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

[Domestic Church]

Catholicguy, I am sorry if you took offense. It was given that the Catechism on the Errors of Vatican II was full of error. That was posted so that we could verbally dissect it...that's why I suggested to bring the salt shakers earlier on this thread. Shall we freepmail you before linking controversal items so you realize they are suspect? Or should we post the word hotzone in parenthesis? This kind of stuff needs to be aired in order to defend our faith and it is better for all of us to see this with the Catholic support of this caucus. I for one am very grateful for the educational dialogue here.

[Mike Fieschko]

Or should we post the word hotzone in parenthesis?

How about, instead of [Barf alert],

[Swill before pearls] ? 8^]

[Domestic Church]

That's much better...[swill before pearls] it is. Was that in todays readings or yesterdays?

[Mike Fieschko]

Was that in todays readings or yesterdays?

Friday's Gospel was St Matthew 13:16-17 and today's was St Matthew 13:24-30. The 'pearls before swine' is St Matthew 7:6.

[Domestic Church]

St.Matthew 7:6 must be tomorrow!

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

Narses, check your freepmail for Morse's permission to post his opinion pieces here at freerepublic.

[Mike Fieschko]

St.Matthew 7:6 must be tomorrow!

Tomorrow is St Matthew 13:44-52, which includes the parable of the pearl of great price.

[narses]

Thank you.

[Litany]

Peace...
:)

[BlackVeil]

"Narses specialises in posting stuff that undermines the authority of the Hierarchy or is critical of the Pope and this is just Commie garbage ... " I don't see any particular theme in what Narses posts. There are lots of different things to read on the religion forum. Actually, if you want stuff that consistently undermines the hierachy, look at the official publications of the Catholic Church. In effect, they are stripping away all forms of traditional authority, and have been doing so for years.

[Catholicguy]

I don't see any particular theme in what Narses posts

It is very evident he supports the schism of the SSPX and undermines The Magisterium. He has done so since he became a Freeper 6/22/02

[Catholicguy]

Catholicguy, I am sorry if you took offense. It was given that the Catechism on the Errors of Vatican II was full of error

As my Son says, "My bad." I misunderstood. I have seen the Ecumenical Council attacked for so long that my knee-jerk reaction sent my sneakers into the Stratosphere

[Catholicguy]

Narses specialises in posting stuff that undermines the authority of the Hierarchy or is critical of the Pope and this is just Commie garbage is yet ANOTHER example of how he tries to frighten others and undermine their confidence. (That was an excellent encapsulation. Thanks for reposting it). Your post is both dishonest (I post many things and what I try to do is elicit comments from which I can learn) and cowardly (as you don't "ping" me as I am told is the custom here). I have asked you before and I ask you again, stop attacking me

ALL my posts are honest and I have no hidden agenda. You became a member on 6/22/02. I think your first post came at 5:01. It was an attack on The Magisterium. You attacked the decision of the Roman Curia that speaks in the name of the Pope and you, intentionally or not, mischaracterised the decison of that Curial Office AND you, mistakenly of falsely, accused one of the Churches involved as being heretical. I have since corrected this error publicly at least three times. Sitetest has corected you on the same error. Patent has corrected you on the same error. I have no doubt you still hold your personal opinion to be the correct one and that you reject the decision of the Magisterium. Youhave eeven said the Mass was invalid AFTER the Curia had taken its decision speaking for the Divinely-constitued authority. You may fool some. You haven't fooled me for an instant.

You have been unrelenting since. I went back and checked. You have a pattern of supporting the sspx schism. I have noted that, so has patent and st chuck; others have also, as I recall. Your posts succoring the schism of the sspx are taken from public opponents of the Pope - The Remnant,Catholic Family News, Seattle Catholic etc. You may fool some folks. You do not fool me.

An OVERWHELMING percentage of your posts concerning the Pope or The Magisterium are attacks, some subtle, some bold. You have yet to post a piece defending the Pope in any controversial aspect of his Papacy. You always side with those who cast his actions in a negative light. You may fool some folks. You don't fool me. There ARE perfectly rational and defensible explanations for why the Pope does what he does. You have never posted them. When those explanations ARE posted, from the TCRnews website, you place yourself in opposition to those articles. You may fool some folks. You don't fool me.

[Catholicguy]

After your nasty private FReepmail to me,

You have my permission to post it and we can publicly discuss why I sent it to you. Care to open this up?

[NYer]

The Saints must disappear before God, although it is much easier to kill God than His Saints.

Isn't that the truth!!

Thanks, polycarp, for posting the story of Michael, a/k/a Mikolaj because he came from Poland. Here is yet another link on this man ... THE CONFESSION OF MIKOLAJ, THE ANTI-PRIEST .

If even half of what he wrote is true, then it would lend credence to our worst fears. "Destroy from within" has always been the communist plan, be it the church or a free society, like the US. Hopefully, some of the pope bashers and other nay sayers on FreeRepublic will read your post and gain a better understanding of just how insidious a problem, we as catholics confront in our church.

The Holy Father rightfully looks to youth to repair and restore our church. Christ assured us the He would never abandon us. Thanks to you, the other freepers on this forum and EWTN, my faith has never been stronger. Christ will prevail. God willing, we will be around to witness the full cleansing and restoration of His church.

[narses]

More personal attacks, more telling me and others what I think, more hatred, lies and innuendos and more apparently false claims of charity. Stop. You said you would and then you attacked again. Have you any honor? Any shame? Can you keep your word?

Posted by Catholicguy to narses
On Religion Jul 26 4:06 PM #457 of 509

Even as I sent that, I knew it was a mistake. Perhaps you can't stop yourself from contacting me. That is understandable :) You should see me in person :) So, I propose to help you break the attachment. I will not respond to your continuing personal posts to me. You seem incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions in this area so I will take control. I will not respond to your personal posts to me no matter how many times you send them

Do your attacks do any good? Have you convinced anyone of your positions with them? I listen with respect to patent and sitetest and sinkspur and polycarp and others here. Your attacks mask whatever message you might have to share in such a fashion that your posts become mean-spirited noise.

Again I ask, in fraternal love and charity that you cease your attacks on me, both in posts directly to me and in the even more disreputable posts to others about me that you have engaged in.

The rules here are clear, "No Personal attacks". Please cease.

[narses]

Thanks for the ping. I am amazed at the level of vitriolic attacks against me bt one poster. It is an extraordinary display of hatred the likes of which I never imagined. Steven Hand was a model of charity compared to this.

[Catholicguy]

You have no defense for your agenda and orientation that I sniffed-out immediately. Again, ALL you can do is decry how you are treated face to face while you attack the Magisterium using the words of others. I expected nothing less from you

[Catholicguy]

You're a big boy narses. I am attacking your actions. I think them craven and unmanly. I asked you repeatedly to stop posting to me personally. You refused to cease yet I am supposed to accede to your demands? Come on.

I see you take umbrage about me changing my mind about resisting you face to face.Another weird example, imo, of how you operate. When you were Confirmed, you undertook an obligation to defend the faith, not oppose the Pope and The Magisterium. Why do you think you are deserving of more respect, courtesy or fraternal consideration than the Pope whose authority is Divinely-constituted and whose authority you oppose?

Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think you can cite for me ONE TIME that you have given the Holy Father the benefit of the doubt in ANY act of his that is the subject of controversy. Far from giving the Pope, Our Holy Father, the benefit of the doubt, you ATTACK him and post from sites infamous in their public opposition to him to further burden him with opposition and that action tempts other to criticise him and oppose him. You spread disunity, dissension, confusion about the Holy Father and The Magisterium and then have the gall to play the victim. That is beneath contempt. You may fool some of the folks here. You do not fool me.

You keep asking ME to stop "attacking you" as though were some objective standard to which I must adhere but to which you are at liberty to violate if it concerns Divinely-constitued authority. You may attack the Holy Father and his decisions but I am forbidden to counterattack in trying to fulfill my Confirmational duites. You have an odd standard. You think you can not only act in opposition to your Confirmational duties you think you can get me to ignore mine. I do not acknowledge anything other than the FACT that I have called you out and you have no defense against your opposition to the Pope and The Magisterium which BEGAN THE VERY DAY YOU REGISTERED AS A FREEPER.

I wonder how many other real Catholics in here, on their first day as a freeper, posted material that OPPOSED the Holy Father.

Act like a man and own-up to what it is you are doing. I uderstand WHY you recast my counterattacks as a personal attack. You have NO legitimate defense for your actions in opposing the Pope so you are forced to retereat to the "I am a victim" stance and demand from others what you refuse to extend to the Pope.

I have you pegged. I had you pegged from the first post you made. The only way you can hope to stop my opposing your attacking the Pope is to have me banned.

[narses]

You have no defense for your agenda and orientation that I sniffed-out immediately. Again, ALL you can do is decry how you are treated face to face while you attack the Magisterium using the words of others. I expected nothing less from you.

You really need help. You "sniffed me out", how? I attack how? By posting articles. How amusing. I suppose my posts regards the Anglican Church are attacks too? My posts regards vouchers as well? What do you intend to do, post warnings about me every time I post?

Posted by Catholicguy to narses
On Religion Jul 26 4:06 PM #457 of 509

Even as I sent that, I knew it was a mistake. Perhaps you can't stop yourself from contacting me. That is understandable :) You should see me in person :) So, I propose to help you break the attachment. I will not respond to your continuing personal posts to me. You seem incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions in this area so I will take control. I will not respond to your personal posts to me no matter how many times you send them

You said you would stop, instead you have increased both the quantity and volume of vitriolic attacks against me. They need to stop. You accomplish nothing, you help no one and you embarass yourself.