Did Communists Infiltrate the Catholic Church?

http://www.chuckmorse.com/communism_catholic_church.html ^ | Chuck Morse

[narses]

As a traditional Jew, I'm deeply concerned over the plight of the Roman Catholic Church, which I consider to be the largest and most influential repository of conservative Judeo-Christian values in America today. I believe that those of us who care about the furtherance of a moral society have a stake in the future of the church as a moral force. The American church is under siege today, not only from the usual external forces but also from the weight of its own internal contradictions. The scandal of corrupt homosexual priests violating the innocence of minors in their care is, to put it mildly, a contradiction in Christian and Catholic practice and faith. When did this corruption inject itself into the system and why was the situation allowed to deteriorate to such a degree?

Much has been written regarding Communist methods of infiltration. The standard method was to "bore from within" which involved Communists disguising themselves as loyalists to an organization they sought to undermine. Once gaining entry, they would gradually and subtly change the values and principles of the targeted organization. The process of "change" can take a generation. Communists have exhibited unlimited patience and supreme confidence in the ultimate attainment of their goals. Examples in America include substantial inroads by Communists into organized labor, academia, the legal profession, race relations, cultural institutions, and the government itself.

When planning to infiltrate, the Communists probe for an institutional weakness to exploit and, in the case of the Catholic Church, perhaps they perceived the weakness to reside in the all-male celibate priesthood. Did Communists send their followers, particularly homosexuals, sexual deviants, and enablers, into seminaries to become priests in order to foster a homosexual culture within the church? Homosexuals, practicing their predilections in an overwhelmingly conservative Catholic community, while given protection by well placed minded superiors, could certainly contribute to the undermining of faith in Catholicism and could unquestionably shake the credibility and moral standing of the church itself down to its very foundations. Undermining Catholic authority has been a clear and often stated goal of the Communist left. Speculation regarding how the Communists attempted to implement their program is reasonable and necessary in order to better understand the present situation.

Two former Communists, Bella Dodd and Manning Johnson, spoke on Communist infiltration of the Catholic Church. Dodd, an important Communist party lawyer, teacher and activist, converted to Catholicism in April 1952 under the tutelage of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen. Stating that the Communist infiltration was so extensive that in the future "you will not recognize the Catholic Church," Dodd also asserted that:

"In the 1930's, we put eleven hundred men into the priesthood in order to destroy the Church from within."

"Right now they are in the highest places, and they are working to bring about change in order that the Catholic Church will no longer be effective against Communism."

Manning Johnson, a former Communist Party official and author of "Color, Communism and Common Sense" testified in 1953 to the House un-American Activities Committee regarding the infiltration of the Catholic Church:

"Once the tactic of infiltration of religious organizations was set by the Kremlin ... the Communists discovered that the destruction of religion could proceed much faster through infiltration of the (Catholic) Church by Communists operating within the Church itself. The Communist leadership in the United States realized that the infiltration tactic in this country would have to adapt itself to American conditions (Europe also had its cells) and the religious make-up peculiar to this country. In the earliest stages it was determined that with only small forces available to them, it would be necessary to concentrate Communist agents in the seminaries. The practical conclusion drawn by the Red leaders was that these institutions would make it possible for a small Communist minority to influence the ideology of future clergymen in the paths conducive to Communist purposes This policy of infiltrating seminaries was successful beyond even our communist expectations."

As a radio talk show host and avid listener to talk radio in Boston, I've listened intently to comments by Catholics as the crisis has unfolded. Much has been said regarding the left dominance of the seminaries and a prevalence of the ideas of "liberation theology" which is a biblically contradictory Trojan horse within the Catholic gates. Establishment organs, such as the Boston Globe, continue to wring their hands over the homosexual activities of priests while supporting a homosexual agenda everywhere else. Hopefully, the Catholic flock will wake up and sweep the corruption out of their church in the same way that their founder, Jesus of Nazareth, swept the moneychangers out of the Temple.

Page URL: http://www.chuckmorse.com/communism_catholic_church.html Host Web site: http://www.chuckmorse.com

[RobbyS]

I might add that, so far as religion and the supernatural are concerned, communism and liberalism are on the same page. Could any Commie hate the Church more than James Carroll the Globe columnist? I am sure there are priests with different temperments but the same faithlessness who have decided to stay in the Church so long as it is personally profitable to them.

[Mike Fieschko]

I was on vacation while that happened. I wish I had seen the posts

There was one post attacking Jim Robinson and the moderator(s): 494 in this thread. In a moment, StillSmallVoice was banned.

(Yes, yes, I know about post hoc ...)

[Catholicguy]

Thanks for the link

[Loyalist]

If you think Commies planned Vatican Two do you also think that Pope John 23rd was a Commie?

No, but I believe he may have been too naive and trusting of the liberal clerics, cardinals, bishops and periti alike, who hijacked it. Popes have died during Councils before, but certainly they took advantage of his failing health.

Again, we don't know who, or even if anyone, was a Communist agent at Vatican II. But to dismiss the possibility of Communist infiltration of the Vatican out of hand is unwise, in light of what is known about Communist infiltration elsewhere.

[Catholicguy]

However, it's apparent that the Wind blew in and the whole thing got away from them.

:) Touche

[Polycarp]

Which Free-speech advocate

(I might get flamed for this but...)Just curious, where can I find a Catholic doctrinal support for the "Free Speech" enshrined in the American (protestant) experiment as it has come to be reality in post-Christian America?

I'm not impressed by appeals to a code of "Free Speech" that is, in its modern form, in many ways antithetical to Catholic moral doctrine.

Hand appeals to "Free Speech" when it serves his agenda. He denies it to others though by branding them integrists when they clearly are not and have no way to refute such lies.

I saw Hand's neurotic post regarding myself and FRee Republic in his letters to ed subpage. What a liar and coward. The man IS psychotic. I'm glad he was banned here.

Don't let this happen to you:

To view a home page, enter a screen name:

Q: Why are the home pages ugly in this 'improved' version? A: Because I'm working on the system. It will look better when I am finished.

---

CATHOLICGUY signed up 2001-04-01.
This account has been banned.

[narses]

It's right there next to "Religous Liberty" I think.

:)

[Catholicguy]

I think Pope John 23rd was fairly sharp and I also think he has been badly mischaracterised by some on the right. He was the one that put a Monitum on Teilhard's writings and he also issued an Encyclical saying that to be in union with Christ, one had to be in the Catholic Church - or words to that effect.

[Catholicguy]

(I might get flamed for this but...)Just curious, where can I find a Catholic doctrinal support for the "Free Speech" enshrined in the American (protestant) experiment as it has come to be reality in post-Christian America?

I'd locate it in the teaching on the State. I don't have the time to look it up now though. Free Speech wasn't about Porn and whatnot (an underused word, IMO)but about the liberty of men to criticise and speak the truth about political matters and political men.

[Mike Fieschko]

Holy smokes ... I get back to the keyboard, and I thought freeper Catholicguy had been banned. I had to load his freerepublic home page twice to make sure he's still here.

[Polycarp]

I'd locate it in the teaching on the State. I don't have the time to look it up now though. Free Speech wasn't about Porn and whatnot (an underused word, IMO)but about the liberty of men to criticise and speak the truth about political matters and political men.

How about just the doctrinal support for the latter, when you have a moment.

I don't doubt it may exist.

But the "Free Speech" the Founders envisioned was not even a Catholic ideal at the time. Heretics did not have any fundamental "right" to spread heresies in Catholic ethics.

I'm not sure they even do to this day...

Just something I've thought about...anyone know a cohesive article on this?

[Polycarp]

and I thought freeper Catholicguy had been banned

(Sorry...I was just warning a fellow Catholic, in charity, as another poster here recently asserted)

[Catholicguy]

But the "Free Speech" the Founders envisioned was not even a Catholic ideal at the time. Heretics did not have any fundamental "right" to spread heresies in Catholic ethics

There are many surprising precedents concerning democracy in Catholic practice. Many folks are surprised when they first read the Rule of St. Benedict. I think after reading it that some would claim he had been infected with liberalism... he even includes a conscience clause.

When I get home, I'll kick around some books to see where a free speech right could be located. I certainly agree that what we have now can in no way be supported but I think that free speeech as envisoned by the Protestant Fathers of this country as regards political speech is not contrary to Catholic ethics

[Mike Fieschko]

the liberty of men to criticise and speak the truth about political matters and political men.

How about just the doctrinal support for the latter

There's discussion of the principles underlying society in the Catechism, but nothing there as far as I know, which discusses 'freedom of speech' explicitly. See sections 1901 et seq., which I believe permits freedom of speech if that 'fundamental right' is included in the organizing poltical arrangements/documents. There are probably other sections of the Catechism as well.

The Church might look at 'freedom of speech' as permitted but not required as a matter of doctrine, or preferred but not required as a matter of doctrine.

[saradippity]

Your comments about John 23's statements that so reflect our(meaning those who love the Church led by the Holy Father and teaching Magisterium)beliefs are interesting and useful in these times. I think one of the most effective tools we have in our arsenal are the words of former Popes.

I have recently piggy-backed onto a comment made by one of our daffier catholics,who was adulating Pope John 23 for opening the windows and bringing the "spirit of VatII" to the church.I agreed that he was a wonderful pope and added,quite casually,that I thought two of the most significant pronouncements of his,were the documents concerning the unacceptability of ordaining homosexual priests,and his words on the everlasting beauty of the Tridentine Mass.This stopped the exchange with the first person but led to a good,in-depth conversation with another.

I am now looking for letters to the editor that will allow me to bring forth material like that in a response letter.I even obtained a copy of "America",I am expecting that the opportunity to emphasize how important it is to follow what the Holy Fathers' have said will present itself.

[livius]

Something that we should remember is that while the Papacy is one thing, the Vatican is another. The Vatican is essentially a corrupt European court, one of the oldest, and furthermore, totally unreformed and operating by the rules of many centuries ago. Things such as poisonings, etc. are not unthinkable in this environment, and palace intrigues are no doubt rife.

The Papacy (embodied by each individual Pope) is, however, something different.

But at a certain point, they come together or at least operate in the same spheres. What is their effect upon each other? Are there times when the Roman court overwhelms the Keeper of the Keys? How does the Fisherman hold off forces that would have been quite at home with the Borgias? (Incidentally, the Borgia - or Borja, the original spelling on the name, since they were Spanish and in fact from Catalunya - Popes did incredible things for the Church, although some of the other family members were a bit iffy.)

I've been wondering about this a great deal in the last few weeks. One of the things that occurred to me is that, in various ways, Vatican II gave much more control to the corrupt Roman court than it had ever possessed before. I think that many 19th century developments, and particularly infallibility, may in some way have been designed to separate the Papacy and the individual Pope from the Vatican and its dangerous and vice-ridden court. But Vatican II undermined much of this, and I think we are seeing a strangely Vatican-dominated Papacy, except for the wonderful doctrinal pronouncements (Vatican aparatchiks aren't smart enough to come up with their own) and the great personal power of this Pope.

Any opinions on this?

[livius]

Sorry, guys, forgot to ping you. Any ideas on this? (see post #216)

[BlackElk]

Vatican II's Declaration on Religious Liberty affirmed Catholic Church Support for the rights of those in error.

[saradippity]

Yep!There are foxes all over the place but I see many of the various heads of Congregations as far better than any american catholic bishop or cardinal.It is not that I don't think that there are American Bishops and Cardinals who may be holy and brilliant, but currently they would have difficulty extricating themselves from the "herd".Unless our USCCB does something holy or intelligent in the next few months pursuant to the "scandal",I would sooner see them disbanded entirely and go back to "from the Pope and his teaching Magisterium to the individual bishop", with the laity appealing directly to Rome when serious diversions and deviiations from Catholic teaching rear their head.

Cardinals Ratzinger and Hoyos put out clear,beautiful documents affirming the faith as do a couple of others. To ensure our complaints get seen,we usually send our letters to the correct Congregation and several other Congrgations just to be sure someone knows whats going on.We just put a FYI,on the cover sheet.

[Mike Fieschko]

in various ways, Vatican II gave much more control to the corrupt Roman court than it had ever possessed before.

What are examples of how the Council, the Council documents, whatever, gave the curia more control, and control over what?