The Meaning of Catholic

By your prayers, over the next few months I will be developing the research we’ve been working on for our book together, which has the working title The First Fruits of Fatima You’ve Never Heard Of: the Saga of the Russian Catholic Church of the Byzantine Rite 1917-Present. This research will only be available to those who chip in something to help fund our lay apostolate by subscribing to Pelican or to this Substack. But here’s one of the basic hypotheses we’re working with: America lost the cold war by swallowing the errors of Russia.
As a Michigander in these United States myself, I think this framework is very important to illuminate our whole epoch. As it happens, the late great Jesuit Fr. John Hardon had a similar insight in 1998, at a time when the American Empire was proclaiming to the world that they had won the Cold War:
The United States of America is the most powerful Marxist country in the world.
In the lecture in which he said these words in 1998, Fr. Hardon looks at some of the basic principles of Marxism and observes that these same principles have been adopted by the American Empire.
I would add these errors are also exported by the American Empire. E. Michael Jones notes in his important text Logos Rising that when the Iranians revolted against the western-imposed government in 1979, they were actually reacting against, among other things, the imposition of pornographic Hollywood on their traditional, Shia Muhammadan culture.
Obviously the Muhammadans follow the false prophet and warlord Muhammad to blaspheme His Majesty, Our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of Kings. Nevertheless, Dr. Jones is not wrong to point out this fundamental rejection of American-imposed Marxism in the form of the evil images of pornography.
But let’s back up.
I want to lay out the very basics of this hypothesis. And I must give due credit to my daughter who wrote a fantastic high school paper analysing Marxism. She summarised the basic principle of Marxism like this:
“You’re only as good as what you can do.”
In other words, human dignity is power. Your worth is based on how much power you have. If you don’t have power, you’re worthless.
Hence, the Marxists tell the poor – you have no power because the rich have stolen from you. This statement might be true or false, depending on the degree of oppression in any given country that the rich are imposing upon the poor and weak. This is the actual reality that the poor have suffered since the industrial revolutions began circa 1776.[1]
In any case, the poor man has a real or perceived oppression. The same is true of Blacks or other minorities, immigrants, or any group of people who are suffering real or perceived injustice of any kind.
OK so there’s some degree of truth in the first claim – you are suffering because of evil men. Let’s just grant that as true for the sake of this argument.
But I would also assert that in the hearts of these minorities and oppressed peoples, they perceive themselves to be oppressed. That is the main truth which we can all agree on.
That is the state of their hearts.
And the heart is the axis of human history, so it is false to be hard-hearted toward these poor souls, like Ben Shapiro, and haughtily trumpet “Facts don’t care about your feelings!”
Thanks, that attitude never converted a single heart to the truth. That’s literally heartless. The point is to win hearts first, then (and only then) win arguments. (Yes, the Marxists are consumed in their own feelings - but the solution is not to go to the opposite extreme and treat them mercilessly!).
But I digress.
The point here is that the Marxist, unlike Ben Shapiro, is correctly assessing the state of these hearts. That’s the main truth to seize upon here.
What does the Marxist do next with this truth? Like the serpent, he whispers a lie. That’s when the fundamental lie comes in.
“You’re only as good as what you can do.”
You, poor man, have no power. Therefore you are worthless. It’s time to seize the power from the rich and claim your human dignity.
You, Black man, have no power. Therefore you are worthless. It’s time to seize the power from the White man and claim your human dignity.
You, immigrant, have no power. Therefore you are worthless. It’s time to seize the power from the Rich White man and claim your human dignity.
You get the idea.
BUT WAIT.
The idea of dignity as power is the same principle imbedded in the Declaration of Independence!
“We hold these truths to be self-evident…”
You know the rest. The fundamental dogma of the American Empire is that all men are created equal. That dogma is true in the fundamental Christian sense.
But how does the Declaration of Independence use this truth? It proclaims that there can be no taxation without representation.
In other words, if you don’t let me vote, you are offending my human dignity as your equal. Hence, Thomas Paine, the main propagandist of the American Revolution (whom Dr. Jones notes in his newest book, quoted Satan in his pamphlets to further his aims - so the primary texts itself show that there’s a Satanic element to 1776), said that Monarchy is Tyranny per se.
If human dignity = power, then of course Monarchy is tyranny by definition.
In fact, if human dignity = power, then any human hierarchy whatsoever is tyranny by definition.
Hence, Feminism, one of the primary Errors of Russia, was born in the American and French Revolutions in particular.
Already in March of 1776 when the Continental Congress was seizing power, Mrs. Abigail Adams threatened her husband John Adams that
if particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation.[2]
And why shouldn’t the women rebel against their husbands in 1776? The woman had suffered under a real tyranny by the Protestants, who tore down the statues of the Queen of Heaven, and reduced woman to an object either of lust or propagation, no longer dignified as a woman possessing the feminine genius, as Dr. Alice von Hildebrand discusses in her book, The Privilege of Being a Woman: feminine participation in the Mother of God and her noble office of Queen and Mother!
Because if we start with the error that human dignity is power, which is fundamental to the American and French revolutions – this idea fits perfectly with the errors of Russia. Communism is founded on the same premises.
And this is why America lost the Cold War. Marxism took a new form in the west which fit perfectly within the liberal democracies.
This new form of western Marxism consumed democratic societies without creating a totalitarian system like the Soviets or Chinese. Western Marxism created what Todd Huizinga calls the “new totalitarian temptation.” It’s a different form of totalitarianism, but it’s the same Marxist and Liberal lie.
This is not to say that the American Revolution did not contain many Catholic principles and actually brought about, through God’s Providence, much good. But that’s another story and the subject of another book I’m writing: Saving These United States from the American Empire.
But the main point to seize upon here is this: the framework for modern history is given by God Himself at Fatima – the errors of Russia will spread and the Immaculate Heart of Mary is the answer. In my view, America lost the Cold War because our principles (despite lots of good American Catholic efforts in the 1950s) could not overcome the errors of Russia.
America was conquered by the errors of Russia.
Therefore, all the more reason to get to First Saturday tomorrow, and remember you can finish the devotion in one hour. More to come here for paid subscribers and Pelican users.
With respect and love to all,
TimothyFounder, Meaning of Catholic lay apostolateSt. Joseph the Worker
[1] Even at the same time that the poor were helped by those same industrial revolutions by mass producing cheap goods and products. In my view, the economic narrative is a both/and, not either/or, between the Marxists and the Austrians. That’s why the Catholic Social encyclicals draw upon both sides and correct both Marxists and Capitalist extremists.
[2] Abigail Adams to John Adams, March 31, 1776 in Miriam Schneir, ed., Feminism: The Essential Historical Writings (New York: Vintage Books, 1972), 3. Emphasis added.


This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit meaningofcath.substack.com/subscribe

* Today (Monday): St. Peter Canisius, Doctor of the Church (see Tradivox volume 9)
* Tuesday: St. Paul of the Cross, Founder of the Passionists (Also St. Louis de Montfort and new feast of St. Gianna Molla)
* Wednesday: St. Catherine of Siena (her “birthday” - traditional feast day, Novus Ordo Missae) - St. Peter Verona (Octave of St. Joseph, Spouse of the Blessed Virgin)
* Thursday: St. Catherine of Siena (1962 Missal) - James the Greater (Byzantine)
* Friday: St. Joseph against the Communists (Prophet St. Jeremiah - Universal Feast Day)
* Saturday: Universal Feast of St. Athanasius against the World


This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit meaningofcath.substack.com/subscribe

Dear Anonymous,
I see you do not have a face and you do not have a name. You are an anonymous person on the internet. You’ve hidden your face and hidden your name, and instead you’ve created a false face and a false name. As a result I don’t really know if you are a real human person. Are you a robot? Are you an artificial intelligence? I’m not entirely certain.
I’d like to believe you are a real, human person. You probably are. But then again, I’ve been working on the internet for years and I’ve seen this so many times, it’s so predictable.
A real human person hides his face and hides his name and then begins to act like a non-human person.
Why are you hiding, brother (or sister)? What are you afraid of?
I have seen this again and again. A man hides his face and hides his name, and thus he makes himself into a non-human person. The internet is already a disembodied community. So we’re already limited in the human interaction that we can have on the internet. We already cannot have a real, in-person, contact. The metaphysical light of the Image of God in man is obscured by the man-created light of the screen.
But you’ve chosen to go further. You’ve hidden your face and name.
This suggests to me that you are afraid to have a human interaction. If we were talking in person, and you could never look me in the eye, and you refused to tell me your name, I would conclude that you were not serious about having a conversation. Then I would quickly end the conversation and say goodbye, since this conversation cannot go further without a face and a name.
From my experience it’s the same online.
Many, many times I have seen it. A human person hides his face and his name, and then proceeds to interact online in a non-human way. He does not talk to others with respect or kindness. He does not seem to be genuinely searching for the truth.
And the first act of respect for other human beings is sharing your face and your name. Instead, you hide your face and hide your name, and thus you act like a non-human person to me. Therefore you begin our interaction by disrespecting me as a human person.
If you’re afraid to face me or tell me your name for some legitimate reason, you can certainly send me an email so we can speak privately. I respect your need for privacy online – sometimes people need to write anonymously for some grave cause – this can sometimes happen if you are a priest or a woman.
However, if you don’t have a legitimate reason but you still want to hide your face you’re your name, and then you want to talk to others in a “public” place online – aren’t you making yourself into a non-human person? Forgive me, brother (or sister?), but since I do not know you, your false name and false face leads me to wonder if your intentions are false. You have already shown that you do not want to interact with other people in a human way.
You have already shown that you cannot face me, because you have adopted a false face.
You have already shown that you cannot speak to me because you have adopted a false name.
You tell me that you do not want to “get personal.” But a face and a name is not “personal” – it’s not like you’re telling me your personal family details or something like that – no. It’s not personal, it’s human. That’s the way God made us. He gave us faces and our parents gave us names. That’s His preference for human interaction. Human persons have faces and names.
If you don’t want to show me your face and your name, that tells me you want to be a non-human person online. And it seems to me that I cannot pursue truth and charity with non-human persons. Non-human persons have false names and false faces, and therefore from the very beginning of your online existence, you are not living in the truth. Therefore, if you are a real human person, I sincerely wish you the best, but I cannot continue to talk to non-human persons. Here’s my face and my name, and I look forward to getting to know you if ever change your mind about your own face and your own name, and then together we can pursue truth.
With respect,
Timothy
[email protected]
Photo by Chris Yang on Unsplash



This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit meaningofcath.substack.com/subscribe

I confess the Apostles, Nicene, Athanasian, Tridentine, and Pauline creeds according to the sense and understanding which the Church has always confessed.
I condemn all errors in the Syllabus Errorum of Bl. Pius IX, the Lamentabile of St. Pius X.
I take Oath Against Modernism and make the Professio Fidei.
I believe all matters of faith and morals that the Church now teaches and has always taught according to their particular theological note.
I confess the Declaration of Truths of His Eminence Cardinal Burke et al.
I confess the Immutable Truths about Matrimony of His Excellency Bishop Schneider et al.
I confess the Manifesto of Faith of His Eminence, Cardinal Müller.
I confess that the Second Vatican Council is the twenty-first ecumenical council of the Catholic Church.
I confess that the Novos Ordo Missae and Sacraments are valid and confer Sacramental grace.
I confess that His Holiness, Pope Leo XIV is the Vicar of Christ on earth, to whom I submit with obsequium religiosum of mind and will.


This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit meaningofcath.substack.com/subscribe

* Pre-55 Joseph
* Troops of St. George
* Rogationtide


This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit meaningofcath.substack.com/subscribe