S
StudentMI
Guest
I’ve seen several posts by self proclaimed socialists and even communists here recently and wanted to address something.
Communism has several definitions and historical manifestations. It is my contention that none of them can be reconciled to Catholicism.
First we have the heretical movements in the middle ages, all of which were condemned by the Church. Umberto Eco does a great job illustrating one in his novel The Name of the Rose.
Next we have the attempt by the Anabaptists to set up what for all intents and purposes was a socialist or communist regime in Munster in 1534. No word from the Church concerning whether this matched the Gospel vision.
Next comes the French Revolution. Condemned over and over again. Babeuf is regarded as an early progenitor of what came to be known as communism.
And here’s where we get to theory. Proudhon, a proponent of mutualism, regarded his theory as the synthesis of communism and property. His works are placed on the Index.
Marxism envisions an historical process that is later to be for all intents and purposes disregarded by his most self proclaimed ardent adherents. History unfolds in a materialist fashion, with necessary stages ending in the evolution of capitalism which moves to socialism, when all private property is nationalized. At the end of this stage, when the ruling class has been subsumed and all men are equal, and the entirety of production is controlled by the ones doing the producing, that the state simply withers away as unnecessary and communism is reached. It is a stateless society where all property is held in common and all are equal. It is for all intents and purposes an eschatological vision, an inversion of Hegel’s vision of God by way of Feuerbach. To say it has been condemned is to put it lightly. It involves forceful seizure of property in the socialist stage and enforced equality, both of which go against the Church’s social teaching. While Church teaching allows socialization in some instances, it denounces the wholesale seizure of private property.
Marxism will develop into several different schools, with one unifying factor: forceful seizure of private property. Leninism will develop the theory of the vanguard as the only means to organize such a seizure and running of the state, though many will claim the roots of Leninism were not a deviation from but natural development of Marxist ideology. All subsequent Marxist schools of thought with any influence will use the vanguard theory in implementation of socialism.
A curious phase of the Russian Revolution will consist of what is called ‘war communism.’ The significance of this is that the leaders envisioned it as communism itself realized in history. It was a humanitarian, economic and moral disaster.
Continued…
Communism has several definitions and historical manifestations. It is my contention that none of them can be reconciled to Catholicism.
First we have the heretical movements in the middle ages, all of which were condemned by the Church. Umberto Eco does a great job illustrating one in his novel The Name of the Rose.
Next we have the attempt by the Anabaptists to set up what for all intents and purposes was a socialist or communist regime in Munster in 1534. No word from the Church concerning whether this matched the Gospel vision.
Next comes the French Revolution. Condemned over and over again. Babeuf is regarded as an early progenitor of what came to be known as communism.
And here’s where we get to theory. Proudhon, a proponent of mutualism, regarded his theory as the synthesis of communism and property. His works are placed on the Index.
Marxism envisions an historical process that is later to be for all intents and purposes disregarded by his most self proclaimed ardent adherents. History unfolds in a materialist fashion, with necessary stages ending in the evolution of capitalism which moves to socialism, when all private property is nationalized. At the end of this stage, when the ruling class has been subsumed and all men are equal, and the entirety of production is controlled by the ones doing the producing, that the state simply withers away as unnecessary and communism is reached. It is a stateless society where all property is held in common and all are equal. It is for all intents and purposes an eschatological vision, an inversion of Hegel’s vision of God by way of Feuerbach. To say it has been condemned is to put it lightly. It involves forceful seizure of property in the socialist stage and enforced equality, both of which go against the Church’s social teaching. While Church teaching allows socialization in some instances, it denounces the wholesale seizure of private property.
Marxism will develop into several different schools, with one unifying factor: forceful seizure of private property. Leninism will develop the theory of the vanguard as the only means to organize such a seizure and running of the state, though many will claim the roots of Leninism were not a deviation from but natural development of Marxist ideology. All subsequent Marxist schools of thought with any influence will use the vanguard theory in implementation of socialism.
A curious phase of the Russian Revolution will consist of what is called ‘war communism.’ The significance of this is that the leaders envisioned it as communism itself realized in history. It was a humanitarian, economic and moral disaster.
Continued…
Last edited:
