The origins of communism derive from the monastic orders of the Roman Catholic institution. These orders such as the Franciscans, Dominicans and Jesuits operate off of communistic principles. The vow of poverty which monastics including Jesuits take is a vow in which they give up any claim to private property ownership. This directive to dissolve all private property was made a central tenet of the Communist Manifesto. Jesuits as individuals cannot own anything; all property is shared among members of the Order.
Regrading poverty vows, The New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia states:
“The express vow of renunciation of all private property was introduced into the profession of the Friars Minor in 1260. About the same time another change took place; hitherto no limit had been placed on the common possessions of religious, but the mendicant orders in the thirteenth century forbade the possession, even in common, of all immovable property distinct from the convent, and of all revenues; and the Friars Minor of the strict observance, desiring to go one step further, assigned to the Holy See the ownership of all their property, even the most indispensable. Following the example of St. Francis and St. Dominic, many founders established their orders on a basis of common poverty, and the Church saw a large increase in the number of the mendicant orders until the foundation of theclerks regular in the sixteenth century; even then, many orders united common poverty with the regular clerical life: such were the Theatines (1524), whose rule was to live on alms and contributions spontaneously given; and the Society of Jesus (1540). It soon became evident that this profession of poverty which had so greatly edified the thirteenth century was exposed to grave abuses, that a certain state of destitution created more cares than it removed, and was not conducive either to intellectual activity or to strict observance; and that mendicity might become an occasion of scandal. Consequently the Council of Trent(Sess. XXV, c. iii, de reg.) permitted all monasteries, except those of the Friars Minor Observantines and the Capuchins, to possess immovable property, and consequently the income derived therefrom; but the Carmelites and the Society of Jesus, in its professed houses, continue to practise the common poverty which forbids the possession of assured incomes.”
The Catholic humanist Sir Thomas More’s Utopia in 1516 further contributed to Communism and served as a basis upon which Marx and Engels would develop their ideas. In fact the communist soviets so loved Moore that they erected a monument in his memory:
Hailed as a Communist hero by Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and Karl Kautsky, More’s contribution to “the liberation of humankind” is commemorated, at Lenin’s suggestion, on a monument erected in 1918 in Aleksandrovsky Garden near the Kremlin.
- Margaret L. King (2014). Renaissance Humanism: An Anthology of Sources. Hackett Publishing. p. 157.
Note that Lenin formally readmitted the Jesuits into Russia in 1922. Lenin’s right-hand man Felix Dzerzhinsky who was the head of the Soviet Secret Police and the Cheka, had been Catholic and was such an admirer of the Jesuits that he once desired to become a Jesuit priest.
The Jesuits in the 17th and 18th centuries perfected the first system of communist governance in their Paraguayan reductions. The New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia admits:
(1) Conditions of Property
The economic basis was a sort of communism…The land and all that stood upon it was the property of the community. The land was apportioned among the caciques, who allotted it to the families under them. Agricultural instruments and draught-cattle were loaned from the common supply. No one was permitted to sell his plot of land or his house, called abamba, i.e. “own possession.” The individual efforts of the Indians, owing to their indolence, soon proved to be inadequate, whereupon separate plots were set aside as common fields, called Tupamba, i.e. “God’s property” which were cultivated by common labour under the guidance of the Padres. The products of these fields were placed in the common storehouse, and were used partly for the support of the poor, the sick, widows, orphans,Church Indians, etc., partly as seed for the next year, partly as reserve supply for unforeseen contingencies, and also as a medium of exchange for European goods and for taxes (see below). The yield of the private fields and of private effort became the absolute property of the Indians, and was credited to them individually in the common barter transactions, so that each received in exchange the goods he desired. Those abamba plots which gave a smaller yield because of faulty individual management were exchanged from time to time. The herds of livestock were also common property. The caballos del Santo, which were used in processions on festal occasions, were especially reserved. Thus the Reduction Los Santos Apostoles at one time owned 599 of these.”
R.W. Thompson’s Footprints of the Jesuits has a chapter on the Jesuit reductions which is worth reading also and likewise explicitly states that the reductions were what would be called communism in the modern age. I believe that is in Chapter 10. In the following chapter, Thompson tells how the Jesuits told the Indians that White men had “devils in their bodies,” hence the origin of the term “White devil” being anti-White Jesuit propaganda!
Sources show the term “social justice” to have originated from a Jesuit Luigi Taparelli, S.J.:
In his Church, State, and Society: An Introduction to Catholic Social Doctrine (Catholic University of America Press, 2011), J. Brian Benestad of the University of Scranton notes that “a Jesuit philosopher by the name of Luigi Taparelli D’Azeglio was the first to use the concept of social justice in his major work, Saggio teoretico di diritto.” Father Taparelli (1793-1862) served as rector of the Roman College and helped found La CiviltÀ Cattolica, the Italian Jesuit periodical.
Taparelli was a contemporary of Marx with Marx and Engels having developed their “science of socialism” during the same period as Taparelli’s “social justice.”
Karl Marx for five years was trained at a Jesuit school:
Marx was an average student during his school days. Until the age of 12, he was taught at home and from 1830 to 1835, he did his schooling at Jesuit High School in Trier.
And it was said by ex-Jesuit priest Alberto Rivera that Marx had been tutored by Jesuits in the British Museum on the tenets of communism. Marx having been a Jesuit coadjutor is further attested to by Otto von Bismark when, in his German newspaper said that Marx was under control of the Jesuit priest Peter Beckx, then Superior General of the Society of Jesus! Of this, Marx himself commented:
“Bismarck complained in his North German Gazette that I was in league with Father Beck, the leader of the Jesuit movement, and that we were keeping the socialist movement in such a condition that he could do nothing with it.”
“I will, when opportunity present, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all Protestants and Liberals to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth” Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction
The Society of Jesus, or the Jesuits, with their Sun Worship logo, operate in the highest echelons of the Jesuit Illuminati, or rather their leaders do. It is the Jesuit leadership that controls the Knights of Malta, Knights Templar, Knights of Columbus in the USA, and works closely with another secret order of the Roman Church, Opus Dei, which was created by the Jesuits. The Society of Jesus was the creation of Ignatius Loyola, who was born at the Castle of Loyola in the Basque province of Guipuzcoa in Spain on Christmas Eve 1491. He and a group of associates founded the Jesuit Order in 1537 and it was given papal approval in 1540. From there it expanded its influence until it reached its present status as one of the most powerful secret societies on earth. Loyola became the first Jesuit Superior General, also know as the ‘Father General’, and he sent his agents far and wide to set up schools, colleges, and seminaries.
BUDAPEST (Reuters) – Hungary’s government will stop financing gender studies university courses, Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s chief of staff said on Tuesday, marking one of the first concrete steps in a cultural shift signaled last month.
Re-elected in April to a third consecutive term, right-wing nationalist Orban said in July that major cultural and intellectual changes were in the works, adding that his landslide victory was “nothing short of a mandate to build a new era”.
Chief of staff Gergely Gulyas cited low enrolment numbers, which he said would be reason enough alone to shut down the courses, but also spelled out the government’s ideological opposition at a news conference.
“The Hungarian government is of the clear view that people are born either men or women. They lead their lives the way they think best, but beyond this, the Hungarian state does not wish to spend public funds on education in this area,” he said.
Orban’s supporters want a shift towards conservative values to end what they call a dominance of leftists and liberals in the arts, science and education.
The move against the gender studies courses is one of the first specific such government policies. Others included a move to reduce the independence of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in the allocation of public research funding.
Gender studies courses are taught at the state-run university ELTE and Central European University, which are among the top universities in Hungary.
Gulyas said those already enrolled could finish their studies but Budapest would stop financing the courses from the next academic year.
The proposal first surfaced in Hungarian media last week, triggering opposition from the social sciences faculty of ELTE.
“We consider it worrying that the proposal aims to shut down a course dealing with social relations between men and women, gender inequalities as well as issues of family and demographics,” Dean Gabor Juhasz said in a statement.
ELTE did not immediately comment on the decision on Tuesday.
It could not immediately give a total number of enrollees. Last year it planned to enroll 18 students in its master’s program but only 10 applied, state news agency MTI said.
CEU also declined immediate comment on Tuesday. It issued a statement after the proposal was first aired, saying the school “reaffirms its commitment to academic freedom and rejects any attempt at censoring academic curricula”.
CEU said it has 44 students enrolled in a two-year master’s program that offers two degrees, one Hungarian and one American. The Hungarian degrees are now at risk for future enrollees. CEU’s other gender studies students and PhD candidates only get U.S. degrees, which are unaffected.
CEU is founded by Hungarian-born U.S. financier George Soros. The government has made the demonization of Soros, who promotes liberal causes though his charities, a central plank of its ideology.
Pro-government daily Magyar Idok ran an opinion piece hailing the plan.
“Gender-faithful liberals have already caused irreparable harm in the souls of generations growing up in the past decades. We need to fight them without compromise and achieve a complete victory, otherwise they will end up destroying us,” sociologist Balint Botond wrote.