Less than 15% of Czechs are associated with a religious organization or church – and even most of these 15% are rather lukewarm. You don't expect Czechia to be the source of brave and inspiring sermons or a source of the truly conservative priests. But maybe you should.
On September 28th, the Day of Czech Statehoood and the anniversary of the murder of Good King Wenceslaus, our national patron, a very experienced priest [and linguist, Bohemist, and former minister of schools at a government led by Klaus] Prof et Mons. Petr Piťha delivered a sermon in the country's most recognizable church, the St Vitus Cathedral at the center of the Prague Castle, and the sermon turned out to be explosive.
You would expect such an old man to give another boring speech. You could think that such an experienced man is going to be excessively careful. But the speech gets truly powerful. John Archer may feel as a moderate sissy at some moments. ;-) Archbishop of Prague Dominik Duka has already defended Mons. Petr Piťha – while some Catholics have left the church in the middle of that sermon and some cultural Marxists, e.g. the Templeton-funded "priest" Mr Tomáš Halík, have attacked Mons. Piťha in the media. The priest has already been sued for "fearmongering" by a far left group (ČŽL, Czech Women's Lobby), too.
Here is my fast translation. If you will find it too ordinary for a few minutes, be patient.
Mons. Petr Piťha's sermon against the Istanbul Convention
Men of Czechia, Czech women,
I am expected to talk to you on the anniversary of martyrdom of a martyr, St Wenceslaus, very close to his tomb, face to face towards the eternal heir of the Czech land. We just read a beautiful excerpt from the Book of Wisdom which aptly says why St Wenceslaus is a saint, how and through which journey he managed to reach his status of fame within the Kingdom of Heaven, and then could stand as the main patron of our nation in the midst of us.
He was not only brave, just, loving his country and nation, unusually educated, and pious. But already as a young man, he was also wise. The Holy Scripture keeps on saying the same thing. The Book of Wisdom was valid in the epoch of the Old Testament, during Wenceslaus' lifetime, and it is valid today, too. It will continue to be valid because the word of God is immutable. God stands faithfully in it.
I will convey two propositions from what we just heard: Those who saintly watch over the holy orders, will be recognized as saints. To answer the question that is essentially penitent, namely what will be the considered status of those who don't watch over them either impiously or due to their stupid procrastination, will be left to you. Instead, I will speak about the second proposition.
The beginning of the wisdom is the desire to learn one's lesson. How does the present society behave? A strong and determining attitude may be expressed as follows: Let the state or government take care, I am paying taxes, am I not? In the same way, we tend to approach the spiritual and moral questions, too. Let the patrons take care, I attend the Midnight Masses, don't I?
We the Catholics may say something more cogent: I attend a mass every Sunday and I pray every day. Let us admit that our society is, and we are with it, utterly fatuous because it lacks the desire to learn its lesson. What I have in mind is the lesson that follows from the history. The younger someone is, the less he is interested in it. We are incorrigible. And our fate will reflect that.
At this very moment, our Parliament talks about the ratification of the Instanbul Convention. And our society seems to be calm. Scarcely, we may hear some very weak little voice of someone. But some voice could have always been heard during any event. Maybe you don't know at all what is the danger we are facing. No one has warned you clearly enough. But let us admit that we are not interested in anything. And that's why I will try to concisely explain it.
I already see a threat in the insidious way in which the Instanbul Convention is formulated. In the text of the convention itself, there is nothing that a reasonable person couldn't subscribe to. All the dangerous and unacceptable things may only be found in an explanatory note that is so extensive that an ordinary person, and maybe many lawmakers, will never read it. To fully understand the convention, one must also know the texts of numerous previous, already valid, documents. Also, it is necessary to read it in the context of additional proclamations and pronouncements by its champions.
Because I am not giving a talk at the Law School but rather a sermon in the cathedral, I won't elaborate upon that.
Another threat, as I see it, is a certain convention's extension of the rights and freedoms and we are completely overlooking the fact that freedom isn't a sum of partial freedoms, freedomlets, and little freedoms. Instead, freedom is a unique, compact whole, and it is indivisible. It has the character of the sea that is not the sum of droplets like the rain. Freedom is either present – and then all the smaller things naturally follow from it – or it doesn't exist and there's non-freedom instead. According to the Instanbul Convention, the latter (non-freedom) should be codified in our country in the name of a powerful pressure group of genderists and homosexualists.
I emphasize "homosexualists", not "homosexuals" – because many of the latter disagree with the opinions of the aggressive homosexualists. The perfectly perverse laws that should be introduced in our country – and that have already been adopted by several other countries – are directed against the traditional family, i.e. father-man, mother-woman, kids i.e. girls or boys, and grandparents, always men or women.
The proposed laws and their protagonists have embraced the ideology of Marxism and Nazism. They are neo-Marxists, which is being talked about, and neo-Nazis, which people remain maidenly silent about. The proposed laws are non-democratic by their very nature, they are dictatorial. Dictatorships have always needed to get rid of the family – which, despite any local partial authority at home, remains a democratic unit, the carrier and source of democracy, but also the basis of the true bonds in the society. That bad families have existed and still exist, is something all of us know. That changes nothing about the principle, however.
To start, I remind you of a sentence from today's Gospel: "Who would want to save his life, he will lose it. However, who would lose his life for me, will find it." And I will approach to the partial list of consequences that would await us if this legislation were codified. I am sorry because I will sound like a man who is hammering a nail into a coffin or who is knocking on the gates of misfortune.
Your families will be torn apart and dispersed. What will be enough for that will be your saying that the man and the woman aren't the same. They will take your children away from you and they will keep as secret from you the place where they hid them, where they sold them, where they imprisoned them. A sufficient condition will be a false accusation. The sex of newborns by a look into their groin will be abolished. The baby itself will decide about its sex and that's why you will be obliged to educate it asexually and, as a consequence, you will sometimes not be able to even name it.
For every disagreement [and now listen carefully, Alessandro], you will be deported to re-educational labor camps of the extermination type. Homosexuals will be declared as the superior ruling class, you will be assigned to an inferior auxiliary class and work according to the orders by powerful elites who will decide what can be said and what is forbidden to say. You will be placed beneath all animal species that are reproducing sexually because the legislation won't apply to cats, frogs, and the insects.
What should I say to wrap up the sermon? The experience from ages has taught us that the defense of endangered free people is easier and more effective than the uprisings of slaves and inmates. I don't have to say what St Wenceslaus would do. But I must say that our hopes are in our ability to stand behind him and to sing – more genuinely and more frankly – the chorale: Don't let us perish, neither us nor the future ones.