Lenin on "clericalist" nonsense

Hugh Rodwell m-14970 at mailbox.swipnet.se
Sat Aug 24 06:31:39 MDT 1996


Adolfo opines:

>The question that has to be answered is what kind of DECEPTION is hidden
>within the Churchly pretentions to a "liberation role" for the most solid of
>the the ideological pillars of the ruling classes through the ages.

And what would he say about the revolutionary Bohemian Hussites of Tabor
during the peasant revolutions of the Reformation?

He goes on:

>In what
>relation does that the "rrrrrevolutionist mouthings" of such theologians
>stand in the unflinching anti-communism which is the very essence of the
>Church as a DECEPTIVE AND REACTIONARY POLITICAL ORGANISATION!

Well and good. No quarter for any section of the church.

Why then all the shmoozling up to a section of the bourgeoisie in the shape
of the 'national bourgeoisie' for an alliance that can be nothing but
deceptive.

If the church in all its forms (including the churches in London at which
Adolfo has told us he's had meetings, presumably) is so treacherous, why
not the bourgeoisie? After all, isn't 'unflinching anti-communism ... the
very essence of the' *bourgeoisie* 'as a DECEPTIVE AND REACTIONARY'
*class*??

Cheers,

Hugh

PS Thanks to Matt Kelly in Ireland for the comments on Connolly. Perhaps
you could point us to some relevant articles or passages by Rosa L on this
question, Matt? It would be extremely interesting to see a debate between
her and James Connolly on the way a revolutionary Marxist party should deal
with Catholic workers! Lenin in the chair!

H




     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---




More information about the Marxism mailing list