Pastor Paweł Chojecki, New Covenant Church in Lublin, Poland
Translation: Katarzyna Wierbol
We are told to believe that the Catholic Church abolished communism. To begin, let’s ask ourselves the following question: who introduced communism? Why was it so easily rooted in the minds of European nations? What kind of spiritual or mental climate made up the subsoil for the seedling of the widespread socialism? Finally, who, up to this day, “spiritually” supports the mentality of homo sovieticus in nations, especially in Eastern Europe?
To clearly see the answers to the questions asked above, we need to start with the basics: when will an individual support a totalitarian and immoral rule? Two conditions must be met:
The individual must have the sense that his fate strongly depends of the authorities. They have to get rid of their God-given sense of subjectivity and believe in their objectivity in regard to the surrounding reality. They must reject the idea of being the master of their own destiny and accept the mentality of a carefree and thoughtless slave who is a meaningless speck of dust in history.
The individual must lose the absolute sense of morality. They must accept the situational ethics, a relative concept, a morality that places survival and personal gains as the highest values. That represents very low moral standards.
When, in a society, a sufficient number of such “damaged” people can be shaped successfully, the establishment of an immoral authoritarian force is only a matter of short time.
Furthermore, the deciding factor that influenced people’s minds till the beginning of the 20th century (the moment marking the birth of communism and the invention of television) was indisputably religion. Therefore, is this fact correlated with communism being rooted in the fastest and strongest way in Eastern Europe, in Italy and Spain and later in Latin America? Why didn’t it spread to Great Britain, to the United States, to Australia or to New Zealand? After all, all of these countries are populated by white people that share a similar heritage concerning their history and their culture. The only difference is religion. Thus, it’s worth to take a look at what factors in Catholicism and Orthodoxy helped shape the soviet man.
The key issue in every religion is the question of salvation (or, more generally, the issue of a better life after death). That’s where the foundations of self-perception and of perception of our surrounding world are established. What do Catholicism and Orthodoxy say to their followers? Well, they say that the decision concerning salvation has already been made behind their backs. Upon the recommendation of the Church, parents put them under the rituals that, according to legends, leave an everlasting and inerasable imprint on their souls. This obviously has an impact on the mental development of such individuals. That Institution (Church), included you, without you knowing and without your approval, in the community of its followers and began the process of your salvation. No wonder that in the following steps of the development of its conscious, homo catholicus/orthodox (in the following parts of this article, I will be referring only to the dominating Catholicism in Poland, even though the issues are equally relevant to Orthodoxy) turns his requests towards the Institution. When they want to obtain forgiveness for their sins, they go to see an official of the Institution (the middleman between God and man). To keep man dependant of the Institution, the ritual by which your sins are forgiven is not a one-time thing, but rather something that is repeated many times or at least once a year, as “Big Brother” established it. When an individual wants to take part in the union with the Catholic God (communion), it can’t happen without passing by a middleman from the Institution (priest) that has an official and exclusive authority to regulate what “nourishes the soul” of the faithful. When the individual approaches their death, they can’t count on God’s open arms, but must first get the permission from the Institution. Even though they have passed through the anointing and even death, the poor man doesn’t have peace in the after-life. There, they wait in a waiting-room (purgatory) made-up by Institutional deceivers. They wait to get favor from officials who will, “selflessly” grant them, or not, from the “treasury of merits” of the Institution, what they need to appease God’s anger towards them. The Institution deliberately doesn’t give people the date of when the debt in the purgatory will be settled for their deceased loved ones. That way, the process of settlement lasts as long as the human memory and generosity allow it.
Won’t such trained individual be an easy prey for a totalitarian state (today referred to as a welfare one) whose goal is to make them surrender to the authority and let it decide of their health, education, salary, kids, retirement, and even of their death?
In contrast to the Catholic God, the God of the Bible is a partner to a great man. He is a partner to a person who is blessed with unlimited free will, who has great ambitions, possibilities and endeavors. He is a partner to a person who is created for a direct, personal and everlasting bond with his Creator. He is a partner for someone blessed with grand freedom, freedom accompanied with responsibilities. Those responsibilities are not transferable to others. Since Eden, this human being has sinned and fallen down, but the God of the Bible prepared a special sacrifice and offer for him: the death of His Son who, once and for all, wiped away the sins of all people. That great man, great since created in the image of God, has his fate in his own hands. As a fully aware man, he can choose everlasting life by believing in Jesus or choose eternal condemnation.
Will someone with such self-consciousness let any state official decide for him of his future here on Earth? Will a person who decided of his own destiny look at the state and let it decide on how his kids should be educated, on his salary or retirement, look for it to provide him a home, a doctor and entertainment? No! A slave with a carefree and thoughtless mentality would accept that, not the summit of God’s creation that is destined to subdue the earth!
And what of the second trait of the soviet man, regarding the relativity and lack of independent morality? The simple fact that sins are divided into “light” and “heavy” ones raises the idea that there are probably some sins on which we can turn a blind eye. No wonder that, for example in Switzerland, you could leave your bike on the street and come back a week later to find it in the same place, whereas this is impossible in the Red Square in Moscow. Furthermore, Catholicism, which supposedly builds independence and responsibility in its followers, came up with the idea that with each heavy sin we must run to an official (priest). The Institution clearly acknowledged that the average person is too foolish or even bad on the inside. That being said, after sinning people need a teacher and somebody that will enforce their improvements. Catholics guide themselves, from time to time, by the catechism (which changes with time) and wait for moral judgments from the Institution because they’re not even able to make simple decisions.
However, Rome’s and Constantinople’s biggest problem is the fact that they abandoned the source of Christianity, which lies in a moral transformation: the spiritual rebirth. The God of the Bible calls the sinful person to acknowledge his catastrophic situation (in anticipating hell) and to personally accept His solution for this problem, which is Jesus’ sacrifice. When man recognizes the greatness of God’s gift and opens up to Jesus, He enters that person and transforms them from the inside. Now it’s Him, the living God, and not external commands, that gives man the strength to behave morally:
There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
Romans 8:1-10 (NKJV)
Instead of the new birth, Catholicism and Orthodoxy, beside the fact that they control their officials, order all kinds of exercises and rituals that are supposed to improve the moral condition of their followers. The result of these efforts is easy to anticipate:
“Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” which all concern things which perish with the using — according to the commandments and doctrines of men? These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.
It’s no wonder that up to this day, the Catholic and Orthodox clergy gives a customary example of hypocrisy and scandal. I won’t name any examples since the press has already taken care of that.
Furthermore, let’s take a brief look at the Catholic morality in history. Murder is a sin, but murder of a heretic is a holy act. Treachery is bad, but treachery for the good of the Church is greatly praised.
Here’s an example. In 1572, a social-political agreement was supposed to be made between French Protestants and Catholics. Its symbol was supposed to be the marriage of the Protestant King of Navarre, Henry IV of France, with a Catholic princess, Margaret of Valois. We know how it ended (let it be a warning to all of today’s naïve and ecumenical Protestants). First Paris, and then all of France were bathed with the blood of people whose only fault was trusting Jesus instead of Catholic rituals and middlemen. Did the Church condemn this barbaric act of betrayal and merciless slaughter? Did the Pope curse those who were responsible? No. He conducted a thanksgiving mass, told to ring the church bells and ordered that some medals be made.
Is it surprising that in France, 200 years later, the first guillotines were set and the heads of the clergy, the kinglets and the aristocracy filled the baskets? Is it not Catholicism that taught to show contempt towards human freedom, conscience and life? Is it not Catholicism that showed that for the sake of an idea, no atrocity is too evil anymore?
Maybe you think that’s only the past, that Catholicism has changed since then. Please get to know the history of the Catholic Croatia during the 20th century. It’s filled with horrors which I don’t dare to describe, that were led by the Catholic leaders, their superior being the cardinal Stepinac, a Croatian cardinal, who was of course glorified by the Church. And what of the war in Yugoslavia that ended recently? Was it condemned by the Vatican? No. The Vatican condemned the Serbs and, along with the Germans, supported the pursuit of war by Croatia. It also stood in the first line of countries that acknowledged the dissolution of Yugoslavia. This is strange, Machiavellian logic: Yugoslavia (a federation) was considered bad, but the European camp, good.
However, Rome with its felonious morality, hasn’t said its last word yet. For the past centuries, Catholicism helped shape the passive and amoral herd of dehumanized individuals. Today, it helps in eliminating the last barrier on the way to a worldwide, not a local, totalitarian rule. The nation is that barrier. In order to do that, the sense of national identity and patriotism must be destroyed. The European citizen must first be created, followed by the world citizen. When there is a sufficiently large number of completely dependent of the state individuals who think that their homeland is an old-fashioned illusion, and that reality represents a manger that they can exploit, the antichrist will stand ready at the door. Then, the Vatican with its usual servitude, will take care of liquidating those who have not given in to socialism:
And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived. He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed. He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads,
and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands.
And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication. And on her forehead a name was written: MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.
Therefore, we shouldn’t be asking whether the guillotine will resurge, but rather WHEN. Looking at the signs of the times, we see that the time is coming…