atheism to the great famine orchestrated by Stalin in the 1930s, which killed upward of seven million Ukrainians and demoralized millions more, thus serving Stalin’s intention of making a proud people supine to Soviet rule. For in the first decades of Bolshevism, the Soviet scythe slashed with amateurish enthusiasm. As Communism matured, it became more of a business than a labor of perverted passion. By the time it came to western Ukraine, it had entered the business stage, evidencing more the banality than the bloodiness of evil.  

Today, eastern Ukraine is stricken to a greater degree with the nationwide diseases cited above: breakdown of the family, demographic collapse, fatalistic nihilism, and, in lieu of religious faith, a materialism all the more vile for its tawdriness.  

Pervasive immorality and corruption  

But what do Ukrainians have to say? Through supporters of the Ukrainian Catholic Education Foundation who maintain close ties with Ukraine—many of them being either members of the generation of Ukrainians who fled abroad to escape the Red Army in 1944 or their children—I recently was put in contact with several Ukrainians from different parts of this country roughly the size of Texas. Their accounts of the troubles confronting their country—and the roots of those causes, all somehow branching from the tap root of Communism—were depressingly similar. For the space of this article, two will have to suffice; and suffice well, since all were minor variations on the same theme.  

“The worst evil in Ukraine is immorality. Moral decay is not something you can deal with just by investing some money into some kind of program,” said Natalka Lominska, an instructor at the National University of Ostroh Academy, a secular university in the western city of Volynia. “Let’s take trust. In your culture, when two people meet, they tend to trust each other… But not in Ukraine. People trust almost nobody: state institutions, government officials, even neighbors and doctors! Not only are you expected to bribe the doctor [for supposedly free services] but you can’t be sure tests will be done properly or you’ll be diagnosed properly. And if all goes well, chances are high that the drugs from the pharmacist will be fakes.”  

(To give at least some doctors their due, I met a decent one in Lviv who said his salary was so paltry that he would gladly accept even a peasant’s chicken in return for services. As it was, he had to moonlight as a computer programmer to make ends meet.)  

Lominska, who obtained a graduate degree in the US, is a widow raising a 13-year-old son. She is particularly concerned with the pervasiveness of corruption, a hangover from Communist days when everyone was equal, only some more so than others through their connections.  

“Corruption is so widespread that young people think they can buy everything, even love, trust, friendship, and health. When I ask my students about it, the answers are shocking. When I answer that one can buy medicine, but not health; that one can buy sex, but not love, and so forth, they seem to be very skeptical. Consequently, money becomes the most important thing for a lot of people. Stealing is a widespread method of obtaining it… There have been grandchildren who have killed their grandparents for a few hundred hryvnia [there are roughly seven hryvnia to one US dollar]. It’s terrifying, but it’s true.”  

The prospects for Ukraine? Said Lominska, after noting other problems such as alcoholism, AIDS, and the increasing rate of hard drug use that, in turn, fuels the rate of HIV infection leading to AIDS: “I’m not a pessimist, but I’m scared.”  

This predicament was expounded upon by Oksana Sorokowski, a native of the capital city of Kyiv who emigrated to the US in 1993 and now works for the National Institutes for Health, a federal government agency. But she keeps in close contact with friends and relatives in Ukraine and visits every couple of years.  

Ukraine evidences the same problems resulting from Communism as other post-Soviet countries, she noted, especially corruption: an outward manifestation of spiritual ruin wreaked by displacing Christianity with a “new system of ethics built on hypocrisy.” Almost two decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the stench of Orwell’s Animal Farm clings close to the ground.  

What differentiates Ukraine is that the Soviets deliberately sought to destroy the Ukrainian national identity, resulting in a wounded nation confused about its own identity—the eastern part having been heavily crucified, and Russian rather than Ukrainian being the language commonly spoken in Kyiv even today.  

“Except for the western part of Ukraine… most of the people, especially in the south and east, were so poor and brain washed that they didn’t even embrace their [post-Soviet] freedom,” she emailed from her home in the Washington, DC suburbs. “They were wishing to be back in a cage” as during the old regime when life resembled a “zoo: “people had no freedom, but their basic needs were taken care of… they were fed, watered, given a place to live.”  

“Brainwashing” is a term grown rusty since the Cold War contest between Free World and Communist. But Mrs. Sorokowski’s use of the term is apt today, even among younger Ukrainians who evidently imbibed the brainwashedness of their parents.  

A North American newspaper, The Ukrainian Weekly, recently featured a series in which first-year university students from western, central, and eastern Ukraine—the first cohort of university students born in post-Soviet Ukraine—were interviewed about Ukrainian history. Those from western Ukraine evidenced the least brainwashing, having had parents and grandparents who remembered pre-Soviet Ukraine. Some from the east, however, could have been mistaken for Young Pioneers, members of the Soviet scouting organization.  

They were asked about the great genocidal famine, often called Ukraine’s Holocaust, which even today is shrouded in Stalinist-era secrecy and propaganda. (In the West, this propaganda was abetted by Soviet-smitten fellow travelers such as Pulitzer-winning New York Times correspondent Walter Duranty, who duly reported the Communist Party line on Ukraine.) One freshman, a self-identified supporter of the Communist Party of Ukraine, even claimed the Holodomor was “technically necessary, from an economic point of view.” Uncle Joe would be proud of his latter-day children who call themselves Ukrainian.  

Faded hopes

Mrs Sorokowski’s thoughts about Ukraine’s present prospects?  

During the Orange Revolution in 2004, she said, “people rediscovered trust, love, true friendship, kindness, and hope. Crime went down to an all-time low. I visited Ukraine shortly after… and the change was unbelievable. Alas, it didn’t last long. The hopes for dramatic [political and social] change faded… and now I hear again about corruption, moral decrepitude, and total lawlessness. Yes, money seems to be everything—the substitute for law, for education, for just about everything. Crimes go unpunished when you are rich. Law, medicine, banking, and real estate seem to be especially warped by corruption. And it seems to be getting worse as the crisis tightens its grip on the economy.”  

On a relatively lighter note that complemented Mrs. Sorokowski’s song of woe, Matthew Matuszak, a Ukrainian-American who is English-language editor of the Religious Information Service of Ukraine (www.risu.org.ua), told me: “It is totally inconceivable to imagine a politician in Ukraine getting thrown out of office like [Rod] Blagojevich [the former governor of Illinois, accused of trying to sell President Obama’s vacant Senate seat]. Politicians here are outside the law.”  

On a somber but still complementary note, Matuszak related an ordinary example of police corruption that makes Chicago’s legendary bad cops Officer Friendlies in comparison. Ukraine, like Russia, is facing a sad phenomenon: the ever-growing population of homeless adolescents, abandoned by parents due to such causes as alcoholism and economic hardship. The Catholic Church in Ukraine is supporting many projects to help these kids. One such project in the city of Zaporizhzhia has encountered resistance from a source unimaginable in most Western countries: the local police department. The project director has said that the police make money off the street kids vis-à-vis prostitution and drugs, so they really don’t want the problem solved.  

Ukraine’s prognosis is dire. The antidote, however, is simple but difficult to imbibe in many quarters after almost a century of totalitarianism: a rebaptism of the human spirit in Ukraine’s historic Christian faith, and a total rejection of the false gods of Marx and Mammon. Wherever the antidote is being imbibed, however, the human spirit in Ukraine is proving itself as rich and life-sustaining as the soil that makes this huge and fertile country the bread basket of Europe.  

Matthew A. Rarey is communications director at the Ukrainian Catholic Education Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to rebuilding the Church in Ukraine by supporting various projects, especially the only Catholic university in the former Soviet Union, the Ukrainian Catholic University. For more information, visit http://www.ucef.org

Story Credit: Spero News 



Video: Watch the cancer of unemployment growing county by county — Jan. 07 to Jan 2010

The legacy and fate of a one-term-only Marxist-Socialist president and his party…

Map Information/Large screen here


CCHD BOYCOTT VIDEO: Why I Don’t Contribute to Catholic Campaign for Human Development by Stephanie Block


Why I Don’t Contribute to Catholic Campaign for Human Development

Thursday, October 22, 2009
Stephanie Block

In violation of the strict rule that any discussion using “Nazi” as a simile for anything is immediately ceded, let me ask what Nazism, American slavery, and abortion have in common.

The answer is that they all deny(ied) the personhood of one group of human beings with the consequence that the “right to life” of the depersonalized group lies (or lay) in the power of those with legal status.

Which is why I won’t be contributing to the Catholic Campaign for Human Development – not this year or any year that one penny goes toward the support of any Alinskyian organizing network, such as the Industrial Areas Foundation, PICO, Gamaliel, DART, and the now disgraced and defunded ACORN… not to mention smaller networks and the hundreds of affiliate groups they spawn.

The links between the Alinskyian organizing networks and abortion are indirect but serious. It isn’t that the local Alinskyian organization will say “we’re supporting abortion rights” but that they are promoting (for example) Obama’s universal, government health care, despite its abortion-supportive components or that they’ll support a pro-abortion politician because he supports a pet program. The politically progressive Alinskyian organizing networks don’t have to include abortion “rights” in their platform to be supportive them.

And there’s an additional Culture of Death problem in all this, namely the indeterminate political “relationship” created by this particular ecumenical fellowship. To take an example, consider the institutional members of the Alinskyian organization, VOICE (Virginians Organized for Interfaith Community Engagement). VOICE is an Arlington, Virginia affiliate of the Industrial Areas Foundation network and has about 39 institutional members – only institutions can join, not individual people – as well as another 7 who are in an “exploratory commitment” with the group. All are religious bodies.

Of those religious bodies, 11 are Catholic and presumably adhere to Catholic teaching about the intrinsic evil of abortion. The rest are predominantly from denominational scions – progressive break-aways from mainline religious “traditions”– that support abortion.

For instance, since 1971, the United Church of Christ has affirmed a woman’s right to access to safe and legal abortion. There are three United Church of Christ congregations in VOICE.

In 1978, Unitarian Universalists declared a “right” to contracept and abort. There are 5 Unitarian Universalists congregations involved with VOICE.

The conservative and reform branches of Judaism support a woman’s “choice” to abort and have 3 congregations in VOICE. The 5 Presbyterian members of VOICE are Presbyterian Church USA congregations. The Presbyterian Church USA also affirms a woman’s “choice.” United Methodists support the legal option of abortion…and there are 5 United Methodist congregations in VOICE.

Baptists have no centralized institutional authority, meaning there’s a good bit of variation from congregation to congregation. Their larger groupings, called conventions, do tend to group themselves into “progressive” or “traditional” camps. One “progressive” camp, for example, would be the New Baptist Convention founded by Jimmy Carter in 2008, about which The Washington Post writes gives “moderate Baptists a stronger collective voice and could provide Democrats a greater entrance into the Baptist community.” [Alan Coopeman, “Carter, Clinton Seek to Bring Together Moderate Baptists,” Washington Post, 1-21-07] Of the 8 Baptist congregations of VOICE, most seem to belong to the National Baptist Convention, which is divided on the abortion issue.

The Episcopal Church USA Executive Council formally made the Episcopal Church a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice in 1986. There are 2 Episcopalian congregations in VOICE.

The one African Methodist Episcopal congregation in VOICE, if it is consistent with other AME thought, laments abortion but argues it must be legally available for cases of rape, incest, and the “freedom to make reproductive choices.”

As for the Dar Al Hijrah Islamic Center, VOICE’s single Muslim member, it may or may not be anti-abortion but its pro-life credentials are questionable. Paul Sperry, in his book Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington, writes: “Heading deeper into falls Church on Leesburg Pike for about another mile takes you to the next place of interest on the Wahhabi corridor: Dar Al Hijrah, the hard-line Wahhabi mosque where Hazmi and other hijackers from the Pentagon cell worshipped and received aid and comfort. He and other hijackers were ministered to there by an iman who encourages violent jihad and martyrdom.”

So the question is, why is the pro-life Catholic Church in a political coalition with pro-death denominations rather than other pro-life denominations? Before you answer too quickly, imagine that rather than openly supporting “woman’s right to choose,” they supported a white man’s “right” to lynch?

I suggest that if the latter situation seems clear-cut, that if pro-life churches would never consider entering into any open-ended coalition with pro-slavery organizations, they have no business in a coalition with pro-aborts either. Groups that, as a matter of institutional policy, depersonalize other human beings so that the literal life is at stake, are dangerous.

Which is why, I suspect, that one reads of Catholics around the United States organizing boycotts of the CCHD. Mary Ann Kreitzer, president of Les Femmes in Diocese of Arlington, where VOICE is active, writes, “The pretense that ending [CCHD] funding to ACORN has eliminated the scandal is ridiculous when you consider that many of the other community organizing groups receiving money operate exactly like ACORN does and are engaging in the same type of liberal lobbying. …Why are millions being funneled to secular groups that often have an agenda diametrically opposed to the Church?”

[See Kreitzer’s article http://lesfemmes- thetruth. blogspot. comsearch? q=tuck+grinnell]

What a good question. More Catholics ought to be asking it.

Stephanie Block is the editor of the New Mexico-based Los Pequenos newspaper and a founder of the Catholic Media Coalition.