BISHOP BARRON: Marxism begins by attacking faith — history shows where it ends

Many commented favorably on Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s recent speech at a security conference in Munich. What they seemed to admire most was his willingness to look beyond particular political and economic issues that concern policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic – the war in Ukraine, climate change, immigration, etc. – and to take into account the cultural beliefs that Europe and America share.

Secretary Rubio waxed lyrical about Dante, the Cologne Cathedral, Shakespeare, the democratic form of government, the university system – and even the Beatles and the Rolling Stones – as representations of this shared vision. But then he took a further step that particularly caught my attention. Very much in the spirit of Pope Benedict XVI and Church historian Christopher Dawson, he observed that culture is closely linked to worship, that is, religion. In a word, all the things we value are related to what we value most. That’s why Secretary Rubio has not been afraid to identify the Judeo-Christian faith as the deepest and most abiding source of what is best in Western culture. Only when Europe and America together rediscover the sources of their common culture will they find the cohesion to which they both aspire.

It comforted me to see that this clarion call was met with a sustained ovation. I believe that even this rather jaundiced and secularized audience sensed the true spirituality behind Rubio’s rhetoric.

AOC MOCKED FOR THE “ABSOLUTE TRAIN WRECK” WEEKEND ON THE WORLD STAGE: “MADE A FOOL OF HERSELF”

But his speech did not please everyone. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who was in Europe at the same time as Rubio, mocked the secretary of state’s concern for Western culture as “thin.” All cultures, she asserted, are ephemeral, transient, unstable; therefore, social analysts should focus not on vague cultural achievements but on the “material” elements of a society that manifest themselves in class struggle.

I would first like to observe that it is simply astonishing to say that the culture which gave birth to the university system, affirmed the rights and prerogatives of the individual and gave birth to the democratic rule of law is “thin”. But second, I would like to draw attention to the troubling Marxist quality of AOC’s wording. According to Karl Marx, all serious students of political economy should focus their attention on the class conflict between those who have power and those who do not. He also argued that the various expressions of culture – art, literature, science, entertainment and especially religion – are merely epiphenomenal superstructural elements, whose sole purpose is to protect the economic substructure. Thus, the responsible intellectual should at best recognize culture, but should not be preoccupied with it in any way – precisely the recommendation that AOC made in its airy rejection of the ideological foundations of the West.

What increasingly concerns me is the predominance of explicit Marxism in the rhetoric and practice of some left-wing leaders in America. Just recently, we heard Mayor Mamdani of New York extoll the “warmth of collectivism” and one of his top aides insist that residents of our greatest city should get used to the idea that government can and should confiscate private property and seize the means of production.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Again, Marxism is neither implicit nor subtle; it is out in the open, shamelessly exposed. And that should alarm all Americans. I might strongly encourage Mamdani and AOC supporters to speak to those who fled the Marxist tyrannies of Russia and Eastern Europe or to those working today under communist oppression in North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, or China. I sincerely doubt that any of them would gratefully acknowledge the “warmth of collectivism”.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

I speak out against this radicalism, not only as a concerned American, but also as a bishop of the Catholic Church. Marx said that the first criticism is the criticism of religion. He meant that before we even evaluate a capitalist political economy, and certainly before we engage in revolutionary praxis, we must rid ourselves of religion, which functions, as he famously put it, as “opium for the masses.” We must rid ourselves of our addiction to the drug of supernatural faith, which has dulled our sensitivity to our own suffering and served as a cover for the oppressive class. It is important to note that the political followers of Marxism closely followed their master in this regard. Observe the strategies of Lenin, Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, Fidel Castro and Pol Pot, to name just a few of the most notorious examples. Their first move was invariably to attack the churches.

Some might find the Marxism touted by some radical politicians today fashionable and refreshing, something to talk about at Upper East Side cocktail parties. Given the historical record, I find this frightening.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM BISHOP BARRON