Vatican: Hammer and Sickle Crucifix represents dialogue and a commitment to freedom and progress

Gateway Pundit is reporting that the Vatican is now asserting that the hammer and sickle crucifix given to Pope Francis represents dialogue and a commitment to freedom and progress.

In his Encyclical Letter on Atheistic Communism Divini Redemptoris nos 4-12, Pope Pius XI had this to say:

"This Apostolic See, above all, has not refrained from raising its voice, for it knows that its proper and social mission is to defend truth, justice and all those eternal values which Communism ignores or attacks. Ever since the days when groups of "intellectuals" were formed in an arrogant attempt to free civilization from the bonds of morality and religion, Our Predecessors overtly and explicitly drew the attention of the world to the consequences of the dechristianization of human society. With reference to Communism, Our Venerable Predecessor, Pius IX, of holy memory, as early as 1846 pronounced a solemn condemnation, which he confirmed in the words of the Syllabus directed against "that infamous doctrine of so-called Communism which is absolutely contrary to the natural law itself, and if once adopted would utterly destroy the rights, property and possessions of all men, and even society itself."[1] Later on, another of Our predecessors, the immortal Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris, defined Communism as "the fatal plague which insinuates itself into the very marrow of human society only to bring about its ruin."[2] With clear intuition he pointed out that the atheistic movements existing among the masses of the Machine Age had their origin in that school of philosophy which for centuries had sought to divorce science from the life of the Faith and of the Church.

During Our Pontificate We too have frequently and with urgent insistence denounced the current trend to atheism which is alarmingly on the increase. In 1924 when Our relief-mission returned from the Soviet Union We condemned Communism in a special Allocution[3] which We addressed to the whole world. In our Encyclicals Miserentissimus Redemptor,[4] Quadragesimo Anno,[5] Caritate Christi,[6] Acerba Animi,[7] Dilectissima Nobis,[8] We raised a solemn protest against the persecutions unleashed in Russia, in Mexico and now in Spain. Our two Allocutions of last year, the first on the occasion of the opening of the International Catholic Press Exposition, and the second during Our audience to the Spanish refugees, along with Our message of last Christmas, have evoked a world-wide echo which is not yet spent. In fact, the most persistent enemies of the Church, who from Moscow are directing the struggle against Christian civilization, themselves bear witness, by their unceasing attacks in word and act, that even to this hour the Papacy has continued faithfully to protect the sanctuary of the Christian religion, and that it has called public attention to the perils of Communism more frequently and more effectively than any other public authority on earth.

To Our great satisfaction, Venerable Brethren, you have, by means of individual and even joint pastoral Letters, accurately transmitted and explained to the Faithful these admonitions. Yet despite Our frequent and paternal warning the peril only grows greater from day to day because of the pressure exerted by clever agitators. Therefore We believe it to be Our duty to raise Our voice once more, in a still more solemn missive, in accord with the tradition of this Apostolic See, the Teacher of Truth, and in accord with the desire of the whole Catholic world, which makes the appearance of such a document but natural. We trust that the echo of Our voice will reach every mind free from prejudice and every heart sincerely desirous of the good of mankind. We wish this the more because Our words are now receiving sorry confirmation from the spectacle of the bitter fruits of subversive ideas, which We foresaw and foretold, and which are in fact multiplying fearfully in the countries already stricken, or threatening every other country of the world.

Hence We wish to expose once more in a brief synthesis the principles of atheistic Communism as they are manifested chiefly in bolshevism. We wish also to indicate its method of action and to contrast with its false principles the clear doctrine of the Church, in order to inculcate anew and with greater insistence the means by which the Christian civilization, the true civitas humana, can be saved from the satanic scourge, and not merely saved, but better developed for the well-being of human society.

The Communism of today, more emphatically than similar movements in the past, conceals in itself a false messianic idea. A pseudo-ideal of justice, of equality and fraternity in labor impregnates all its doctrine and activity with a deceptive mysticism, which communicates a zealous and contagious enthusiasm to the multitudes entrapped by delusive promises. This is especially true in an age like ours, when unusual misery has resulted from the unequal distribution of the goods of this world. This pseudo-ideal is even boastfully advanced as if it were responsible for a certain economic progress. As a matter of fact, when such progress is at all real, its true causes are quite different, as for instance the intensification of industrialism in countries which were formerly almost without it, the exploitation of immense natural resources, and the use of the most brutal methods to insure the achievement of gigantic projects with a minimum of expense.

The doctrine of modern Communism, which is often concealed under the most seductive trappings, is in substance based on the principles of dialectical and historical materialism previously advocated by Marx, of which the theoricians of bolshevism claim to possess the only genuine interpretation. According to this doctrine there is in the world only one reality, matter, the blind forces of which evolve into plant, animal and man. Even human society is nothing but a phenomenon and form of matter, evolving in the same way. By a law of inexorable necessity and through a perpetual conflict of forces, matter moves towards the final synthesis of a classless society. In such a doctrine, as is evident, there is no room for the idea of God; there is no difference between matter and spirit, between soul and body; there is neither survival of the soul after death nor any hope in a future life. Insisting on the dialectical aspect of their materialism, the Communists claim that the conflict which carries the world towards its final synthesis can be accelerated by man. Hence they endeavor to sharpen the antagonisms which arise between the various classes of society. Thus the class struggle with its consequent violent hate and destruction takes on the aspects of a crusade for the progress of humanity. On the other hand, all other forces whatever, as long as they resist such systematic violence, must be annihilated as hostile to the human race.

Communism, moreover, strips man of his liberty, robs human personality of all its dignity, and removes all the moral restraints that check the eruptions of blind impulse. There is no recognition of any right of the individual in his relations to the collectivity; no natural right is accorded to human personality, which is a mere cog-wheel in the Communist system. In man's relations with other individuals, besides, Communists hold the principle of absolute equality, rejecting all hierarchy and divinely-constituted authority, including the authority of parents. What men call authority and subordination is derived from the community as its first and only font. Nor is the individual granted any property rights over material goods or the means of production, for inasmuch as these are the source of further wealth, their possession would give one man power over another. Precisely on this score, all forms of private property must be eradicated, for they are at the origin of all economic enslavement .

Refusing to human life any sacred or spiritual character, such a doctrine logically makes of marriage and the family a purely artificial and civil institution, the outcome of a specific economic system. There exists no matrimonial bond of a juridico-moral nature that is not subject to the whim of the individual or of the collectivity. Naturally, therefore, the notion of an indissoluble marriage-tie is scouted. Communism is particularly characterized by the rejection of any link that binds woman to the family and the home, and her emancipation is proclaimed as a basic principle. She is withdrawn from the family and the care of her children, to be thrust instead into public life and collective production under the same conditions as man. The care of home and children then devolves upon the collectivity. Finally, the right of education is denied to parents, for it is conceived as the exclusive prerogative of the community, in whose name and by whose mandate alone parents may exercise this right.

What would be the condition of a human society based on such materialistic tenets? It would be a collectivity with no other hierarchy than that of the economic system. It would have only one mission: the production of material things by means of collective labor, so that the goods of this world might be enjoyed in a paradise where each would "give according to his powers" and would "receive according to his needs." Communism recognizes in the collectivity the right, or rather, unlimited discretion, to draft individuals for the labor of the collectivity with no regard for their personal welfare; so that even violence could be legitimately exercised to dragoon the recalcitrant against their wills. In the Communistic commonwealth morality and law would be nothing but a derivation of the existing economic order, purely earthly in origin and unstable in character. In a word. the Communists claim to inaugurate a new era and a new civilization which is the result of blind evolutionary forces culminating in a humanity without God."

Atheistic Humanism murdered some 250 million people in the 20th century. See here.

The hammer and sickle can never represent dialogue and a "commitment to freedom and progress." The hammer and sickle represent the misguided attempts to construct a society without God, a project which always ends up with men enslaving men and murdered corpses.

Any attempt to build a "Utopia" without the living God produces the termite colony.

Victoria Kennedy's atheistic humanism

According to Catholic faith, every sin can be forgiven during life because of God’s surpassing love (DS 349). However, the Scriptures speak of sins that cannot be forgiven in the sense that they constitute a terrible offense against the truth and the light, against the Holy Spirit (Mt 12: 31-32; 1 Jn 5:16). In speaking of sin this way, the Scriptures refer to a sin more radical than most mortal sins, for it is a sin whose nature blocks forgiveness. Since the time of Saint Augustine, theologians have provided us with a list of sins against the Holy Spirit, proceeding from initial impenitence through obduracy, presumption, despair, rejection of known truth, envy of the grace given to others, to final impenitence. Final impenitence leads to Hell, the eternal separation from God begun in this life through our free self-determining choices to turn from God and His law of love and to cling inordinately to some created good that, in effect, one puts in God’s place.

It is this final impenitence which Victoria Kennedy promotes when she advances the idea of a subjectivist conscience.  In an op-ed piece for The Washington Post, Ms. Kennedy wrote, "The pro-choice position recognizes that the United States is a diverse, pluralistic society where a woman has a constitutional right to make a decision based on her own conscience, religious beliefs and medical needs."  This is how Ms. Kennedy, who views herself as a "good Catholic," attempts to justify the killing of an unborn child.

It is most ironic that Dianne Williamson, enraged that Bishop Robert McManus has decided to rescind Victoria Kennedy's invitation to speak at Anna Maria College in Paxton, would write an opinion piece accusing Bishop McManus of closing his ears on Victoria Kennedy.  For this is what the Culture of Death advocates do.  They close their ears to the Lord Jesus.  When a person rationalizes what is known to be wicked in the sight of the Lord, that person opens a chasm between themselves and God which continues to grow wider and wider until they can no longer hear His call and discern the word of truth that He has spoken.


Margaret Sanger was determined to free sex from the restrictions of Christianity.  This, she said, would bring about an earthly paradise freed from te shackles of limitations on sexual desire.  In her Pivot of Civilization, Sanger made it clear that she wanted everyone to reject the next world and any hope of obtaining Heaven and to replace this goal with that of building the earthly paradise based upon worldly happiness:

"I look, therefore, into a future when men and women will not dissipate their energy in the vain and fruitless search for content outside of themselves, in far-away places or people.  Perfect masters of their own inherent powers, controlled with a fine understanding of the art of life and of love, adapting themselves with pliancy and intelligance to the milieu in which they find themselves, they will unafraid enjoy life to the utmost....Interest in the vague sentimental fantasies of extramundane existence, in pathological or hysterical flights from the realities of our earthliness, will have through atrophy disappeared, for in that dawn men and women will have come to the realization, already suggested, that there close at hand is our paradise, our everlasting abode, our Heaven and our eternity.  Not by leaving it and our essential humanity behind us, nor by sighing to be anything but what we are, shall we ever become enobled or immortal.  Not for woman only, but for all of humanity is this the field where we must seek the secret of eternal life."

Victoria Kennedy is an atheistic humanist.  She just hasn't steeled herself to admit this.  She has succumbed to a humanistic, pragmatic philosophy, a progressist atheism in which religion, as Harvey Cox put it in his Secular City, "..is in a sense the neurosis of culture."  For Cox, "secularization corresponds to maturation, for it signifies the emancipation of man first from religion and then from metaphysical control."  And humanity "must cease worshiping certainties.  For when certainty enters a question, authority also enters as the implacable enforcer of certainties."  And authority is viewed as the enemy of free intellectual research, scientific advancement, social development and moral maturity.

Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand, in his book The New Tower of Babel, stressed that, "The egocentric sovereignty that modern man arrogates to himself bans everything that has the character of coming from above, of imposing bonds upon us, and of calling for an adequate response.  Modern man also shuns all the factors in life which are gifts, which he cannot grant to himself: they remind him of his dependence upon something greater than himself and above himself. Thus truth in its implacable sovereignty - absolute truth that judges our reason instead of being judged by it - is denied." (p. 19).  And ironically, those who want to shake off the demands of absolute truth and who come to view the Christian faith and its teachings as mere "superstition," fall "into the web of the most naive, uncritical (not to say superstitious) worship of unfounded opinions," for "He who shirks episteme (knowledge) inevitably becomes a disciple of doxa (opinion). (p. 19).

Our Lord told us that if we love Him, we will keep His Commandments.  And loyalty to the commands of Christ is inseparable from loyalty to the commands of the Church He founded, of which He is the Head and with which He identifies Himself.  Victoria Kennedy rejects this.  She rejects Our Lord's commands made known through His Church.  She has opted instead to work for Margaret Sanger's idea of an earthly paradise where man is his own god.

But this road of self-will doesn't lead to paradise.  It leads to an eternity in that place where self-will has been embraced to the point of final impenitence: Hell.

Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario: Anti-Catholic Bully

Father Alphonse de Valk, writing for Catholic Insight, reports that Dalton McGuinty, the Premier of Ontario, is attempting to bully Catholic schools into allowing the celebration of homosexuality.  This comes as no surprise.  For McGuinty is really a Secular Humanist at heart.  Secular Humanism has all the characteristics of a religion. The Secular Humanist places man at the center of things. In the Humanist Manifesto II, which was released in 1973, humanists called for a new faith: "...traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to love and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them is an unproved and outmoded faith. Salvationism, based on mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with false hopes of heaven hereafter. Responsible minds look to other means for survival." (Humanist Manifesto II, The Humanist; September/October 1973, p. 4). Humanism is, therefore, fundamentally at odds with Christianity which regards God and not man as the supreme value of the universe.


Because Humanists recognize the importance of the public schools in advancing their man-centered religion, they do everything in their power to ensure that children are indoctrinated into the tenets of Humanism even as they attack faith-based schools. It was Paul Blanshard, writing in The Humanist, who said, "I think that the most important factor moving us toward a secular society has been the educational factor. Our schools may not teach Johnny to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is 16 tends to lead toward the elimination of religious superstition. The average American child now acquires a high school education, and this militates against Adam and Eve and all the other myths of alleged history." (The Humanist State, March/April 1976, p. 17).

Humanist John Dumphy, also writing for The Humanist, said "I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preacher, for they will be ministers of another servant, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subjects they teach regardless of the educational level - preschool daycare or large state university. The classroom must and will become and area of conflict between the old and the new - the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery and the new faith of humanism resplendent in its promise of a world in which the never realized Christian idea of 'love thy neighbor' will finally be achieved." (The Humanist, January/February 1983, p. 26).

Humanists have a right to believe as they do. But so do people of faith. Tolerance of different beliefs is an essential ingredient of a free society. But Humanists do not embrace such tolerance. They are, in fact, the most intolerant as they seek to indoctrinate and coerce others into their belief system.

The time is fast-approaching when those of us who are morally opposed to homosexuality will be in physical danger.  For atheistic humanism, when it comes to power, inevitably leads to violence and mass murder.  McGuinty and his comrades have already attempted to silence moral opposition toward homosexuality.  See here.

The Church proposes but the world imposes.

The intellectual insecurity of the atheist and where it eventually leads...

The atheist is crippled by an intellectual insecurity. He must strive continually to convince others - and even himself - that God does not exist. But he is always haunted by the fear that he has not really banished the presence or power of the Divine Other. This canker of insecurity, which gnaws at his heart unceasingly, manifests itself in the incessant need to propagandize against belief in God.

For example Richard Dawkins, an atheist who authored "The God Delusion," devotes much if not most of his time attempting to convince others that belief in God is even dangerous (see here). This charge is most ironic since, as Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., reminds us, "When man becomes his own absolute center, then God becomes his hell, because God sets limits to man's greatness. But once having attained autoerotic sovereignty, a monstrous metamorphosis takes place in atheist man. He begins to feed on his fellow men, for they now are his hell, threatening to rob him of his freedom. When God is rejected because he is seen as man's hell, then man, whom God loves, suffers the same fate and for the same reason. There is a frightening resemblance between the atheist humanist as a cell of society and a malignantly cancerous cell in the human body. Both cells have thrown off any service of subordination to the health of the communities in which they thrive. They act and grow according to their own uncontrolled ravenous appetites feeding parasitically on the whole organism. As runaway cells they invade and destroy every healthy cell in the body until they extinguish life and speed to completion the total disintegration of the unity of the body. Atheistic humanism is a psychic cancer. It shares two major characteristics with physical cancer. Both these human cancers arise from the arbitrary rebellion of a subordinate cell against the established social harmony of the whole. Secondly, both these cancerous rebellions are metastatic and messianic in their aggression to the death against organism and community." (The Gods of Atheism, pp. 463-464).

Gilbert Keith Chesterton reminded us that when man denies God he does not believe in nothing. Rather he will believe in anything. Moreover, he will not do nothing but as a fanatic he will do anything:

"There are men who will ruin themselves and ruin their civilization if they may ruin also this old fantastic tale. This is the last and most astounding fact about this faith; that its enemies will use any weapon against it, the sword that cuts their own fingers, and the firebrands that burn their own homes...He [the atheist fanatic who is crippled by his own insecurity] sacrifices the very existence of humanity to the non-existence of God. He offers his victims not to the altar, but merely to assert the idleness of the altar and the emptiness of the throne. He is ready to ruin even that primary ethic by which all things live, for his strange and eternal vengeance upon some one who never lived at all." (Orthodoxy, pp. 238-239).

Atheistic fanatics have a long history of unmatched violence. Today, fanatical rhetoric from atheist fanatics has resulted in actual violence against the Church as well as calls for such violence. See here.

God is not the delusion. The myth of the atheistic humanist who truly values reason is the real delusion.

An illusion which bears a striking resemblance to the puberty crisis of the adolescent...

In his work entitled "Trojan Horse in the City of God," Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand wrote that, "Incessantly we hear today the self-satisfied slogan, 'Man has finally come of age.' Yet there are so many features of the present epoch - the dethronement of truth by historical relativism, the fetishization of science, the devastation of our lives as a result of the laboratory view, and many others - that make it more than doubtful that modern man has really and truly come of age. There is, moreover, something inherently self-deceptive in the very idea. It is a characteristic symptom of immaturity to feel oneself more mature and independent than men of previous times, to forget what one owes the past, and, in a kind of adolescent self-assertion, to refuse any assistance. One need only recall Dostoyevsky's masterly description of the puberty crisis - Kolya Krassotkin in The Brothers Karamazov, Hypolit in The Idiot, the hero of The Adolescent - to grasp the special immaturity of the man who is convinced of his superior maturity, who thinks that in him humanity has in a unique way come of age, who is dominated by one preoccupation - to show his independence. His ludicrous smallness is manifest as he looks down on everything passed on through tradition, even the most timeless values. The illusion of an historic coming of age is not the exclusive possession of our epoch. In the period of the so-called Enlightenment, man also felt themselves to have come of age and looked down on former times as periods of darkness and immaturity. This illusion is a recurring phenomenon in social history and it bears a striking resemblance to the puberty crisis in the life of the individual person. But the contemporary assertion that whereas this perennial boast was never before justified, it is now really true makes its self-serving character all the more clear.One of the many indications of the intellectual and moral immaturity of the present age is the fact that the percentage of worthless books and articles that captivate the minds of intellectuals seems greater today than in any other time in history." (pp.143-144).

This illusion of man having "come of age" is a characteristic of psychological, spiritual and intellectual immaturity. It is also at the core of atheistic humanism. For atheistic humanism advances the notion, rooted in adolescent pride and rebellion, that the human race has reached a leap of advancement, a new stage of development and enlightenment in which man must abandon any notion of divine authority and rely only upon himself to build a utopia here on earth. A utopia where there are no dogmas, no permanent truths, no objective principles or fixed concepts. In the words of Harvey Cox, "Religion is in a sense the neurosis of culture; secularization corresponds to maturation, for it signifies the emancipation of man first from religion and then from metaphysical control." (The Secular City).

This is America's brand of atheism. It is represented in mythology by Prometheus challenging the old gods and stealing fiery power from them to bring man on earth a freedom from divine authority, liberation from childish beliefs and sexual taboos so that man come of age may create for himself a temporal utopia of plenty and a society of peace. This atheism was advanced in 1933 in The New Humanist magazine in a document entitled the "Humanist Manifesto I," by a group of 34 "liberal humanists." However, forty years later The Humanist magazine published "Humanist Manifesto II." This was necessary because the foolish optimism of the "liberal humanists" regarding the natural goodness of man was utterly demolished by the sheer brutality and horror of the Second World War. Not to mention the savage and evil systems of Nazism, Fascism and Communism.

The adolescent rebellion from God which is atheistic humanism continues. It has not learned anything from the harsh realities of history. It refuses to. And this refusal will only lead to more such disasters in the future for mankind. For as George Santayana reminded us, "Those who will not learn from history are condemned to repeat it." Already we are witnessing the brutality of an atheistic humanism which declares its "love for humankind" even as it approves of the worst form of child abuse - abortion - as well as euthanasia and all varieties of sexual experimentation and immoral "lifestyles" such as fornication and homosexuality. And when those who believe in objective truth and morality object, as did those who opposed same-sex "marriage" in California, Churches were attacked and Christians and Mormons were subjected to violence and intimidation - all in the name of "love" and "freedom."

And now the atheistic humanists who promise us a utopia of "freedom" and "love" are using any and all means of hate-filled propaganda in a demonic attempt to discredit the Holy Father and the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Ye shall know a tree by its fruit.

When Choice Becomes God....

In his Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, Pope John Paul II warned that, "It is at the heart of the moral conscience that the eclipse of the sense of God and of man, with all its various and deadly consequences for life, is taking place. It is a question, above all, of the individual conscience, as it stands before God in its singleness and uniqueness. But it is also a question, in a certain sense, of the 'moral conscience' of society: in a way it too is responsible, not only because it tolerates or fosters behaviour contrary to life, but also because it encourages the 'culture of death', creating and consolidating actual 'structures of sin' which go against life. The moral conscience, both individual and social, is today subjected, also as a result of the penetrating influence of the media, to an extremely serious and mortal danger: that of confusion between good and evil, precisely in relation to the fundamental right to life. A large part of contemporary society looks sadly like that humanity which Paul describes in his Letter to the Romans. It is composed 'of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth' (1:18): having denied God and believing that they can build the earthly city without him, 'they became futile in their thinking' so that 'their senseless minds were darkened' (1:21); 'claiming to be wise, they became fools' (1:22), carrying out works deserving of death, and 'they not only do them but approve those who practise them' (1:32). When conscience, this bright lamp of the soul (cf. Mt 6:22-23), calls 'evil good and good evil' (Is 5:20), it is already on the path to the most alarming corruption and the darkest moral blindness." (No. 24).

When choice becomes god, when humanism becomes absolute, we are on the sure road to absolute despotism. A humanism without God will never humanize man. It will only succeed in driving man into the abyss of madness as he strives to wreck the world and civilization in a spirit of blasphemous joy out of satanic hatred for the Living God. Gilbert Keith Chesterton was convinced, and so am I, that when man denies God, he does not believe in nothing but instead will believe in anything and, as a fanatic, will wreck this world out of hatred for the God which he denies:

"There are men who will ruin themselves and ruin their civilization if they may ruin also this old fantastic tale. This is the last and most astounding fact about this faith; that its enemies will use any weapon against it, the sword that cuts their own fingers, and the firebrands that burn their own homes...He [the atheist fanatic] sacrifices the very existence of humanity to the non-existence of God. He offers his victims not to the altar, but merely to assert the idleness of the altar and the emptiness of the throne. He is ready to ruin even that primary ethic by which all things live, for his strange and eternal vengeance upon some one who never lived at all." (Orthodoxy, pp. 238-239).

The choice is ours: a world where atheistic humanism is the official religion and men are enslaved in total bondage to the father of lies (John 8: 44) and the unnatural perversions which accompany this bondage or a world which embraces an authentic humanism, a community of love which "seeks the integral good of man" (Deus Caritas Est, No. 19) which is grounded in the Love of God.