The most important point of the document is its stance on Catholics’ view of socialism and communism. In looking at this topic, I have asked myself how much this serious, mysterious, and deep crisis that the Church is going through—this “procela tenebrarum” (St. Jude, 13), which Paul VI sadly and accurately called “self-destruction”—is caused by communists. Paul VI did not mention this issue in his Apostolic Letter, nor, to my knowledge, in any other document. Still, the question bothers me because this self-destruction is a crime. And if I want to find out who is responsible, I need to ask who benefits the most from it. Since communism benefits from this crime, I can’t help but wonder if communist agents are ultimately behind this “self-destruction.”
Today, I want to share some information to help the reader form an opinion on this matter.
This information is based on a study of the policies implemented by communists toward the Russian Church (often called “Orthodox”), which was supported by most Russians in 1917 when the communists took power.
The general public—especially in the West—has a simplistic and false view of this policy: over this half-century of dominance, communists have occasionally unleashed brutal persecutions against the Russian Church. With each persecution, the number of bishops and believers declines. During the periods between persecutions, the church attempts to recover. But time alone isn’t enough, as another massacre soon follows. So, from one attack to the next, all that remains of the so-called “Orthodox” church are sorrowful remnants on the brink of total disappearance.
In reality, the situation differs quite a bit. This is what I will attempt to explain in broad terms.
* * *
Communists indeed launched a brutal attack on all religions in Russia, not just the Catholic faith—so prominent in Ukraine and other regions—but also the “orthodox” religion and others, lasting until 1939.
But if we focus only on the latter, the persecutions weren’t just acts of violence. They also involved the widespread use of highly sophisticated methods of collective brainwashing.
This was the initial phase of anti-religious struggles in Soviet Russia, which ended in an unmistakable failure. Persecuted, divided, and confused by corrupt and treacherous hierarchs, the “Orthodox” stayed firmly loyal to their religious beliefs.
The persecution then shifted its approach. The communist government aimed to dismantle the Russian church not from the outside in, but from within. To accomplish this, it granted limited freedom and allowed it to reorganize. However, it set several conditions in return. The most notable was that the “orthodox” hierarchs had to be trusted individuals in the eyes of the Kremlin’s atheists. For the Russian church, this was like accepting a deal: communism would temporarily refrain from destroying the flock, as long as all the shepherds were wolves chosen by wolves.
Nothing is more effective at disorienting, discouraging, and demoralizing the faithful completely, thereby weakening the “orthodox” church and paving the way for its eventual demise.
Generally, decay is a slow process. Therefore, the final blow to the “orthodox” church was somewhat delayed. “How can we take advantage of it while it continues to exist in this sad state?” This was a crucial question for every true communist, for whom everything that exists must serve the “cause of the proletariat.”
The benefits the Kremlin gained from this worsening situation were truly remarkable. Under its influence, the “Orthodox” church:
a) Provided important support to Stalin in resisting the German invasion.
b) Took it upon itself, after the war, to rebuild among its millions of faithful the popularity of the communist regime, which had never been great and that time had dangerously undermined.
c) Influenced the “Orthodox” churches in the countries conquered after the war to support the Soviet invaders, thereby strengthening Russia’s extensive colonial empire in Europe.
d) It actively promotes communist propaganda within the “orthodox” churches of Greece, Turkey, Asia Minor, and Africa, as well as among Russian “orthodox” churches established byexiles around the world.
e) Through the ecumenical movement, it moves closer to both the Catholic Church and Protestant sects, raising hopes of establishing a “modus vivendi” with communism if successful. This, in turn, helps weaken the anticommunist efforts of the West.
This period, which we might call the decline and exploitation of the “Orthodox” religion, has lasted from 1939 to the present day.
These are the broad outlines of the tragic history of the “Kremlin Orthodox” church under the communist regime. After learning this, the Catholic reader will likely see how many lessons can be learned from what happened in the garden of the “Orthodox” neighbor.
How did the events unfold in each phase? We will discuss this in another article.
* * *
Some readers may think it’s strange that I always put “Orthodox” in quotation marks. I don’t do this to provoke or offend. It’s simply because, as a Catholic, I can only consider the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church as Orthodox, since Orthodox, in Greek, means ‘correct opinion.’ Of course, this has caused many Catholics to stop using quotation marks, trusting that a Catholic obviously cannot accept a church separated from Rome as truly orthodox. But in these days of extreme ecumenism, I believe it’s entirely reasonable for both faithful Catholics and consistent “orthodox” Christians to want to avoid confusion and take specific steps to do so.
Why do I use the neologism “Kremlinian”? Simply because the facts require me to say it, and I do so with great enthusiasm: many Russian and non-Russian “Orthodox” reject any communion with the mitered lackeys that the Kremlin has placed at the head of the farcical church and hierarchy that Moscow manages under the atheist state’s support.
Those anti-Kremlin “Orthodox” hierarchs and laypeople, facing persecution and pressure of all kinds, remain firm in their view of the “Kremlinites” as sinister impostors. The noble steadfastness of these “Orthodox” individuals deserves warm applause, which every genuine Catholic gladly offers.
