The Hoax of Atheistic Communism

Folha de S. Paulo, 14 March 1971

"History is the tutor of life," said Cicero. There is nothing more useful for understanding certain aspects of modern reality than studying analogous situations from the past.

Heresies, as is well known, emerged one after the other throughout the twenty centuries of the history of the Catholic Church. The most recent of these is progressivism, a barely disguised revival of the modernism that St Pius X condemned at the beginning of the 20th century.

The general public has vague and often inaccurate notions about how these different heretical movements broke away from the Church. For example, most people imagine that Luther’s break with the Church took place in four stages: 1) He developed a doctrine that was contrary to Catholic doctrine. 2) Realising the ideological contrast, he revolted, broke away from the Church, and established an evangelical sect. 3) The Church then threatened to excommunicate him unless he renounced his errors. 4) Luther persisted in his doctrinal position, was excommunicated, and the break was finalised. Thus, supposedly, Luther left the Church when he wanted to and in the way he wanted to. He left like the prodigal son who openly told his father ahead of time that he was leaving his father's house.

However, history teaches us that, in Luther's case as in those of the other great heresiarchs, the process of separation was much more complex. This is because certain heresiarchs — perhaps most of them — did not want to leave the Church in a dramatic fashion. They were far too diplomatic and subtle to choose such an obvious way to achieve their goals. Instead, they chose to remain within the Church to covertly spread heresy among the faithful. If successful, the heresiarchs would be able to infiltrate all levels of the Church.

For this reason, despite being aware that their beliefs were incompatible with Catholicism, the founders of heresy attempted to express their principles in a way that appeared to be compatible with orthodox theology. Had they not taken such precautions, they would have been easily identified and condemned as heretics. All Catholics would have turned against them and their doctrines. Their infiltration process would have halted immediately, and they would have risked taking with them no more than a handful of apostates.

From this standpoint, the milestones in the subtle process by which heretics separate from the Church are clear: 1) The heresiarch conceives of his heterodox doctrine and presents it in a way that appears orthodox at first glance; 2) The heresiarch begins to circulate his camouflaged error, attracting unwary followers whom he gathers into groups controlled by his supporters; 3) In secret, his followers are taught the stark error, but are advised to disseminate it in a veiled manner; As the new sect begins to spread, genuine Catholics denounce the new heresy. The adepts defend themselves by claiming they are orthodox and are being slandered. The Church examines the controversy, declares the new doctrine heretical and excommunicates its followers.

There is a class of heresiarchs and heretics who do not rush out of the Church, but instead wish to remain inside and fish in muddy waters. They must be rooted out by force through the application of spiritual penalties.

The peculiar nature of these sectarians explains why their process of separation from the Church does not always end in excommunication. Once a heresy has been condemned, it appears to die, but soon springs up again inside the Church.

For example, once Arianism, the famous heresy of the 4th century, had been condemned, the Arian sect fell apart. However, it soon reappeared within the Catholic ranks, using expressions that camouflaged doctrines inspired by Arius's thinking but less radical than his own. Thus, semi-Arianism arose.

Consequently, the Church had to make a new effort to detect, define and condemn this new heretical trap, uprooting the cancer that had sprung up within it again.

What is the ultimate goal of a hidden heresy? What do its leaders hope to achieve with this infiltration tactic? It is not simply to recruit many followers among the faithful. Rather, it is to win over priests, bishops, cardinals and, if possible, even a Pope. The heretics' dreams of empire know no bounds!

The formation of communism was a very different process. Its founder was not Catholic. Its followers were recruited from among people who had never had faith, or who had lost it entirely. Whenever the Marxist sect made new converts, they openly broke with the Church.

However, it seems evident that nowadays, communism is changing its tactics and trying to imitate the subtle manoeuvres of veiled heresies to a large degree. In other words, Marxism is now adopting the airs of a sacristan, endeavouring to take root in the Church in order to conquer it. Having failed in its struggle against the Church from the outside over the last hundred years, it is now trying to destroy it from within.

How is this done? In a thousand ways. I don't have enough space here to describe this immense manoeuvre in all its aspects. I will limit myself to describing one of its many facets.

Enter the hoax of 'atheistic Communism'. The term is legitimate and can be found in pontifical documents.

It is based on the fact that communism is a complex web of errors, the most significant of which is atheism. Therefore, it is logical for it to commonly be designated as 'atheistic communism'.

However, Catholic circles influenced by communism have begun to interpret the term capriciously. They argue that if the Popes condemn atheistic Communism, it is only because it is atheistic. Therefore, they claim, if there were a non-atheistic strain of communism, the Church would obviously have no objection to it.

This subterfuge amounts to claiming that the Popes only ever condemned the atheism of Communism. Reading the documents of Leo XIII alone is enough to see that this is false. In fact, the Church also condemns the political, social and economic tenets of Communism. An authentic Catholic cannot accept these tenets, even if they are presented as being unconnected to atheism.

For example, affirming the orthodoxy of a communist-inspired programme of social reform that includes divorce, free love, and complete promiscuity in sexual relations is blatantly opposed to Catholic morality. This remains true even when the advocates of these reforms receive the sacraments.

The same applies to collective property, i.e. an economic system that excludes individual property. Anyone who says they believe in God but desire the implementation of such a system is against the Church.

What does communist propaganda gain from this doctrinal shell game with the term 'atheistic Communism'? It creates the illusion for countless Catholics that they can be communist in every other respect while setting atheism aside. This is a perfect imposture.

Read also: Pseudo-Blessings for LGBTQ+ Couples in Cologne: a Decisive Confrontation for the Church in Germany and the World

If this treacherous manoeuvre continues unhindered, Communism will become deeply rooted in Catholic circles, as nascent Arianism and Protestantism once were.

In the face of this panorama, authentic Catholics are horrified. The communists laugh. After all, if the Church continues its current policy of not excommunicating anyone, who will root them out of Catholic circles?