Fri 24th Oct 2014 | Last updated: Fri 24th Oct 2014 at 18:39pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Comment & Blogs

The road to totalitarianism begins in Ekaterinburg

So how could a Stalin apologist be a ‘tireless agitator for a better world’?

By on Wednesday, 3 October 2012

Stalin smiles at the Teheran Conference, Iran, in 1943 (AP Photo)

Stalin smiles at the Teheran Conference, Iran, in 1943 (AP Photo)

The other day I visited an Orthodox Church, which, like most Orthodox churches, was full of icons. I looked for and found the two icons that I always look out for – that of Saint Elizabeth of Russia and that of the Imperial Martyrs.

Saint Elizabeth was the Grand Duchess Ella of Russia, and she was married to the Tsar’s uncle Grand Duke Sergey, who was assassinated in 1905; after his death, she became a nun, and when the Revolution came, she was murdered in Siberia by the Bolsheviks, by being thrown down a mineshaft, a fate she shared with several other members of the extended Imperial family. The horror of her death is redeemed by her serenity and faith in the face of it. Her relics are now venerated in Jerusalem.

Saint Elizabeth’s younger sister was the Empress Alexandra – they were both daughters of the Grand Duke of Hesse, and his English wife Princess Alice, thus granddaughters of Queen Victoria. Her fate, and that of her husband, children and servants is well known, and happened the day before the murder of Saint Elizabeth.

The Imperial martyrs and Saint Elizabeth are not canonised by the Catholic Church, but the sanctity of Elizabeth and the Imperial children is not in question, I think. They were all killed, too, in odium of the faith, which is a sure path to heaven.

It now seems beyond doubt that these murders were carried out on an order that came from Lenin himself. It was a long time ago, and it may seem that this is only of historical interest, but the murders of the Imperial family, and members of many other families too, at the time of the Revolution, did break new ground. Lenin was surely the first to order the execution of women and children without trial and without semblance of due process, using political expediency as his excuse; and many people round the world accepted this doctrine of “necessary murder” – in other words, they admitted it was wrong and regrettable even, but claimed it was nevertheless justified by circumstance – in this case the paramount importance of saving the Revolution.

I remark on this because a noted exponent of this doctrine has just died, Professor Eric Hobsbawm. In his obituary in the Daily Telegraph, we read: 

In 1994 he wrote that, on balance, the achievements of the “shining light” of the Bolshevik Revolution and the subsequent dictatorship of Stalin had been positive and wrote of the “far from unimpressive records” of dictators like Honecker and Ceaucescu.

Most startlingly, Hobsbawm gave Stalin the credit for the post war “miracles” experienced in the West. Soviet communism, he argued, had provided its antagonist “with the incentive — fear — to reform itself” and “by establishing the popularity of economic planning, furnished it with some of the procedures for its reform.” In a television interview, Hobsbawm was asked whether, for such an accomplishment to take place, “the loss of fifteen, twenty million people might have been justified?”

“Yes”, replied Hobsbawm.

So, there it is, from the mouth of one of our leading (Marxist) intellectuals. The end justifies the means. And as for the end, whether it is worth such means, who decides that? People like Stalin, of course. And thus we have a circular argument.

This is moral relativism, and if it is true that a life is only relatively valuable, and that it should be sacrificed for some supposedly greater good (chosen by no specific criteria except personal whim), then that means that no one is safe. Anyone’s life might be sacrificed for the most capricious reasons to safeguard some self-proclaimed concept such as “the Revolution”. This is precisely what happened in Russia under Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev. And what is still happening in some countries today.

I am sure that Professor Eric Hobsbawm was a pleasant man, and a good companion, but he was also an apologist for totalitarianism and state sponsored murder. He hardly strikes me as “a tireless agitator for a better world”, as Tony Blair has called him. 

The road to totalitarianism, which makes the state absolute and the individual expendable, started in the cellar at Ekaterinburg. It is worth stating the opposing truth: the state exists purely to serve the individual, and only the individual has rights; if the collective demands that the individual’s rights be sacrificed, that that collective is a bad thing, indeed, a structure of sin. Indeed, once the principle of the sacredness of the individual and the right to life is sacrificed, then the floodgates to murder and cruelty are opened. And once opened, who can shut them again?

Incidentally, we should all make sacrifices, something I believe as a Christian. But we should sacrifices ourselves. We have no right to sacrifice anyone else, let alone “fifteen, twenty million” of our fellow human beings, even for “the shining light” of the Bolshevik Revolution.

  • Michael Petek

    Yours isn’t the only discussion of Eric Hobsbawm’s odious legacy to have appeared in the press this week. In 1939 he wrote a pamphlet defending the Nazi-Soviet carve-up of Poland and so appeared as a propagandist for Hitler’s aggressive war.

    As a member of the Communist Party he was a member of an inherently criminal organisation: the crime being conspiracy to commit genocide, or crimes against humanity, or both..

  • Confused of Chi

    One day we will all know the Truth, but for now may he rest in peace.

  • Bob Hayes

    A timely reminder of the perils of relativist thinking from Fr Alexander Lucie-Smith. But I have one quibble! 

    The crimes of the Bolsheviks are legion, their scale is almost incomprehensible and they stand condemned by the historical record. But the claim that, ‘Lenin was surely the first to order the execution of women and children without trial and without semblance of due process, using political expediency as his excuse’ is simply historically inaccurate. Such wickedness had of course been committed before: Matthew 2: 13-18 – the Slaughter of the Innocents being perhaps the most obvious example.

  • paulpriest

     No: It began at Hegel’s writing desk…

  • awkwardcustomer

    Eric Hobsbawm’s justifications of mass murder were quite typical of those who subscribed to the Marxist idealogy.  My mother’s family were Communists, and for 6 months in my late teens I was a member of the Communist Party.  I have heard endless justifications for revolutionary violence from all manner of Marxist, including statements like, ‘Two million Kulaks or the revolution – we choose the revolution’, to justify Stalin’s starving to death of this ‘counter-revolutionary’ group.

    On a family ‘holiday’ to the Soviet Union, organised by the Anglo-Soviet Friendship Society, I witnessed a scene straight out of the Gulag.  On the way from Leningrad airport to our hotel, our coach pulled up behind a truck with its back down leaving a group of men inside clearly visible.  I can still see them to this day, and one man in particular, with his shaved head, shabby overcoat, hollow cheeks and dead, staring eyes.  The other members of our party saw them too.  One person even asked, ‘What’s that?’  But then the truck disappeared into the traffic and was gone.  Most of my mother’s family were still Marxists when they went to their graves.

    Worryingly, there are signs that Marxism is becoming fashionable again, and even signs of a ‘soft Totalitarianism’ taking hold in the West.  People are being taken to court, not for what they have done, but for things they have said. The Soviet Union may have collapsed, but Marxism as an idea is still alive and well.  It has taken a different form, that’s all, and has been undermining Western traditions and culture for decades in the hope of bringing about the collapse of the West. Listen to Yuri Bezmenov, a Soviet defector and former KGM man on the subject.

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fQoGMtE0EY

     

  • JFJ

    “The road to totalitarianism, which makes the state absolute and the individual expendable, started in the cellar at Ekaterinburg. It is worth stating the opposing truth: the state exists purely to serve the individual, and only the individual has rights; if the collective demands that the individual’s rights be sacrificed, that that collective is a bad thing, indeed, a structure of sin. Indeed, once the principle of the sacredness of the individual and the right to life is sacrificed, then the floodgates to murder and cruelty are opened. And once opened, who can shut them again?”

    Brilliant!  If you can get the BBC to broadcast just this bit, it would be great.  Thank you.

    And, one can only hope that perhaps those like Bob Crow, who is a self styled communist and who, allegedly has a bust of Lenin in his office, might actually learn….learn from history.  However, I once heard a sermon in which the preacher said something I think is probably true….’The one thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history.’

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Hobsbawm, his fellow-historian Christopher Hill and many, many others were apologists for the Satanic Bolsheviks: fellow travellers of hell and all it contains. Others such as ludicrous Webbes, Bertrand Russell, Walter Duranty, the Trade Unionist Jack Jones (who was taking Soviet money in the 1970′s) and many in the media (who until today have never renounced their support for those demons).  Hobsbawm, indeed, was asked in a TV interview if the murder of “15 or 20 million people was worth it” and he replied “yes”.

    An appalling man. If Bliar has been praising him, this tells us all we need to know about that grinning idiot snake-oil salesman. Except it wasn’t 15 or 20 million, was it? Russian historians put the Bolshevik’s butcher’s bill from 1917 – 1991 at between 40 and 60 million. The killings started the day of the Revolution and continued until the end. The two years of Collectivisation (1932-33) and its associated planned famine in the Ukraine murdered 15 million alone, all planned and deliberately done. Between forty and sixty million human beings done to death by a gang of killers, rapists, criminals of the most bestial kind. And all in the name of “Progress” and the “Perfectibility of Man” which promised Heaven on this earth. Fools, fools, fools! ANY attempt to perfect Man and his society without the Grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ inevitably ends in death, blood and horror. This is why Pius XII refused to have any contact with these men. No contact at all. You just DON’T sit down with the devil’s emissaries, not ever. But then came the planning for Vatican II, and John XXIII’s Metz Agreement with Nikita Khrushshev, and the refusal of Paul VI to allow any debate on the request of 500 Council Bishops to condemn Communism, and the betrayal of Cardinals Tomashek, Sliipiyi (who spent many years in the Kolyma GULAG), Mindzenty. And finally the Marxistization of the Church.Yes, the “dialogue” with the Enemy’s emissaries gave him his entry into the Church, as the tortured soul of Paul VI later admitted. What else is “Justice & Peace” than an attempt to replace personal charity (= good works) by social improvement? What else is Liberation Theology, still undefeated despite John Paul II’s efforts? What is the constant bleat of the clergy about things of this world except the Marxist (ultimately in fact Masonic) ideology that Man must be seen purely in a material, immanent way with no regard whatever for the transcendent? What else is the Novus Ordo but the replacement of the Sacrifice of Christ on Calvary, His sin-offering for all men, re-presented in an unbloody manner on the altar, with a community sharing where the participants regard first and foremost themselves?Betrayers of Christ, all of them!The three “M”s explain the collapse of the Catholic Church in ten years from 1965. Marxism, Masonry and Modernism. There can be no renewal at all of the Church until these three, which have a stranglehold on the Hierarchy and the Magisterium, are expunged entirely and wholly from the Church in Her doctrine, in Her liturgy and in Her theology. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Communism is finished, but “Cultural Marxism” as it’s nowadays called, has won in the West and throughout the world.

    And why should this be?

    Because Popes from 1960 onwards have ignored Our Lady’s call to consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart. They have refused to do it and as a result, Our Lady’s promise that “Russia will spread its errors throughout the world” has come true. 

    To those who will say, “Ah! But John Paul consecrated the world to the Immaculate heart in 1984!” I repeat the order of events of that consecration of the world:

    On December 8th, 1983, Pope John Paul II wrote to all the bishops of the world, asking them to join in with him on March 25, 1984, in consecrating the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. He included with his letter his prepared text of consecration. On March 25, 1984, the Pope, after making the consecration of the world proper, added suddently, “Enlighten especially the peoples of which You Yourself are awaiting our consecration and
    confiding.” This clearly shows he knows Our Lady is awaiting the Pope and bishops to consecrate certain peoples to Her, that is the peoples of Russia.

    These words were then published in the March 26, 1984 issue of L’Osservatore Romano. Opponents of the Consecration of Russia have, conveniently, from 1984 until this day, omitted to report that the Pope actually said, in effect, that he had not done the Consecration of Russia as requested by Our Lady of Fatima.

    March 27, 1984 - The Italian Catholic bishops’ newspaper Avvenire reports that the Holy
    Father, on March 25 at 4:00 in the afternoon, three hours after he consecrated the world, praying in St. Peter’s, asked Our Lady to bless “those peoples for whom You Yourself are awaiting our act of consecration and entrusting”, and thus admits that the Consecration of
    Russia remains unfulfilled.The 1984 Consecration in my view did end Communism. But the promises of Our Lady that what would follow a Consecration of RUSSIA were very concrete:

    i.   Russia would be converted (either to Catholicism or the ROC would come into full Communion);
    ii.  A period of world peace;
    iii. The Great Chastisement (which is coming) would be averted.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Before that, with Luther and the shattering of Christendom.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Perhaps your prayers would be better offered up for the estimated 400 million souls which lie at Marxism’s abbatoir door world-wide.

  • awkwardcustomer

    I’m glad you’ve raised this.  No, the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary has not been done.  Our Lady of Fatima did not ask for the Consecration of the World, but for the Consecration of Russia, clearly and specifically.  It is especially pertinent that Our Lady first appeared to the Fatima seers in May, 1917, given that the Bolshevik revolution took place in October 1917.

    Here is the text of the 2nd secret which outlines what will happen if the Consecration of Russia is carried out, which it hasn’t been:

    ‘You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end: but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the Pontificate of Pope Pius XI. When you see a night illumined by an unknown light*, know that this is the great sign given you by God that he is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father. To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of reparation on the First Saturdays. If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.’

    (‘The war is going to end’ refers to the First World War.  The ‘worse one’ refers to WW2.)

    Obviously, Russia has spread her errors throughout the World. These errors continue, despite the collapse of the Soviet Union as a political entity.  Marxism is alive and well. There’s no point in pretending that Marxism died with the Soviet bloc.  It didn’t.  The European Soviet Union is taking shape before our eyes.  So called ‘Soft Totalitarianism’ always hardens in the end. 

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Secrets_of_F%C3%A1tima#Second_secret

  • awkwardcustomer

    Mistake.

  • awkwardcustomer

    Another mistake.

  • Ælfrid the Mercian

    And what of the Third Secret?

    It’s plain to anyone with a brain that the Vatican is involved in a giant cover-up that seeks to divert attention from the sure fact that the text divulged at Fatima some years ago is only the first part of that Third Secret; and that the rest of it tells of the Great Apostasy of the last fifty years and the reasons for it: the loss of Faith at the very top of the Church. 

    The gross inconsistencies of things said by the likes of Cardinals Sodano and Bertone in this regard, and the silencing of Sr. Lucia from the early 1960′s until her death, all point, in concrete and specific ways, to the fact that Rome is lying about this. 

    And for good reason. The remaining text would blow Vatican II and the New Theology and the New Mass out of the water.

  • awkwardcustomer

    Exactly.  The shattering of Christendom began with the Protestant Reformation and it’s been downhill ever since.

  • awkwardcustomer

    Eric Hobsbawm justfied the deaths of 20 million people at the hands of the Soviet regime – a conservative estimate by most accounts.

    How much ‘truth’ do you need?

  • NewMeena

    “It began at Hegel’s writing desk…”

    Meaning “I can write ‘Hegel’”

  • scary goat

     Sister
    Lucia personally confirmed that this solemn and universal act of consecration
    corresponded to what Our Lady wished (“Sim,
    està feita, tal como Nossa Senhora a pediu, desde o dia 25 de Março de 1984”:
    “Yes it has been done just as Our Lady asked, on 25 March 1984”: Letter of 8
    November 1989). Hence any further discussion or request is without basis. So can someone explain this please? This came from the Vatican website.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Part of what is without doubt a total cover-up Scary.

    The letter supposedly written by Sister Lucia was typed. We have statements by other Sisters in her convent that she never learned to type.  

    The letter was signed. A hand-writing expert has put on record that the signature is not hers. 

    Lucia is known to have told several people, one a Portuguese journalist, that the 1984 Consecration was NOT valid. Her own sister confirmed publicly that this was Lucia’s constant view.

    A priest was able to see her (most visits to her were blocked by order of Rome from the late 1950′s – early 60′s) and said publicly that Lucia had stated forcefully that the 1984 Consecration did not comply with Our Lady’s wishes.

    Then in 1989 all changed: Lucia’s sister, the priest, both suddenly changed their stories completely.

    This was clearly under duress or under Holy Obedience.  

    I urge you to go to this link and explore over a few days the pages you will find there:

    http://www.fatima.org/thirdsecret/default.aspx

  • scary goat

     Ok, I will see it. 

    Just a passing thought….and I admit I don’t know much about this, but although I know there are problems in the Church and in the world, I am finding it difficult to believe the Church could be SO badly off track…  :-(

    is it possible the problems are because they delayed for so long? I mean USSR fell with the consecration.  But it was asked for donkeys years before. Maybe if it was done before it would have nipped it in the bud.  Maybe if it wasn’t done at all it would be much worse by now. Maybe we are suffering some consequences because it was allowed to go unaddressed for so long.  Maybe we are living in an unstable state where it is still possible to turn back the tide? Or not….depending on our actions. Maybe if the Church cleans house and does things right?  Maybe that is what Pope BXVI is trying to do?

  • paulpriest

     no – meaning I spent two years studying his dialectic and geist for my minors…and he truly is the founder of all the ‘man and destiny’ porn-ideologies and the ensuing genocides

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    For Scary: (the column has become too narrow to reply there)

    You ask the following excellent questions. “Maybe if it wasn’t done at all it would be much worse by now. Maybe we are suffering some consequences because it was allowed to go unaddressed for so long.  Maybe we are living in an unstable state where it is still possible to turn back the tide? Or not….depending on our actions. Maybe if the Church cleans house and does things right?  Maybe that is what Pope BXVI is trying to do?”

    We are living in the Last Times. La Salette says it. Fatima says it. Garabandal says it. Akita says it. 

    Cardinal Ciappi – the personal theologian of John Paul II (and of the four popes before him) says it.

    In a letter written in 1995 to Professor Baumgartner in Salzburg, Austria,  he wrote “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”

    John Paul II says it.

    The October 1981 issue of the German magazine Stimme des Glaubens reported on a discussion that Pope John Paul II had with a select group of German Catholics, in November of 1980. The following is a verbatim report of the discussion:
    The October 1981 issue of the German magazine Stimme des Glaubens reported on a discussion that Pope John Paul II had with a select group of German Catholics, in November of 1980. The following is a verbatim report of the discussion:The Holy Father was asked,
    “What about the Third Secret of Fatima? Should it not have already been
    published by 1960?”

     

    Pope John Paul II replied:
    “Given the seriousness of the contents, my predecessors in the Petrine
    office diplomatically preferred to postpone publication so as not to encourage
    the world power of Communism to make certain moves.  On the other hand, it should be sufficient
    for all Christians to know this: if there is a message in which it is written
    that the oceans will flood whole areas of the earth, and that from one moment
    to the next millions of people will perish, truly the publication of such a
    message is no longer something to be so much desired. Many wish to know simply
    from curiosity and a taste for the sensational, but they forget that knowledge
    also implies responsibility. They only seek the satisfaction of their
    curiosity, and that is dangerous if at the same time they are not disposed to
    do something, and if they are convinced that it is impossible to do anything
    against evil.

     

    At this point the Pope grasped a
    Rosary and said: “Here is the remedy against this evil. Pray, pray, and
    ask for nothing more. Leave everything else to the Mother of God.”

     

    The Holy
    Father was then asked: “What is going to happen to the Church?” He
    answered: “We must prepare ourselves to suffer great trials before long,
    such as will demand of us a disposition to give up even life, and a total
    dedication to Christ and for Christ … With your and my prayer it is possible to
    mitigate this tribulation, but it is no longer possible to avert it, because
    only thus can the Church be effectively renewed. How many times has the renewal
    of the Church sprung from blood! This time, too, it will not be otherwise. We
    must be strong and prepared, and trust in Christ and His Mother, and be very,
    very assiduous in praying the Rosary.”Cardinal Ratzinger says it (or said it. he has since changed his story in what is clearly an attempt to treat Fatima as a thing of the past). On November 11, 1984, Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, gave an interview in Jesus magazine, a publication of the Pauline Sisters. The interview is entitled “Here is Why the Faith is in Crisis,” and was published with the Cardinal’s explicit permission. In this interview, Cardinal Ratzinger revealed that he had read the Third Secret and that the Secret refers to “dangers threatening the faith and the life of the Christian and therefore (the life) of the world.”Cardinal Ratzinger said in the same interview that the Secret also refers to “the importance of the Novissimi [the Last Times / the Last Things]” and that “If it is not made public, at least for the time being, it is in order to prevent religious prophecy from being mistaken for a quest for the sensational …” The Cardinal further revealed that “the things contained in this ‘Third Secret’ correspond to what has been announced in Scripture and has been said again and again in many other Marian apparitions, first of all that of Fatima …”

  • Kevin

    I am sure that Professor Eric Hobsbawm was a pleasant man, and a good companion, but he was also an apologist for totalitarianism and state sponsored murder.

    This is an odd feature of modern conservative and Catholic culture.

    If a Catholic in liberal company makes a “politically incorrect” statement, such as “Abortion is never justified”, he or she is likely to be excommunicated from that company, if not prosecuted or litigated against. We, on the other hand, see fit to socialise with people who are more than just student debaters – they are conscious facilitators of evil.

    It cannot be that we are less capable of understanding the need to show disapproval of wrongdoing. We seem, however, to have a psychological need to be liked by certain wrongdoers, perhaps because we see them as capable of depriving us of worldly goods.

    If we can work (with each other) to break out of that mindset a lot of things are likely to improve very quickly.

  • scary goat

     What????????????
    What’s that supposed to mean?

  • scary goat

     Who is Hegel please?

  • Bob Hayes

    Good grief Benedict. Get together with Dan Brown and script the ultimate conspiracy theory about the Catholic Church.

  • awkwardcustomer

    The USSR and the Soviet block fell as a political entity because the Soviet model was unsustainable economically.  This is partly because it relied on industrialising a previously Feudal society in record time, not to mention the fact that Collectivisation just doesn’t work, in industry or in agriculture.

    But Marxist ideas continue to spread and have become entrenched in the West.  The destruction of the family, the elimination of religion, relentless attacks on Western culture and traditions, the dismantling of the nation state, internationalism and globalisation –  these are all Marxist principles which the West increasingly adopts.

    The Soviet model was sold as a proletarian state, a worker’s paradise.  But contemporary Marxists no longer view the industrial working class as the agent of the Revolution, and increasingly turn to other groups that can be identified as having been ‘oppressed’ by bourgeois culture.  These include women, ethic minorities, homosexuals, even Islamists. Any group that can be utilised to attack Western culture and Tradition will do. 

    The collapse of the Soviet Union does not signal the end of the Marxist idealogy in any way. 

  • paulpriest

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Wilhelm_Friedrich_Hegel

    read…and be afraid..very afraid!

  • JabbaPapa

    We are living in the Last Times. La Salette says it. Fatima says it. Garabandal says it. Akita says it.

    The expression “the Last Times” is a very difficult one, and it has multiple different potential meanings and interpretations.

    And we need to be very careful with Prophecies about the future.

    It is well worth meditating on the Book of Job‘s depictions of God making powerful prophecies to Job, and then changing his mind, then either instructing or failing to instruct Job about this new state of affairs.

    A Prophecy can be provided as a warning, and we are completely disarmed in our attempts to second-guess God.

    One should not interpret prophecy literally, unless and until its meaning becomes clear in the fullness of time.

    The prophecies of La Salette do not appear to be about “the Last Times”.

    The Pope declared that the whole of the Third Secret of Fatima has been revealed, and I can see no serious reason to believe some conspiracists rather than the Holy Father. It does not speak of “the Last Times” either.

    Garabandal speaks of supernatural events forthcoming, not of “the Last Times” as such.

    Akita is a Warning, more than a Prophecy.

    Concerning the Third Secret of Fatima, the interpretations of Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI appear to be entirely consonant with (but necessarily not identical to, by virtue of being interpretations, not praphrase) the contents of that Secret.

  • JabbaPapa

    But Marxist ideas continue to spread and have become entrenched in the
    West.  The destruction of the family, the elimination of religion,
    relentless attacks on Western culture and traditions, the dismantling of
    the nation state, internationalism and globalisation –  these are all
    Marxist principles which the West increasingly adopts.

    These “ideals” belong in fact to a multiplicity of utopian projects — including the Marxist, but also including the Nazi, various banking/financial utopias, the utopia of “science-ocracy”, the utopia of freemasonry, and so on and on and on.

    Virtually EVERY one of them has it in common with the others the desire to destroy the Family, and destroy Religion, and destroy the Catholic Church especially. (I’ve read literally hundreds of texts or descriptions of these utopias or utopian political projects)

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    No, we do NOT “need to be very careful” with prophecies that have the Imprimatur of the Church and of successive Popes. 

    Fatima does not speak of the Last Times? Haven’t you read the quote of Ratzinger give above?

    “Cardinal Ratzinger said in the same interview that the Secret also refers to “the importance of the Novissimi [the Last Times / the Last Things]”

    Don’t you consider posts ever before replying Jabba?

  • JabbaPapa

    Cardinal Ratzinger himself has advised Catholics to be very careful with Prophecies.

    If I have to choose between taking my advice from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, or from anyone else apart from a Pope, then I think you can guess who I’ll be listening to.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Very silly response. These are serious matters which clearly are beyond you.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Freemasonry lies behind all of them Jabba. 

    As Leo XIII said, “Freemasonry, there is the enemy”.

  • JabbaPapa

    Don’t you consider posts ever before replying Jabba?

    Ben, I have clearly stated that my position is a “careful” one.

    What more do you want ?

    That was his **private** interpretation given in an interview, not a statement from the Magisterium.

    I am NOT saying that either his interpretation or yours is “wrong”, but you cannot expect an ex-agnostic and literature student to look at issues like these from only one side and assume the validity of one interpretation only.

  • JabbaPapa

    Freemasonry lies behind all of them Jabba

    This is historically inaccurate, and factually incorrect — the earliest recorded examples of such utopian projects seeking to destroy Family and Religion are from Athens, 6th century BC.

    Plato was not a Freemason.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Then listen to what he has said!

    “Cardinal Ratzinger said in the same interview that the Secret also refers to “the importance of the Novissimi [the Last Times / the Last Things]“

  • JabbaPapa

    Cardinal Ratzinger speaking in a personal capacity is not speaking for the CDF.

    I certainly DO listen to, and respect, and think about his more personal interpretation (as I do your own !!!) — the CDF meanwhile expects from Catholics care and caution when reading such prophecies, and provides some very specific warnings against overly literalist and overly enthusiastic readings of them.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    It’s clear to me that you have not studied these Apparitions in depth. Why not do so, then comment? 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Well, we are talking about “Enlightenment” onwards, I think.

  • JabbaPapa

    Are we just talking at cross purposes or something ?

    Again, at no point have I ever expressed anything but the need for care in the interpretation of particular revelations — this is something that I have to do, personally, for myself, on an almost daily basis.

    Any and all lack of care in the interpretation of prophecies and revelations creates the risk of false understandings and errors.

    AGAIN I have accused *nobody’s* interpretations cited in here as being “wrong”.

  • JabbaPapa

    Moved – thinness.

  • JabbaPapa

    Well, we are talking about “Enlightenment” onwards, I think.

    Even in the “Enlightenment” and onwards, there are a great many utopias and utopian projects devised, not based on Marxism or Masonic ideals in the slightest, and nevertheless perfectly hostile to Family and/or Religion.

    Utopias based on the dictatorship of Science, for example, are unlike both Masonry and Marxism, which consider Science as being in a subservient position to their ideology and leadership — ditto, the Islamist utopias.

    Monastic utopianism considers submission in the rigorous discipline of a totalitarian religiosity (quite uncatholic in nature) as being the ideal society, and whilst it does not destroy religion, it does destroy the very basis of the family by redefining it as a monastic cell.

    One of my favourite absurd 19th century utopias involved the recreation of human society ex nihilo in some African wasteland on the basis of sound financial management principles, specifically designed to be antagonistic to religion, family values, socialism, and masonry and anything and everything resembling them – including political parties and so on. (the sheer ineptness of this conception is very entertaining)

    I mean I’d *certainly* grant that Marxism and Masonry are the dominant ideologies in modern utopian “ideals”, but then again one *does* have to remember that there are many political idealists who are radically opposed to both — Nazism and other such supremacist utopianism springs to mind…

  • L.A. Marrero

    I wonder if the late professor was spared any of the terrors of death, or if he was given to opportunity to experience natural mortal dread, and filled with a sense of his mortality, reflect that he might have been in error. To blithely assert that murders may be needed, that unwilled dying for a cruel agenda is mere collateral damage, is sign enough of a deeply disordered soul and intellect. May God show him the mercy, as I wish for mercy myself. 

  • aearon43

    I agree with a lot of what you say, but your tone does seem a bit on the alarmist side. Remember, Christ has defeated the world, and the gates of hell will never prevail against his Church.

    Becoming overly excited can make you look a little bit insecure. It’s generally better to maintain a calm and balanced state of “mind like water” and approach such things with objective truth.

    Few people truly hate Jesus and the Church. Usually they are simply misguided. Karl Marx, for example, no doubt felt deeply the suffering of the working classes during the industrialization of Europe. He didn’t hate the Church for what it is, but for what he thought it represented (aristocracy, etc.). You, too, no doubt speak from a noble and empathetic point of view.

    But ultimately our task in the New Evangelization is not only to be right (which I am not arguing that you are not), but also to speak in a way that convinces others. The apostles, after receiving the blessing of the Holy Spirit, spoke in tongues, that is to say, they spoke in the native languages of the people they wished to convert, rather than in their native idiom. Likewise, we should be prepared to meet people where they are. That is not to say appease them, but remember: “To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.” Consider this little blog post on Venerable Fulton Sheen: http://www.ignitumtoday.com/2012/10/01/sheen/

    To make one other minor point, attacks on Vatican II do cross a certain line. Ultimately if you want to attack it, you’re going to have to take a seat with SSPX, and not with the Roman Catholic Church. You might argue that VII was the cause of the decline of the Church in the West. I don’t think that’s true; I think the causes lie elsewhere: Modernism, Statism, the world wars, etc. But I could just as well argue that VII is the cause for the 70% increase in Catholicism over the past decade in South Korea. So just keep in mind that a Catholic is catholic, too, and that Europe isn’t the whole world.

  • aearon43

    The shattering of Christendom began with the Crucifixion. 

  • aearon43

    Hegel was a bit of a dualist, but not the worst guy in the world. Read Augustine’s Confessions: all of these heretical schools of thought have been in operation for quite some time now.

  • aearon43

    I think this article would hit a bit too close to home for the BBC.

  • aearon43

    Mr. Carter, I would say that we need to be very careful in every single thing that we do or say, regardless of context. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    The SSPX is in a canonically irregular position and that is all. To suggest that they aren’t Catholics is a (no-doubt unintended) deep insult to a very fine body of men who have suffered grievously in keeping Tradition alive during decades when Rome has not only forgotten what the word means but has spat on it.

    Vatican II is fair game: as a non-doctrinal Council, its documents carry no dogmatic force (excepting those elements which repeat teaching and dogma already taught). I don’t reject it: I simply ignore it until such time as the Magisterium actually explains what its schizophrenic documents, a mish-mash of vagueness, actually mean. Simply saying there is no conflict between them and Tradition is no longer enough, frankly; the debate has to be had. 

    The New Evangelisation (whatever it is) seems to me to be in total conflict with the modern Church’s fascination with ecumenism. One perhaps (I am not sure if it does) says seek converts; the other says there are no false religions so converting souls to any “True Faith” is out.

    What about more “Old Evangelisation”, which was progressively converting the whole world? 

    About the universality of the Church: yes, I’m aware of the Korean numbers. I know two excellent Korean priests. 14% of South Korea is now Catholic, thanks be to God. 

    Usually though people use the growth of the Church in Africa as their example – except that the crucial period of conversion in Africa was the first decade of the 20th Century, not post Vatican II. 

    The Church in the West is nearly dead. Fatima (and I believe Garabandal) are far from played out. 

    Watch this space in other words.

    Finally, I lived in Russia for more than a decade and will very shortly be returning to live there again. I have seen the effect on individual human beings of atheistic materialism and without doubt it comes directly from hell. There is no tone that can be alarmist enough about Marxism.