2.3 Historical and perspective context in which the encyclical was written: “Centesimus Annus”, 1991 and brief comment of its content:
Our publication regarding the choice of the new Pope Leo XIV, aims to make clear the role of ideological shield that the Catholic Church fulfills and that it specifically and organically concretizes it. Therefore, we refer to the official position of the papacy in order to better understand the character and reactionary essence, counterrevolutionary that the Church maintains in general, the role that the new Pope has to fulfill and in the part that follows the present we will see the official positions of the Church in Peru, etc. We need to see this to arm ourselves ideologically and politically against the new reactionary campaign headed by the Catholic Church in collusion and struggle with Yankee imperialism, mainly, on the occasion of the election of the new Pope. Then to complete this part we will see the encyclical “Centesimus Annus”, for what we use as a source of the appointments and comment to the PCP document “On the two hills” (Peru, 1991).
The aforementioned encyclical was written in 1991, thirty-five years after the overthrow of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the restoration of capitalism in the USSR, and fifteen years after the same in China; at a time when a convergent offensive of imperialism, revisionism, and global reaction against Marxism was unfolding in collusion and conflict; when imperialism was proclaiming a "technological revolution," extending its dominion over the remains of what was once the socialist system, and proclaiming the definitive triumph of capitalism and bourgeois democracy. In November 1991, the PCP established that the convergent offensive had given way to a general counterrevolutionary offensive and the hegemony of the United States.
But when the proletariat guided by communist parties and with the light of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism learned to conquer power with the popular war, build socialism and with the cultural revolution continue the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat. And, when the task of international proletariat and communist parties remains to develop and direct the world proletarian revolution to its triumph sweeping from the face of the orb to imperialism, deeply and widely build socialism in all the spheres of society and with successive proletarian cultural revolutions 'make the earth a paradise': communism, the beginning of the kingdom of freedom for all humanity!
In that context, drawing lessons, we must analyze the new encyclical, conceiving it as part of the offensive of the
Imperialism, revisionism and world reaction, although with own and specific interests, those of the papacy, those of the Vatican and their theocratic dreams today sinisterly redivided.
Relate, the encyclical approach on the 'new evangelization' with the arrival in the mid -80s of Premost to Peru, as an Augustinian cure "missionary" is to say "evangelizer".
The encyclical says: "The 'New Evangelization' of which the modern world has urgent need and on which I have insisted on more than one occasion, must include among its essential elements the announcement of the social doctrine of the church that, as in the time of Leo XIII, remains ideal to indicate the rectus when it comes to responding to the great challenges of contemporary age, while the discredit of ideologies grows. It must be said that there is no true solution for the 'social issue' outside the gospel (...) ".
Like imperialism, the encyclical disseminates the supposed expiration of ideologies to sell its evangelical ideology, transnochada, false, of old idealistic darkness and always opposite to the new.
The problem of the 'new evangelization' refers expressly to how the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the Papacy in particular, views the role of Latin America; as they themselves say, half of the world's Catholics are in Latin America—as the current Pope (John Paul II) already said in 1984. Consequently, they are seeking to use the half-millennium since the discovery of America to advance a so-called 'new evangelization' movement aimed at defending the bastion, half of the parishioners, half of the bastion that sustains their power—that is what they seek. Thus, the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the Papacy, aims to defend their positions in America and serve North American imperialism, which primarily dominates Latin America.
They intend, as always, to defend the existing social order, to be its ideological shield because the ideology of reaction, the ideology of imperialism, has expired, and then to accommodate themselves, to continue surviving, but the perspective will be different, not as it was before.
Continuing with the encyclical, it is literally against revolutionary violence, against class struggle, against just and revolutionary wars:
"Extremist groups that try to resolve such controversies by means of weapons easily find political and military support, are armed and trained for war, while those who strive to find peaceful and humane solutions, respectful of the legitimate interests of all parties, remain isolated and often fall victim to their adversaries... In short, the threat of atomic war, capable of destroying humanity, looms over the entire world. Science used for military purposes places the decisive instrument at the disposal of hatred fostered by ideologies. But war can end, without victors or vanquished, in a suicide of humanity, which is why we must repudiate the logic that leads to it, the idea that the struggle for the destruction of the adversary, contradiction, and war itself are factors of progress and advancement in history. When we understand the need for this rejection, both the logic of 'total war' and that of class struggle must necessarily enter into crisis."
He speaks of the "fall of Marxism" and invokes dialogue: "While Marxism considered that only by taking social contradictions to the extreme could they be resolved through violent conflict, the struggles that led to the fall of Marxism tenaciously insist on attempting all avenues of negotiation, dialogue, and witnessing to the truth, appealing to the conscience of the adversary and seeking to awaken in them a sense of common human dignity." ... May men learn to fight for justice without violence, renouncing class struggle in internal disputes and war in international ones!"
But he speaks of the truth to falsify history, because whether he refers to the USSR or Eastern Europe, in both cases there has been either a coup d'état or national uprisings or even a war like the one in Yugoslavia; furthermore, in neither of those places has there been Marxism, but rather revisionism since 1956 with Khrushchev, and precisely what has occurred is a logical consequence of capitalist restoration.
Against the As John Paul II states, throughout the history of humanity, the entire process of transformation of modes of production has been through wars, to move from the primitive community to slavery like Egypt or Rome: to move from slavery to feudalism, slaves rebelled in countless wars against slave owners until feudalism was established, but the newly imposed system did not end the oppression; the oppressed became peasant serfs of the feudal lords, against whom they rose up again in immense and tenacious peasant struggles to wrest the lands they worked and that belonged to them and to destroy feudalism. Among the feudal lords themselves, intense wars for power were experienced, until powerful European kingdoms were defined, for example, the Spanish kingdom or Tsarist Russia or the Manchu Empire in the East.
Also during this stage of feudalism, just as there were wars between feudal lords, there were fierce wars for political and economic power between the hierarchs of the Catholic Church, between the popes, among the bishops, such as the well-known Pope Borgia and family.
The wars of the Crusades to impose their religion on other parts of the world, as well as the atrocious extermination of the native Peruvians and Latin Americans when they conquered America with their swords and divine crosses, under the savage Jesuit invasions, are also part of the history of the Catholic Church.
Then, with the collapse of feudalism, capitalism developed and generated the proletariat, the last exploited class on earth, which must destroy this ominous system also with wars, but revolutionary wars that will finally put an end to all systems of exploitation, definitively leading humanity toward true freedom. And the violence we proletarians, we communists, preach as the vanguard of the class, need not be justified, nor do we lie about its necessity: in the face of an iniquitous system that provokes plundering wars like the two imperialist world wars, the right thing to do is to destroy capitalism, which has become its final phase of imperialism, and build socialism and the bright future of communism: "Rebellion is justified!"
So those false, incense-scented words conceal realities to attack just, correct, and necessary revolutionary violence and to defend counterrevolutionary violence that is unjust and erroneous, defending exploitation and oppression.
He spreads his idealistic theocratic conception of "Christian revelation" as a means of understanding reality:
"Moreover, man, created for freedom, carries within himself the wound of original sin, which continually pushes him toward evil and makes him in need of redemption. This doctrine is not only an integral part of Christian revelation, but also has great hermeneutical value in that it helps us understand human reality."
First, behind the absurd and unscientific idea of original sin, they conceal the existence of exploitation and exploiters; second, humankind doesn't need any crucifixion or any redemption, but rather emancipation from exploitation and oppression, and their emancipation is the work of their own actions; and third, if they believe in an imaginary final divine judgment, if that's their conception, then why do they elevate themselves above their god and judge us as followers of their supposed evil one by calling us terrorists? Why so much condemnation of those of us who fight for the abolition of exploitation here on Earth? Referring broadly to the events in Eastern Europe in 1989, which marked a milestone in the bankruptcy of revisionism and were the object of imperialist strife, he neither condemned one nor repudiated the other, but rather described it as a crisis of Marxism and drew conclusions beneficial to his class interests:
"The first consequence has been, in some countries, the encounter between the Church and the workers' movement... For almost a century, this movement had largely fallen under the hegemony of Marxism... In the crisis of Marxism, spontaneous forms of workers' consciousness emerge again, which reveal a demand for justice and recognition of the dignity of work, in accordance with the social doctrine of the Church... The crisis of Marxism does not eliminate the existing situations of injustice and oppression in the world, which Marxism itself exploited and fed on... To those who today seek a new and authentic theory and praxis of liberation, the Church offers not only social doctrine and, in general, its teachings about the person redeemed by Christ, but also his concrete commitment to help combat marginalization and suffering."
Here he recognizes the influence of Marxism on the labor movement, and since he believes there is a crisis of Marxism, he applies "In troubled waters, fishermen profit," the Catholic Church's old dream of leading the proletariat; and since the causes have not disappeared, she emerges as the solution with her social doctrine.
Regarding the development of the productive forces, he reduces them to the personal exercise of seeking God:
"Ultimately, development should not be understood exclusively economic, but rather from an integral human dimension. It is not only a matter of elevating all peoples to the level enjoyed today by the very rich countries, but also of founding a more dignified life on the basis of solidarity work, effectively growing the dignity and creativity of every person, their capacity to respond to their own vocation and, therefore, to God's call. The culminating point of development entails the exercise of the right and duty to seek God, to know Him, and to live according to that knowledge."
He persists in his staunch defense of private property because it is a natural right of man to enjoy the goods created by God and acquired by the sweat of his brow, with his labor that does not exploit but rather dignifies and embellishes his defense with the supposed universal destiny of those goods, that is, not impeding the right of other men to appropriate a part of God's creation with their own labor. He says that Leo XIII already affirmed and argued:
"...the natural character of the right to private property...this right is fundamental in every person for their autonomy and development; it has always been defended by the Church to this day. Likewise, the Church teaches that the ownership of goods is not an absolute right... While forcefully proclaiming the right to private property, the Pope affirmed with equal clarity that the 'use' of goods, entrusted to one's own freedom, is subordinated to the original and common destiny of created goods and also to the will of Jesus Christ."
And John Paul II, relying on these words of Leo XIII, reaffirms the same ideas:
"The primordial origin of all that is good is the very act of God who created the world and man, and who gave him the earth to dominate it with his labor and enjoy its fruits... In this way, he appropriates a part of the earth, which he has conquered through his labor: this is the origin of individual property. Obviously, he also has the responsibility of not preventing other men from obtaining their share of God's gift; indeed, he must cooperate with them to jointly dominate the entire earth."
This is how John Paul II conceals the capitalist economic basis, surplus value, and exploitative relations.
He defends the family as the center:
"The first fundamental structure in favor of 'human ecology' is the family... We must once again consider the family as the sanctuary of life... it is sacred... it is the place where life, a gift from God, can be welcomed and adequately protected against the many attacks to which it is exposed... Against the so-called culture of death, the family constitutes the seat of the culture of life."
In capitalism, and even more so in imperialism, the family is there to protect the inheritance of goods acquired through exploitation; it is a concept opposed to communist society, in which the entire group will look after everyone. Today, only the families of the exploiters can protect the rights of their children; however, the iniquitous system does not even allow for the development of social relations between the members of the so-called family because individualism is so exacerbated in the bourgeoisie that there is no greater interest than the particular over the general.
And among the proletariat and the popular masses, there is not even the right to decide how many children they can have, and they are imposed birth control programs that the Church itself covertly facilitates. It officially prohibits abortion, but secretly works behind the stupid and mendacious slogan of "responsible parenthood."
With the hypocrisy it has practiced for thousands of years, it hides its pro-imperialist position as a defender of the market economy, even though the phrase "social market economy" is not included in any paragraph of the document. Its criticism of consumerism or the uncontrolled market does not mean it does not defend the market; what it rather reveals is its pro-European but ultimately imperialist position. What happens is that, foreseeing that Yankee imperialism is advancing to become the sole hegemonic superpower, it cannot resent it and accommodates itself:
"Returning now to the initial question, can we perhaps say that, after the failure of communism, the victorious system will be capitalism, and that the efforts of countries trying to rebuild their economies and societies will be directed toward it? Is this perhaps the model that must be proposed to Third World countries seeking the path to true economic and civil progress?... The answer is obviously complex. If by 'capitalism' we mean an economic system that recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the consequent responsibility for the means of production, and free human creativity in the economic sector, the answer is certainly positive, although it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a 'business economy,' a 'market economy,' or simply a 'free economy.' But if by 'capitalism' we mean a system in which freedom, in If the economic sphere is not framed within a solid legal context that places it at the service of integral human freedom and considers it as a particular dimension of it, whose core is ethical and religious, then the answer is absolutely negative. The Marxist solution has failed, but phenomena of marginalization and exploitation remain in the world, especially in the Third World, as well as phenomena of human alienation, especially in the most advanced countries; the voice of the Church rises against such phenomena.
"The Church has no models to propose... For this objective, the Church offers, as an ideal and indispensable guide, its own social doctrine..."
"Business cannot be considered solely as a 'society of capital': it is at the same time a society of persons, in which those who contribute the capital necessary for its activity and those who collaborate with their labor participate in diverse ways and with specific responsibilities."... "The ownership of the means of production, both in the industrial and agricultural fields, is just and legitimate when it is used for useful work; but it becomes illegitimate when it is not valued or serves to impede the work of others."... Ownership is justified when, in the proper ways and circumstances, it creates opportunities for work and human growth for all."
He defends the bourgeois dictatorship against the dictatorship of the proletariat:
"The Church values the system of democracy to the extent that it ensures the participation of citizens in political choices and guarantees the governed the possibility of electing and controlling their own rulers or of peacefully replacing them in a timely manner." ..."The Church also does not turn a blind eye to the danger of fanaticism or fundamentalism among those who, in the name of an ideology with scientific or religious pretensions, believe they can impose their conception of truth and goodness on other people."
Finally, regarding his conception of the much-touted human rights in summary, he says:
"The source and synthesis of these rights is, in a certain sense, religious freedom, understood as the right to live in the truth of one's own faith and in conformity with the transcendent dignity of one's own person."
Therein lies the core of his rights: to live in the truth of the Catholic faith, in the transcendence of human life.
Finally, we will look at the role of the Catholic Church in Peru in arming ourselves ideologically and politically against this new reactionary campaign, both global and in Peru, that has been unleashed with the appointment of Pope Leo XIV as head of the Catholic Church.
