The Catholic Church to Jesuits of Amerika: “No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.”

THIS – at Америка – speaks for itself.

Dean Dettloff. Who? HERE

I note in particular another of his offerings: “Christian Socialism: The Fusion of Faith and Revolution”.

Here’s a quote from his piece:

Communist political movements the world over have been full of unexpected characters, strange developments and more complicated motivations than a desire to undo the church; and even through the challenges of the 20th century, Catholics and communists have found natural reasons to offer one another a sign of peace.

Unexpected characters, indeed? Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Mao, Pol Pot, Kim Jong-un, Ceausescu. Given the essence of Communism, they weren’t unexpected at all. They were inevitable. For Socialism and Communism to triumph, a lot of people have to die. But, hey! What do a few eggs matter, after all, if you are making an omelette?

BTW… his piece at Америка is sure not going to help the cause of Dorothy Day.

Here’s a screen shot of Detloff’s Twitter page. I hope you can make out the banner.

Who can forget that iconic moment of Francis receiving the Hammer and Sickle cross. HERE

I am reminded of one of Francis’s predecessors, Pius XI, in Quadragesimo Anno.

That We, in keeping with Our fatherly solicitude, may answer their petitions, We make this pronouncement: Whether considered as a doctrine, or an historical fact, or a movement, Socialism, if it remains truly Socialism, even after it has yielded to truth and justice on the points which we have mentioned, cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the Catholic Church because its concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth.”
[…]
[Socialism] is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.

The editor of Америка wrote an accompanying piece in which he explains why they published something pro-Communist. In the first paragraph, he vaunts the denunciation of Sen. McCarthy in the 1950’s. Problem: McCarthy was more right than he was wrong about the infiltration of the US government by Communist agents. HERE The editor does, however, say:

For what it’s worth, my general view of economics begins with the fact that markets, for all their downsides, are the greatest force for economic empowerment that the world has ever seen.

He didn’t write “free markets”, but I think that may be what he meant. He goes on to praise his choice to publish a defense Arthur Brooks. In any event, his argument comes down to something like: the piece on Communism is interesting and so we published it.

That’s the criteria for publication there? That it’s interesting? There are a lot of things that are interesting, but are downright evil. Communism is interesting partly because at least 100 million people were slain under that form of government. That’s pretty interesting, in an obscene way.

I find it obscenely interesting that a theoretically Catholic journal should publish something favorable to Communism. No… correction. It’s a Jesuit journal.

The editor, again.

Accordingly, we publish something in almost every issue with which I personally disagree. I hope we publish something you disagree with, too. If not, we are not doing our job.

So, it’s their aim – their “job” – to be provocateurs, agitators.

What’s next for Америка Porn merchants? Porn is interesting, after all, and doubly useful because it’s provocative! They’ve already gone down that road by not correcting their highly visible golden boy homosexualist activist.