A recent document by a European think tank decries the “accelerating financial expansion of movements working to dismantle decades of hard-won sexual and reproductive rights across Europe.” The report, published by the Brussels-based European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual & Reproductive Rights (EPF), highlights the “anti-rights and religious extremist actors in Europe,” but focuses mostly on just one religion: Christianity. Through this inherent bias, the organization admits the one institution that its members and their allies fear—the Catholic Church—as the organizing force behind the “religious ideologues [who] are executing meticulous, long-term strategies for power.”
EPF’s executive committee consists of one member of the European Parliament, along with members of parliament from several constituent states of the EU, with two additional politicians from outside the Union. All of the committee members come from socially left-wing political parties—from a party of the French “center,” Renaissance (founded by French President Emmanuel Macron) to the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party.
A large, wealthy, and pro-abortion coalition
Neil Datta, the author of the 158-page study titled “The Next Wave: How Religious Extremism Is Reclaiming Power”, has been the executive director of EPF since 2004. Before joining the Forum, Datta was the coordinator of the Parliamentary Programme of the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network, one of the funding partners of the EPF—an ironic background for someone who is spotlighting the “$1.18 billion in anti-gender funding between 2019 and 2023.”
The Federation generates nearly $121 million annually. If this level of funding held consistent between 2019 and 2023, this pro-abortion coalition, by itself, gathered half of the total worth of the “religious ideologues” condemned by EPF.
Besides the International Planned Parenthood Federation, EPF’s other funding partners are global gender-ideology powerhouses: the United Nations Population Fund; the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; and the Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros (among others). These organizations, along with their ideological allies, have significantly more resources than the $1.18 billion of their opponents.
Ideological bias against the Catholic Church
Datta’s report (which is not freely available for download, but requires a €25 donation) builds upon two previous studies from EPF about “European anti-gender actors.”
The 2021 study touted that “this [anti-gender] movement had mobilised over US$700 million between 2009 and 2018, channelling resources to establish five pan-European platforms: an anti-abortion coalition, an anti-LGBTQI network, a Christian political party, a social media mobilisation hub and a pseudo-Catholic far-right alliance.” The director-activist never defined the “pseudo-Catholic” term used throughout the study.
The term “Catholic” appears 277 times in the June 2025 document. “Russia”/”Russian” might be the only term that turns up more often (395 times), but this is often in a geopolitical context instead of a religious one (“Orthodox” appears 93 times, a third of the mentions of “Catholic”).
Islam is mentioned just once (outside of footnotes) in a study purportedly about religious extremism, and that single reference wasn’t even in the context of internal European politics. Datta noted that Family Watch International, an American “anti-gender” group,” has been active in engaging with the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation (OIC) … having served as the catalyst for the 2023 homophobic legislation adopted in Uganda.”
At first, Datta mentions the Church or openly Catholic organizations mainly in passing. When he does mention them, he regularly emphasizes their supposedly extreme stances—such as ”ultra-Catholic media organisations;” and the Population Research Institute as a “far-right Catholic organisation established by priests.”
The EPF executive director then states that a “Catholic financial network is quietly gaining ground —not just bankrolling activism but reshaping Europe’s political playing field.” Two centers of this apparent network are specifically French organizations, along with a broader “aristo-clerical” coalition on the continent.
Datta maintains his earlier slanted labeling—highlighting that one of the four most-significant groups in France “operates at the nexus of traditional Catholicism and far-right politics, financing digital infrastructure for ultra-conservative Catholic media in France.”
A leftist fixation on aristo-clerical” networks
The author led into his focus on “aristo-clerical” networks by noting that “the German religious extremist funding landscape is dominated by aristocrat-led foundations.” He launches a full attack on the “European aristocrats [that] bring three essential components in addition to their wealth and perceived prestige value: a generalised disdain for democracy and liberal values; a worldview based on religious legitimation for inherited social, political and economic inequality; and being part of a vast, transnational and endogamous network.”
Datta singles out the extended Habsburg family for particular scrutiny. He claims that they “actively promote anti-gender ideologies, lending a charismatic face to illiberal authoritarianism.” He does not point a finger at the direct heir of Karl, the last Habsburg emperor (beatified by the Catholic Church in 2004). Instead, the EPF leader blames Viktor Orbán, the prime minister of Hungary, who has “strategically incorporated Habsburg descendants into his political network”—especially, his government’s ambassador to the Holy See, Archduke Eduard.
The diplomat, in Datta’s view, “stands out as the most public-facing figure…[who] has also cultivated a social media presence, blending personal musings with advocacy for traditional values and subtle monarchist ideals.” Who knew that Archduke-Ambassador Eduard’s account on X/Twitter (with 109,000+ followers), along with his several books, is a noteworthy threat to “democracy and liberal values” in Europe?
The accusation is particularly exaggerated in light of recent moves to curb free speech in Germany and religious freedom in Spain, with the former arresting dozens in June over their online insults of politicians, and the latter fast-tracking legislation that would criminalize “conversion therapy.” Despite vocal opposition to the proposed law in Spain, mainly from evangelicals, it would also criminalize Catholic apostolates.
Earlier in 2025, authorities in Valencia opened an investigation over “potential hate crimes and criminal conspiracy charges against the San Vicente Mártir Diocesan Schools Foundation, following claims it attempted to ‘cure homosexuality’ in students.” Saúl Castro, a left-wing activist in Spain, also released a book in 2022 that accused multiple Catholic priests and bishops of supporting “conversion therapy”—and advocated that such clerics be sent to jail.
Ironically, the EPF executive director spotlights free speech as an issue towards the end of the study. Predictably, Datta attacks his ideological opponents, decrying how “right-wing libertarians increasingly advocate for absolute and unregulated freedom of speech. Such advocacy tends to be selective, defending hate speech while simultaneously suppressing democratic criticism of authoritarian leaders and anti-rights agendas.”
He also issues an eyebrow-raising claim—that “the media sphere is no longer a neutral marketplace of ideas where superior narratives naturally prevail. Instead, it is deeply skewed in favour of anti-rights actors, fragmented into algorithm-driven echo chambers that reinforce existing biases and amplify polarisation.”
The Catholic Church as ‘puppet master’ in ‘religious extremist activism’
Datta dedicates 17 pages to the Catholic Church’s “substantial influence across Europe”—along with that of traditionalist Protestant and Eastern Orthodox communions. The Church, in his opinion, is the main “engine room of anti-gender mobilisation in Europe”—in other words, the center of a continent-wide conspiracy.
Besides the Church’s overt participation/influence in Europe’s political structures (through diplomacy and its observer status at the EU), he hypes the “informal and often covert forms of influence….through two main channels: first, via individuals with personal ties to the Catholic hierarchy or lay groups; second, through Church-organised NGOs (ChONGOs), which act as proxies for Church positions.”
The author targets the members of Opus Dei, in particular, as “anti-rights puppet masters.” He goes into detail about multiple institutional and individual connections between the group and European political leaders, even with the thinnest of affiliations. For example, Datta zeroes in on “Ja zum Leben,” a philanthropic group in Germany, and its apparent “extended financial and ideological connections” to Opus Dei. The basis for his accusation: “The foundation, which supports numerous anti-gender Organisations … is part of an informal network centred around the Forum of German Catholics, which includes Opus Dei members.”
Datta connected Opus Dei to his new concept of a “ChONGO,” which is “an organisation created by a religious entity (Church), resembling an NGO, established to promote issues that the Church seeks to highlight. ChONGOs are, to varying degrees, funded, staffed and governed by representatives of the Church.”
His first example: the World Youth Alliance (WYA), which he labeled “Opus Dei for Kids.” WYA supposedly “aggressively pushes a covert…agenda rooted in ultra-conservative Catholic doctrine;” “operates as a Vatican front, backed by the Holy See’s UN Mission and extremist groups;” and has “deep ties…to Opus Dei-affiliated private donors.”
The left-wing writer extends similar accusations against the Federation of Catholic Family Associations in Europe (FAFCE)—that its constituent groups are an “advocacy arm for the Catholic Church within European political and policy spaces, presenting itself as a grassroots network of Catholic family associations while being subordinated to diocesan structures and Vatican-affiliated entities.”
He also devotes some attention to other Catholic groups with apparent ties to Opus Dei: the International Catholic Legislators Network (ICLN), the Fondation Jérôme Lejeune (FJL), Teen STAR, and the European Christian Political Movement (ECPM).
The ‘Regressive’ Catholic Church, promoter of ‘theology masquerading as science’
Datta spends much of the latter half of his study (not including annexes/appendices) on how the aforementioned organizations have extended their influence throughout the European political landscape. He mentioned WYA and Teen STAR over 100 additional times, respectively (including footnotes). Datta scrutinized the former over their “transnational web of youth anti-SRHR movements, abstinence education and natural family planning outlets by working alongside the infrastructure of the Catholic Church and particularly the Opus Dei-affiliated network of universities.”
The author spotlights Opus Dei a further 64 times in the latter part of his study. ICLN got 61 new mentions. FJL merited an additional fifty-two. The author also noted that “[d]espite advocating patriarchal norms, women occupy notable governance roles within anti-gender and religious extremist organisations….Female leadership is particularly prominent in some of the most influential entities, including Fundación Jérôme Lejeune (Spain)…and the WYA.”
The EPF executive director bewails how these organizations, along with their allies, “target young people, pregnant women and LGBTQI communities to subtly undermine access to contraception, abortion, comprehensive sexual education and same-sex relationships. Modern in appearance but regressive at their core, such services are typically promoted by…(ChONGOs), cloaked in credible branding and backed by distorted evidence. The result is a strategic effort to displace rights- and evidence-based health care with theology masquerading as science.”
Near the end of his study, Datta emphasizes how these organizations “have expanded their reach and influence across Africa,” and their participation in “efforts aim to shape African societies and influence policies, particularly in opposition to human rights in sexuality and reproductive health.” He blames the Catholic Church for inspiring these groups: “Pioneered by the Vatican, all anti-gender actors….have seemingly convinced themselves with their crocodile tears that upholding…colonial legal frameworks criminalising same-sex relations and/or abortion rights is the real path to African sovereignty.”
One can take away two overarching messages from Datta’s study and all of his activist sources: All of the roads traveled by “anti-gender actors” lead to Rome, and after 225 years of accruing vast power in Europe, secularists are still intimidated by the Catholic Church and see the Catholic Faith as the main obstacle to their ideological goals.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
At least we know who the enemies of Christ are. We pray for a conversion of their hearts. In the meantime, we Catholics “stay awake” as we are admonished by Scripture.
Great article Matthew. Thank you very much!
The defining feature of the geo-cultural entity we call “the West” is not simply its corruption by a centuries-old revolutionary process, but also the persistent and often successful counter-movement that resists that corruption from within. In this struggle, the interests of the Catholic Church and the West converge. Surrounded by ideological and political enemies that seek its destruction, what is under attack is not merely the West’s decadence—but its very essence, which predates modern liberalism and finds its true origin in the Christian Middle Ages, of which the Catholic Church was the mother.
It is telling that this Brussels-based report mentions “Catholic” hundreds of times and “Islam” only once. The real threat, as they see it, is not radicalism, but Catholic order. That secularist networks still fear “Rome” after two centuries of dominance is a backhanded tribute to the enduring cultural and moral power of the Faith.
Who, today, defends the Church and the West? President Trump may seem erratic and divisive, but without the military, economic, and biopolitical protection still extended by the United States, the West would collapse—and its collapse would mark the visible disappearance of the Catholic Church as a cultural and civilisational force.
Within the anti-Western bloc—including China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea—the Church enjoys no freedom of expression, no public presence, no room for evangelization. According to the World Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders, the nations with the lowest levels of press freedom are, year after year, communist or Islamic.
Yes, the West legalises infanticide, gender ideology, and assisted suicide. But it also harbours a vigorous and growing religious and moral reaction. Families in France, Italy, and the United States are still choosing homes based on proximity to traditional chapels and schools where they can raise their children in the faith. No one emigrates to Arab or communist countries for that purpose—because such freedom does not exist there.
It is legitimate to resist the doctrinal and pastoral failures of Church leaders, and to criticize the political and military errors of the West. But it would be gravely irresponsible to wish for the total collapse of the few moral and religious goods that still survive—and, in some places, are once again beginning to flourish—within the Church and within the West.
Sounding a little desparate, aren’t we?
Needless to say, secularism itself is in no way a religion.
A good time to compare and contrast these two religions of the world: unnatural (!) LGBTQ-ism, and the natural religion of Islam overlooked by the Brussels un-think tank (For a later time, a more favorable appreciation of Islamic “fitrah” as partly congruent with “natural law.”)
Four preliminary points:
FIRST, the ersatz LGBTQ un-mindset is a defensive collage of anti-binary afflictions/ fixations against binary/complementary reality. For its part, Islam is a collage of more historical pseudo-identities, but also engaged in a “defensive” war—either soft or jihadist—until all the world is bedded in its big tent.
SECOND, is mega-tribal Islam is an historical analogue to anti-historical LGBTQ tribalism? Islam, is also an eclectic collection: some pagan elements (insiders versus infidels, continued pilgrimage to a renovated Ka’ba in Mecca), many Judea-Christian elements accreted into the largely biographical Qur’an (a folk hero, remotely like Fr. James Martin?), three of the five pillars of Islam are Judea-Christian (almsgiving, fasting, and prayer), global cosmopolitanism (beginning with Arabian expansion into Persia in A.D. 750), accretion of recent Western “nationalism”—but more as a veneer over the ahistorical (!) family of Islam (the umma), and an inscrutable Allah whose cumulative dictates can contradict and “abrogate” earlier truths. Today one or two modern Islamic scholars propose a broadened Islamic eclecticism, to include people of all major non-Christian religions—Confucian and Hindu—because they, too, are “people of the book.” Composite monotheism in an ever bigger binder, and with the Triune One suppressed into a polytheistic triad of Father, Son, and…Mary (there is no Holy Spirit).
THIRD, the presupposition of the LGBTQ-ism is carnal and sensate; while the presupposition of Islam is indecisively both sensate and abstract, e.g., pre-Islamic polygamy bonded with “submission” to a totally inscrutable God. A remote God who totally “is,” but who does not act in time as gratuitous grace leavening our personal and universal human history. Instead, eclectic Islam amalgamates and absorbs; while alphabetical LGBTQ-ism is equally engulfing—as in the redefinition of “marriage” and of what used to be the fully relational human person.
FOURTH, recalling St. Paul’s preaching to the Gentiles and Greeks, and the difference between Christianity and the merely symbolic world religions of the day, this from Benedict XVI:
“If one investigates this concept more closely, however, one encounters something unexpected that—as far as I can tell—is glossed over in almost all the pertinent studies. The Church Fathers found the seeds of the Word, NOT IN THE RELIGIONS OF THE WORLD, BUT RATHER IN PHILOSOPHY, that is, in the process of critical reason directed against the (pagan) religions, in the history of progressive reason, and not in the history of religion” (Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, “On the Way to Jesus Christ” Ignatius, 2005, p. 72, caps added).
SUMMARY: Like Arianism, the un-thinking “Next Wave” expresses and enables a resurgent paganism trying to displace the coherence of revealed Faith & human Reason, as defended by the Catholic Church.
These folks should consult the Richmond, Virginia FBI office. I guess paranoia’s not just a USA thing.
What have Europeans done lately with their hard won ” reproductive rights” besides not reproducing?
This is Antichrist. It will go.
Baby Lives Matter
Wow, I only wish we were half as dangerous and well-organized as he pretends to think we are.
Dear EPF, are those shadowy Catholic power-mongering ideologues in the room with us now? Perhaps next to the albino “Opus Dei monks”? What utter rubbish.
What a glorious joke! The people who wrotethis ridiculous anti Catholic screed will be the first to fall from roofs when the jihadis take power.
None so blind as those who refuse to see.
Time to wake up, America!
Thank you! Surely someone can put that invidious, bigoted document into the public forum; sooner or later, anyway.
An interesting omission for Islam, given the fact that militant Muslims are responsible for 22,000 deaths in Africa this year.
Islam’s motto should be “Chop off some heads, and hearts and minds will follow.”
Yet another reason that the United States should in NO WAY be a member of NATO or in any way involved in an essential alliance of trade or defense with any European nation. There is, quite simply, little or nothing left to defend in Europe.
An interview with Bernadett Petri, who is mentioned in the document.
Hungary Today: Brussels’ New Report Is an Openly Anti-Christian Attack on True European Values
2025.07.08
Article begins:
On June 26th, the European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights (EPF) published The Next Wave—How Religious Extremism Is Reclaiming Power, a report that claims to reveal the growing influence of so-called “anti-feminist” religious groups in Europe. Its funding comes from donors such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Open Society Foundations (linked to George Soros), and IPPF — organizations that are often based outside Europe and have a clear interest in steering social policy on the continent. Ministerial Commissioner Bernadett Petri, who is also mentioned in the report, called the document a clear attack on Christianity.
You recently raised concerns about the report titled “The Next Wave—How Religious Extremism Is Reclaiming Power,” published by a Brussels-based network. Could you elaborate on what you find particularly problematic in this report?
I think this report is actually a very important example of the extent to which anti-Christian sentiment is gaining ground in Europe, and particularly in the European Union. It is an openly anti-Christian piece of work that fits perfectly into the trend regularly reported by several sources, including the American publication The Voice of the Martyrs: namely, that Christianity has become the most persecuted religion in the world today.
This material is relevant in several respects. One is that it presents the rise of conservatives as a “counter-revolution” that is harmful to progressive Europe and poses a serious risk, because it challenges traditional Christian values such as the family model and the social role of churches. However, it is important to emphasize that church organizations have been stable elements of society for centuries, even millennia: they have significant experience in education, family support, and social services, and their decisive power cannot be replaced. We have long seen a kind of distancing from this role on the part of the EU, and this parliamentary forum—which represents the most radical gender and LGBTQ+ movements—is explicitly questioning this traditional role.
Not surprised that no mention of Islam if the report was about money being spent against LGBTQ rights and abortion etc. as the Muslims take little interest in social issues. What is interesting though is the perceived threat of the European Catholic Church when the Church views itself very weak and ineffective there. Many Church leaders have all but given up on the Church in Germany, the Netherlands and Holland. And who would accuse the French Church of being any kind of a threat? Very interesting that the Churches opponents see us as a threat when we consider ourselves very weak.
Some Muslim parents recently took interest in mandatory sex education in Maryland public schools. Thank goodness for their opposition.
Not sex education. I think you meantf forcible ratification and deification of sodomy. And yes they did. What irony.
As a European I wish to know what are these ”ultra-Catholic media organisations”? I don’t know of any such organisation, and I’d love to tune in to hear their message!
I wonder if the authors of this report actually live in Europe or speak any of the continent’s languages. Or could it be that this report was written two or three centuries earlier, with access to insiders’ knowledge of Europe’s vast “aristo-clerical networks”.
Today’s European Catholics would be rather bemused when they learn that their insipid clergymen apparently are capable of wielding “substantial influence across Europe”. In reality they are completely obvlious to the ways of the world, whilst selling out the Gospel for half a penny (at least Judas got 12 silverlings)!
I must confess I had to to laugh out loud when I read this, but it’s actually quite tragic.
It is also rather absurd that the people who have been peddling baseless studies claiming that lack of orgasms causes genocide and child abuse to claim that they are defending evidence based medicine. And then claim that we are the ones who deny evidence based care. The world is inverted to them.
The vileness is so clearly evident! Neill Datta is clearly a play thing of satan and will be damned unless he wishes up fast!!
What may alarm anti Catholic ideologue Neil Datta is the Trump effect. Catholicism doesn’t seem to have clout, some here lament Church weakness. Although with regained freedom it possesses the potential. “What makes them dangerous is that they have a real chance of rolling back human rights for actual people” (Datta to EU).
Far right government frightens Datta. “We know Russia funds Europe’s far Right. But what does it get in return?” (Datta in Linkedin). Neil Datta, like many of us, likely doesn’t perceive the link of Russian Orthodoxy and its political influence within Russia to oppose the LGBT tide. Plus its willingness to find allies outside the fold.
Much is up to Pope Leo’s leadership for Catholicism to take its stand. Although he’ll need to modify his Francis I discipleship. What might be gained is a united Christian wave, rapprochement with the Orthodox Churches and with that resistance to Islam in Europe and now with the Left’s delving into Islam in the US.
Fr. Morello rightly highlights Neil Datta’s alarm at the possible resurgence of a morally serious, publicly confident Catholicism—one that refuses to bend to the spirit of the age. But caution is needed before interpreting every countercultural force as an ally. While Datta frets about Russia funding Europe’s “far-right,” we should ask: what does Russia get in return?
The Russian Orthodox Church is not simply a moral force but a state instrument, deeply enmeshed with a regime that suppresses religious freedom, including Catholicism. The SSPX, FSSP, ICKSP, and the Institute of the Good Shepherd have seminaries across the secular West—but not in Russia. Catholicism is not among the “tolerated” religions there, and all missionary activity is strictly prohibited. While Datta sees the Church as “dangerous” for daring to propose moral truth, Russian Orthodoxy functions as a cultural fortress serving national interests.
A Catholic revival must therefore avoid naive alliances. Yes, we need rapprochement with the East—but true unity cannot be built on shared opposition to Western liberalism alone. It must also rest on freedom for the Church to preach the Gospel in every nation, Russia included.
While I agree in principle Paolo, the close relationship, which coalesces a vision of a Russian World, the former Soviet ideology of resistance to the decadent West now adopted by Putin and the Russian Church – is itself a shared conviction of many in the US, of European moral decadence, the EU and its radical secular humanism. Unfortunately, as tragic as the Ukraine Russia war is, Ukraine was and is a corrupt nation that was manipulated by the Biden administration.
The political objectives of Russian support of the Right in W Europe to weaken the EU, Nato cohesion while true do not entirely discredit the moral objective to support traditional Christian values. It remains possible that there can be a rapprochement with the US and president Trump. Currently, there’s a remarkable ethical affinity between both nations, Russia and the current US administration on moral principles, specifically resistance to the LGBT agenda. Ironically then, Catholicism is closer to Russia’s ethical forum than it is to the EU [we see France incorporating abortion rights in its constitution, Spain considering the same]. If peace can be achieved in Ukraine perhaps during the current talks it may offer an opportunity to end Russian encroachment, perhaps cooperation on shared values.
Dear Fr. Morello,
Thank you for your thoughtful response. While I share your alarm at the West’s moral decadence, I remain sceptical of the suggestion that Russia — under its current religious-political synthesis — offers a viable moral ally for the Catholic Church.
Just days ago, Patriarch Kirill declared that Russia is now “living in very favourable conditions,” with no threat to the Church, and that even the intelligentsia has “converted.” He proclaimed that Russia’s divine mission is to “expel the devil who intends to separate man from his Lord,” and called for spiritual strength to secure military victory — implicitly, in Ukraine. The liturgy included prayers “for our country, protected by God, and for its president Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin… and the victorious army.”
This is not a Christian witness born of repentance or sacrifice. It is a sacralisation of State power, where the Church becomes the voice of imperial ambition. When the sacrament of baptism is recast as the mystical foundation of the Russian State and its universal vocation, we are no longer in the realm of moral conservatism — we are in the realm of political theology, dangerously reminiscent of the very ideologies that once disfigured Europe.
Yes, Western Europe suffers from spiritual amnesia. But the answer to secular nihilism is not a post-Orthodox Caesaropapism cloaked in piety. Between the atheistic West and the self-consecrated East, the Catholic Church must chart a third way: one that neither blesses the decadence of freedom nor sanctifies authoritarianism in the name of tradition.
What Russia now offers is not a Christian renewal, but a mirage of moral strength — a Christianity in service to empire, not conversion.
There’s that tertium quid thing again “between the poles”.
You can get to a point where the “middle way” -alleged too- is so overplayed it works like a dead horse trying to reclaim lost pasture and un-clocked heats while mobilizing the other dead horses for group commiseration therapy so they feel the comforts of realities, wholeness, unities and time.
You not me.
Modify his discipleship? I believe Prevost, like Bergoglio, is on the other team.
In the book of Revelation spiritual prostitute religion is destroyed by the nations of a political beast . Revelation 17: 16 the United nations is acting like a eighth king against the Catholic Church abuse lawsuits and bankruptcys.This was all prophecy to John.
Europe slowly but effectively abandoned its Catholic roots beginning with the reformation and peaking with the French Revolution. Everything within European society since that time has been a consistent and unchecked attack on all things that are of God. Hence, the freemasons, illuminati (or nutty), et al, have taken control of banks, governments and nations, with the unifying result of molding a consolidated Europe that is itself the enemy of the Christian God.
This is why Islam has been basically able to peacefully and passively invade Europe as well as the UK.
In the USA, the character Mamdani is mistakenly considered to be a liberal, a socialist or a communist. He is none of these things – Mamdani is a radical islamist, bent on building a permanent islamic foothold in America’s largest city with the ultimate goal of establishing sharia law. And countless New Yorkers are enthusiastically supporting him.
We who remain faithful to Jesus Christ know how this plays out. Europe is a lost cause; the united nations, a failed organization. The children of God are becoming fewer, and their allies grow thinner and weaker with each passing day.
We have much yet to endure as the time of antichrist approaches, but, as we have been told by our Blessed Mother, when all seems lost, Christ will reign victorious.
We must maintain Hope.
Hey, Paul Rasavage, it sounds like you’ve channeled some unhinged Shia Islamist who says they’ll take over the West by taking over our institutions.
Where’s the Hollywood drama in that? Why can’t the fall of beachhead New York in the 21st-century United States be at least more like a Cecil B. de Mill extravaganza—more like the dramatic fall of the impregnable Constantinople in the 15th Century? Yes, about A.D. 1453 in technicolor Constantinople, this:
“By now, too, the omens had begun. On 22 May [1453] there was a lunar eclipse; a day or two later, as the holiest icon of the Virgin was being carried through the streets in one last appeal for her intercession, it slipped from its platform. A few hundred yards further on, a violent thunderstorm caused the whole procession to be abandoned. The next morning the city was shrouded in fog, unheard-of at the end of May; the same night the dome of Santa Sophia was suffused with an unearthly red glow that crept slowly up from the base to the summit and then went out. The past phenomenon was also seen by the Turks in Galata; Mehmet himself was greatly disturbed, and was reassured only after his astrologers had interpreted it as a sign that the building would soon be illuminated by the True Faith. For the Byzantines, the meaning was clear: the Spirit of God itself had deserted their city” (Norwich, “A Short History of Byzantium,” 1997).
SUMMARY: Surely, all of modernday Wall Street and New York City can’t fall! Surely vigilance will protect us, as with the Twin Towers! The Big Apple—as an active sleeper cell through the local ballot box? What about the media talking-heads and the price of groceries? This isn’t 1789 Paris, you know.
Not yet…
Regarding the last sentance of this article, if only the Catholic Church defended the Faith. Since V2, it has been giving ground. Since Bergoglio, it has switched sides. Prevost is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Sedevacant 12/31/2022.
@ Elias: Elias, my argument is not an exercise in seeking some “middle way,” but the result of examining the political theology at work in the Russian Church–state relationship. The so-called bridge–throne–altar model is not a neutral cultural tradition but an organic fusion of ecclesial authority, imperial ambition, and state power, aimed historically at sustaining the “Third Rome” ideal. In practice, this framework subordinates Christian cooperation to geopolitical objectives and leaves no space for a genuinely free and equal alliance with Catholics.
From the first centuries, Christian thinkers like Tertullian and Lactantius broke with the ancient fusion of religion and politics, insisting that faith must be voluntary and never imposed by the sword. Augustine’s De civitate Dei preserved this distinction, seeing Church and state as distinct yet providentially intertwined realities — the “two cities” mingled in history but never identical. His later concession that rulers might defend orthodoxy by law opened the door to medieval political Augustinism, in which state and Church often converged under one doctrinal vision. The Russian “Third Rome” model is a modern heir to that post-Theodosian fusion: a monistic system in which ecclesial authority is integrated with imperial power for a single political-theological project.
This is why any alliance against gender ideology under such a system will always be conditional, instrumental, and ultimately subordinated to imperial priorities, not to the Gospel’s universality. This is a question of historical and theological substance — not of imagery — and the evidence is there for anyone willing to engage it.
Paolo Giosuè, I appreciate your taking the time and I see you are elaborating what you said in summary here:
“Between the atheistic West and the self-consecrated East, the Catholic Church must chart a third way: one that neither blesses the decadence of freedom nor sanctifies authoritarianism in the name of tradition.”
What you propose doesn’t reconcile with VATICAN II and the evangelical conditioning reflected faithfully in JPII and Benedict XVI.
The imagery I use is not merely an imagery it’s telling you a) I’m not going to fall for beating day-dreaming dead horses b) and why should I when the power of the Word is already witnessed in JPII and BXVI and I have seen it with my own eyes and c) you’re trying to make out that the dead horses are gift horses that I’m not supposed to look at in the teeth only in their dreamies yet which whether teeth or dreams in point of fact won’t change anything whether it be on time or space or realities or ideas or wholeness or parts or unity or conflict, irregardless.
I’m not quite sure what you’re saying; it is frankly less clear than what Paulo said, with which I agree. As he said, we might have temporary alliances with modern atheistic liberalism, but these are less important than allegiances with Islam against the Mongolians — or any kind of “Ecumenical Jihad”, as Peter Kreeft put it.
It is at any rate a sad fact that the conflation of nationalism and Catholic identity is not confined to the East. Remember, it was CATHOLIC clergy from England who burned St. Joan of Arc as a witch.
It is always the most Christian counties — medieval England, medieval France, Mexico, and, yes, Russia — that become the most anti-Christian. Does the USA count on this list? Stay tuned!
I appreciate your note. My only aim here is to recall a lesson the Church has had to learn more than once: whenever the faith is bound too tightly to a nation’s political fortunes, its witness is diminished. However temporary or strategic an alliance may be, the Gospel’s horizon is far wider than any earthly empire.
The debate over Russia’s role in defending Christianity cannot be settled by imagery or sentiment. It requires a return to the Church’s own history, which speaks clearly about the difference between political theology and a Christian theology of politics.
From Tertullian to Kirill: The Return of Political Theology
On the ancient Christian roots of religious freedom — and their betrayal in Russia’s new sacralism
One of the gravest confusions in today’s debate about Russia’s “religious revival” is the failure to distinguish between political theology — the old fusion of altar and throne — and a truly Christian theology of politics. This distinction, present in the early Fathers and most profoundly in Augustine, is not academic hair-splitting: it is vital for judging the current Orthodox–state alliance, and for resisting the Western temptation to see the East as a beacon of faith simply because it appears more overtly “Christian.”
This temptation is dangerous, because it misunderstands the heart of the Christian revolution.
The early Christian break with sacred empire
In pagan antiquity, religion served the state. Worship was less about truth than about pax deorum: keeping the gods favourable for civic stability. Rome’s tolerance was political, not metaphysical — it welcomed any cult that did not threaten the imperial order.
Christians broke this unity. Tertullian declared in 197 A.D.: “Let one worship God, another Jupiter… no one desires forced homage, not even a man.” Lactantius insisted: “Nothing is so voluntary as religion.” Faith, for the early Church, could not be compelled without betraying the Gospel. Christ’s Kingdom was “not of this world,” and He neither wielded nor delegated Caesar’s sword.
From Constantine to Theodosius: the reabsorption of the Church
With Constantine’s conversion, the temptation arose to baptise imperial power. The Edict of Milan (313) was still pluralist, granting freedom of worship to all. But Theodosius’ Edict of Thessalonica (380) made Nicene Christianity the empire’s sole legitimate religion. The state now legislated doctrine. Augustine, under pressure from the Donatist crisis, reluctantly accepted coercion in some cases — a move that, while pragmatic, fuelled medieval “political Augustinianism,” where Church and state fused under one theological vision.
Augustine’s deeper vision: the two cities
In De Civitate Dei, Augustine draws a sharper line: two cities, founded on two loves — amor Dei and amor sui. These are not simply Church and State, but two fundamental orientations of the heart, interwoven in history yet never identical. Even a “Christian state” remains part of the earthly city. Political peace is good, but never ultimate; theological uniformity enforced by the sword contradicts the Gospel’s freedom.
Russia today: a revival of political theology
Patriarch Kirill has praised Stalin as a “believing atheist” and likened Putin to a new apostolic prince. The Church is cast as “founding force of the state,” reviving the tsarist maxim: “the faith of the tsar is the faith of the people.” Wars are presented as sacred acts to restore unity. This is not mystical Orthodoxy resisting secularism — it is religion once again subsumed into national destiny.
The enduring Christian insight
Religious freedom is not a modern Enlightenment concession but a fruit of the Gospel itself. From Tertullian to Lactantius, from Milan to Augustine, the Church’s authentic tradition rejects the sacralisation of political power. No culture, East or West, has the authority to make Christ the chaplain of the state.
Russia may not mirror America — nor should it. But the Church’s mission is not to sanctify empire. It is to proclaim the Kingdom that is not of this world.
In every age, the Church must discern between alliances that serve the Gospel and those that merely serve power — for one will outlast empires, and the other will vanish with them.
Paolo Giosuè, you lost me in the last paragraph…”This is why any alliance against gender ideology under such a system will always be conditional, instrumental, and ultimately subordinated to imperial priorities, not to the Gospel’s universality….”
Instead of an “alliance,” why not a distinct congruence? The Natural Law precedes “imperial power” or civil law, and likewise is not a matter of “ecclesial authority”: “The Church is no way the author or the arbiter of this [‘moral’] norm” (St. John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, n. 95).
If the world is round it cannot be flattened by emperors or popes, nor by both together.
Observers of Russian Church–state relations have noted that in some Orthodox contexts, ecumenism is widely perceived as an initiative of the ecclesiastical bureaucracy, and that this association — whether with cassocked or secular officials — often diminishes its popular appeal. According to this line of thought, the theology of ecumenism is viewed as “artificial” and lacking organic roots, while anti-ecumenical theology is grounded in the patristic tradition. The term “patristic” in this setting is often used by Orthodox groups opposed to the “Nikodimic” approach associated with Patriarch Kirill.
One prominent bishop within this milieu distinguishes himself by showing no fear toward the West, including the Vatican, and by refusing to regard non-Orthodox Christians as adversaries. Following the 2016 meeting in Cuba between Patriarch Kirill and the Bishop of Rome, the Moscow Patriarchate issued statements countering accusations of betrayal or heresy, urging the faithful not to succumb to divisive temptations. It affirmed that the Russian Orthodox Church “stands guard over the Orthodox faith” and bears responsibility for the fate of human civilisation. Refusing dialogue, it argued, would be contrary to the apostolic mandate to “teach all peoples,” noting that the Havana meeting involved neither common worship nor theological compromise.
Today, two contrasting visions shape the Church’s political stance. Patriarch Kirill stresses collaboration with civil authorities while maintaining the Church’s independence, whereas other voices advocate a “new symphony” in which the head of state functions as temporal leader of the Church — the Orthodox autocrat embodying the people’s soul. The latter vision has gained ground in the post-Crimea political climate, where ethno-religious imperialism has been recast as a central national project.
Both sides, however, converge in preferring a clerical governance of ecclesial life, wary of excessive lay activism, especially from fundamentalist “Orthodox fraternities.” Meanwhile, popular reverence for historic figures such as Stalin, Ivan the Terrible, and Nicholas II is on the rise, with political leaders invoking these archetypes as symbols of paternal authority.
Peter, you ask why I speak of “alliance” rather than “congruence.” I agree entirely that the Natural Law precedes both “imperial power” and “ecclesial authority,” and that—as St. John Paul II reminds us—“The Church is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm” (Veritatis Splendor, 95). Yet it is precisely because Natural Law is universal that any collaboration under a political order shaped by other priorities will tend to be provisional and contingent. Congruence, as you suggest, is possible in principle—but without a shared recognition of Natural Law, political congruence easily devolves into expediency.
In this regard, I am merely summarising—not innovating—the teaching of the great Argentine legal philosopher Adolfo Félix Lamas and his disciple Mauro Ronco, whose synthesis of Catholic legal realism offers a needed antidote to both positivism and the postmodern redefinition of “rights.”
When Pope Leo XIV addressed parliamentarians at the Jubilee of Rulers (21 June 2025), he recalled three principles essential to sound politics and law. The third is decisive: the “essential reference… to natural law, not written by human hands, but recognized as universally valid and at all times, which finds its most plausible and convincing form in nature itself.”
From this starting point:
Law rests upon metaphysics. Epistemology shapes law; anthropology shapes epistemology; and metaphysics shapes anthropology.
The modern legal mind is dualistic. From Grotius to Kant, man’s supernatural end is ignored; morality and law are set in opposition—moral law governing the noumenal man, juridical law the empirical.
Kant’s contradiction. He defines legal freedom both as universal formal law and as the will’s empirical interests—two meanings that cannot be reconciled without collapsing moral law into mere external constraint.
From Kant to Feuerbach. Natural law yields to the primacy of state law; the very language of moral principle is displaced.
Postmodern radicalisation. Rights are severed from the body, tied only to the mind; some now propose grading even postnatal human life in legal worth.
Euthanasia as a cautionary slope. What was once unthinkable became law through successive dilutions of principle, proving that compromise on fundamentals accelerates moral erosion.
Against this, Giambattista Vico—virtually alone among moderns—reasserted the foundations of natural law, identifying three universal human customs: religion, solemn marriage, and burial of the dead. These, he argued, must be “most sacredly guarded… lest the world become savage again.”
The restoration begun under Leo XIII—especially through Thomistic philosophy—has provided luminous doctrinal statements, but rarely the political orthopraxis needed to make them effective. Leo XIV’s appeal, like Benedict XVI’s to the Bundestag, could yet be a catalyst for such renewal.
Here lies the real distinction between alliance and congruence. Alliance may unite disparate forces for a time, but congruence demands a common principle—an analogical, objective realism rooted in “goods,” “virtues,” and “commandments.” Without this, alliances inevitably bend to the dominant paradigm of the age: a Franco-German idealism imbued with utilitarian and hedonistic ends.
If the world is round, neither emperors nor popes—nor both together—can flatten it. Natural Law, which is not ours to invent, remains the measure of every true congruence.
And the European elites wonder why the populist parties are advancing. Not because the populists are anywhere near perfect but they come closer to recognizing reality than the EU nut jobs.
Outis, I was encouraging Paolo Giosuè to cut his losses, I think events will show things differently before too long. Let’s see. But also I find his analysis unwieldy plus in places unsupportable as for eg., where he asserts -:
‘ My only aim here is to recall a lesson the Church has had to learn more than once: whenever the faith is bound too tightly to a nation’s political fortunes, its witness is diminished. ‘
Lots of forbearance on all sides, on this page, thanks.
If I was walking through a valley one day with only dead horses littered about everywhere ……