Rome has strongly pursued Communistic politics ever since the pontificate of John XXIII in the late 1950s/early 1960s. Not counting the extremely short reign of John Paul I in 1978, which ended with his “accelerated demise” as he was not towing the line, the popes who followed John XXIII, namely Paul VI and John Paul II, were radically leftist when it came to politics. They were in fact strongly pro-Communist, and pursued pro-Communist policies with gusto. Under John Paul II, however, it was not Moscow-dominated Communism that was supported, but the Vatican’s own brand of Communism. It was highly effective.
There were many who thought things would be different under Benedict XVI, but it was not to be, as this encyclical shows all too starkly. He had in fact shown his avid support for the UN back in April 2008 already, when, in a speech before the world body, he spoke of the “search for the right way to order human affairs”, and said: “That is why the Church is happy to be associated with the activity of this distinguished organisation [the UN], charged with the responsibility of promoting peace and good will throughout the earth.”
In the encyclical, Benedict calls for a radical rethinking of the global economy, a “profoundly new way” of organising global finance and business; criticises the growing divide between rich and poor; and calls for the establishment of what he terms “a true world political authority” to oversee the economy and work for the “common good.” His exact words were, “there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago.” This authority is the United Nations, but a reformed United Nations. This is all Marxist talk, and shows where Benedict’s allegiance lies, and that of the Vatican itself. And in his reference to John XXIII, Benedict was referring to his predecessor’s encyclical, released in 1963, entitled Pacem in Terris. In this, John XXIII said: “Today the universal common good presents us with problems which are worldwide in their dimensions; problems, therefore, which cannot be solved except by a public authority with power, organization and means co-extensive with these problems, and with a worldwide sphere of activity. Consequently the moral order itself demands the establishment of some such general form of public authority.” And: “It is therefore our earnest wish that the United Nations Organization may be able progressively to adapt its structure and methods of operation to the magnitude and nobility of its tasks.”
Commenting on Benedict’s suggestion that the United Nations be re-organised as part of a general reform of the international economic and financial structures, a Romish cardinal named Renato Martino said that this measure was necessary in order “to manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the [economic] crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration.”
This statement is crammed with Marxist phraseology: “managing the economy”, “avoiding economic imbalances”, “disarmament”, “peace”, “protecting the environment”, “regulating migration.” We are left in no doubt about Benedict’s desire for a Socialist world. According to him, the global economy should be regulated (read controlled by the elite few), economic equality should be achieved (remember the old Communist phrase, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”), nations should be disarmed (so that the elite few can call the shots without any possibility of resistance), the environment should be protected (the “green movement” is one of the Reds’ greatest modern causes whereby they are able to advance their agenda), etc. Martino added that Benedict “senses the urgency to find innovative ways to put into practice the principle of responsibility to protect the poorest nations, as well as to give them a voice in making common decisions.” This nonsense about “protecting the poorest nations” is how Communism advances itself in the hearts and minds of the masses, but in reality it has never had the interests of the poor at heart: the poor are merely cannon fodder to advance the revolution. Communists spout “equality”, but as George Orwell put it in his classic work, Animal Farm: “All are equal, but some are more equal than others.”