“Jesus works miracles and gives. Man does not work miracles, and he sells.”
Pastor Ed René Kivitz dared to publish the following quote from Karl Marx on his Facebook profile :
“Finally, a time has come when everything that men had considered inalienable has become an object of exchange, of trafficking and can be sold. The time when the very things that until then were co-participated, but never exchanged; given, but never sold, acquired, but never bought – virtue, love, opinion, science, conscience, etc. Now all of this is done in trade. The time of universal corruption has broken out or, to speak in terms of political economy, time has opened in which anything, moral or physical, once it becomes renal value, is brought to the market to receive its price. “
I ask: any untruth in the excerpt above? Something that contradicts our Christian faith and practice? When I read the reactions in the comments, I wondered if they would be different if instead of attributing the text to Marx, he attributed it to some Christian author incensed among evangelicals, especially the reformed ones.
I then proposed to do a test on my own profile.
I published several phrases by Marx, attributing them to John Calvin, Martin Luther, Charles Spurgeon, John Stott, and Augustine. A lot of people liked it and shared it, without imagining its true author. I also published phrases by these same authors, however, attributing them to Marx. Obviously, many also enjoyed it. However, the criticism came and was harsh.
For example: “The family is the source of peoples’ prosperity and disgrace.” This phrase is from the reformer Martin Luther. But as it was attributed to Karl Marx, there were those who commented: “Family and the basis of God among those he created, men and women. Karl Maxx was an apocryphal imbecile. Era died and with him his idiotic ideas” (sic).
Another phrase that I attributed to the German sociologist is by the preacher prince CH Spurgeon: “Do not believe half of what you hear; do not repeat half of what you believe; when you hear negative news, divide it by two, then by four, and don’t say anything about the rest of it. ” Beautiful phrase, isn’t it? But as it was signed by Marx, it generated confusion. In one of the comments, it read: “Vdd … his life shows who he was … Marx had only one fixed-job and, although he was a scholar … For this love, he accepted the death of four of the seven children, two daughters committed suicide, and he was financially dependent on his wife during the 16 years that he dedicated himself to writing “O Capital”. AN EXAMPLE, ONLY NOT “(sic). Another comment said: “Ordinary, lazy and immoral subject, who has not even managed to put his own life in order. Is this rascal, in many ways similar to Lulla, the creator of the system who intends to bring the solution to the world? Yes. one has the reference it deserves “(sic).
What does all this have to do with the phrases? The fact that he had a disastrous biography, as there were so many others, including Christians, does it disapply any glimmer of genius he may have had? Does the fact that Socrates committed suicide to undo his entire philosophy? I wonder if most of your critics have already taken the time to read a line from “Capital”. Probably not. They were busy watching the videos of the great master astrologer and philosopher Olavo de Carvalho, or reading his wonderful book “The least you need to know to not be an idiot.” (Before they ask me if I’ve read it, my answer is no. I don’t feel like it. The things I watched in their videos were enough to make a judgment about their ideas).
How long will we eat with the hands of others? Who received a power of attorney to think for us? I know Calvinists who have never read a line from the Institutes or the Synod of Dort. They quote Augustine without ever having read “Confessions” or “The City of God.” They detonate Darwin without having even read the preface to “The origin of species”. They critically criticize Simone De Beauvior without ever having read “The second sex” (even because the thickness of the volume is frightening! Lol). They fall flat on poor Paulo Freire (celebrated all over the world!), But they never read “Pedagogia do oprimido”. They disdain Foucault without having read “Watch and Punish” or “The Archeology of Knowledge”.
I am not saying that we all have an obligation to read all of this. But if we are honest, at least, we will try to find out some ideas before going around fighting them with ready phrases that we hear from third parties.
Some of those who criticized the phrases falsely attributed to Marx enjoyed and even shared phrases of his own, however, falsely attributed to some of the great Christian icons. Below, some of them:
“From each one, according to their abilities, to each one, according to their needs.” (attributed to John Stott).
“If the appearance and essence of things coincided, science would be unnecessary.” (attributed to Augustine).
“If a person loves without inspiring love, that is, if he is not able, in manifesting himself as a loving person, to become loved, then his love is helpless and a disgrace.” (I attributed it to Spurgeon).
“The eyes that only see the lie when they realize the truth, are blind.” (I attributed it to Luther).
“Whoever uses the name of justice to defend their mistakes is capable of much more to distort a right.” (I attributed it to Calvin … lol).
I hope that none of my friends who liked any of the quotes feel bored with me. It was, let’s say, an experiment … And it demonstrated that, in fact, there is still a lot of prejudice among us, including, of an intellectual nature.
Turn and move, I am called a Marxist, especially when I go out in defense of minorities, or when I denounce injustices, and more recently when I stand against impeachment. What consoles me is to know that I, Kivitz, Ariovaldo, and so many others, are not the only ones dealing with the narrow mindedness that insists on prevailing in some Christian sectors. Dom Helder Câmara said that when he fed the poor, they called him a saint, but when questioning the reason for poverty, they called him a communist. Do what? Bones of the craft … lol
It is easier to label than to debate ideas. Labeling, the discussion ends. I can assure you, even if you are not a Marxist, that anyone who reads Marx without prejudice may feel embarrassed to find in his writings more of Christianity than in many Christian writers. The same is true of Nietzsche, Sartre, Voltaire, Espinoza, Freud, Jung and so many others. Also try to read Rubem Alves, Leonardo Boff, Frei Betto, and Teresa d’Ávila with the same disposition with which you read Augustine (if you read the Bishop of Hipona). Enjoy and read Rabbi Nilton Bonder (he surprised me! Mainly with “The immoral soul”). Go to me … put aside the canned theology “made in the USA” and vary your reading menu a little. I guarantee it will do your soul good.
By the way, do you know whose phrase is posted in the header of my post? Himself. Of Marx’s wretch! Does anyone dare disagree with the bearded old man? In fact, Karl Marx is part of the beloved group of the five Jews who changed the world, alongside Jesus, Moses, Einstein, and Freud. Sleep with a noise like that … lol
And he answers the question in the post: perhaps we demonize Marx so much because his theories end up revealing that we are not as Christian as we should be. As one Martin Luther King said, “Communism only exists because we are not sufficiently Christian.” We could sleep without this, right?