Posted on 08/27/2010 11:45:13 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
The ultimate intention of Catholicism is the restoration of the Holy Roman Empire. That has always been the ambition, at least covertly, but now it is being promoted overtly and openly.
The purpose of this article is only to make that intention clear. It is not a criticism of Catholics or Catholicism (unless you happen to think a Catholic dictatorship is not a good thing).
The most important point is to understand that when a Catholic talks about liberty or freedom, it is not individual liberty that is meant, not the freedom to live one's life as a responsible individual with the freedom to believe as one chooses, not the freedom to pursue happiness, not the freedom to produce and keep what one has produced as their property. What Catholicism means by freedom, is freedom to be a Catholic, in obedience to the dictates of Rome.
The Intentions Made Plain
The following is from the book Revolution and Counter-Revolution:
|
"B. Catholic Culture and Civilization
"Therefore, the ideal of the Counter-Revolution is to restore and promote Catholic culture and civilization. This theme would not be sufficiently enunciated if it did not contain a definition of what we understand by Catholic culture and Catholic civilization. We realize that the terms civilization and culture are used in many different senses. Obviously, it is not our intention here to take a position on a question of terminology. We limit ourselves to using these words as relatively precise labels to indicate certain realities. We are more concerned with providing a sound idea of these realities than with debating terminology.
"A soul in the state of grace possesses all virtues to a greater or lesser degree. Illuminated by faith, it has the elements to form the only true vision of the universe.
"The fundamental element of Catholic culture is the vision of the universe elaborated according to the doctrine of the Church. This culture includes not only the learning, that is, the possession of the information needed for such an elaboration, but also the analysis and coordination of this information according to Catholic doctrine. This culture is not restricted to the theological, philosophical, or scientific field, but encompasses the breadth of human knowledge; it is reflected in the arts and implies the affirmation of values that permeate all aspects of life.
"Catholic civilization is the structuring of all human relations, of all human institutions, and of the State itself according to the doctrine of the Church.
|
Got that? "Catholic civilization is the structuring of all human relations, of all human institutions, and of the State itself according to the doctrine of the Church." The other name for this is called "totalitarianism," the complete rule of every aspect of life.
This book and WEB sites like that where it is found are spreading like wildfire. These people do not believe the hope of America is the restoration of the liberties the founders sought to guarantee, these people believe the only hope for America is Fatima. Really!
In Their Own Words
The following is from the site, "RealCatholicTV." It is a plain call for a "benevolent dictatorship, a Catholic monarch;" their own words. They even suggest that when the "Lord's Payer," is recited, it is just such a Catholic dictatorship that is being prayed for.
[View video in original here or on Youtube. Will not show in FR.]
Two Comments
First, in this country, freedom of speech means that anyone may express any view no matter how much anyone else disagrees with that view, or is offended by it. I totally defend that meaning of freedom of speech.
This is what Catholics believe, and quite frankly, I do not see how any consistent Catholic could disagree with it, though I suspect some may. I have no objection to their promoting those views, because it is what they believe. Quite frankly I am delighted they are expressing them openly. For one thing, it makes it much easier to understand Catholic dialog, and what they mean by the words they use.
Secondly, I think if their views were actually implemented, it would mean the end true freedom, of course, but I do not believe there is any such danger.
That could easily be said of protestant and other churches of the faith....and why the discord and splits and various problems facing the body of believers to this day. The church today reminds me of the Laodecia church..."supplies neither healing for the spiritually sick nor refreshment for the spiritually weary." Rather all are under attack from within and without and NOT strong in the Lord for neglect of His word, teachings, and failures of arming the saints to withstand this onslaught...and this will continue as the enemy of mens souls has been not only allowed to enter...but invited in.
Clearly -- I'm amazed I have to go over this -- You and your sympathizers have some idea of what God means by all these saying about Idolatry. Since there isn't a text which says, "Them feelthy papists are wrongity wrong wrong," you have to take your idea of what God's definition is and determine that our behavior meets the definition.
Just as clearly we have a different idea. But we are the ones being charged. It seems legitimate for us to ask what EXACTLY it is about our practice which makes it fall under the commands
So somebody says images. And we adduce an image of Calvin.
Somebody says "bow down to". So we wonder if we are actually bowing down to the livid resinous atrocity in our little Marian alcove or the really quite nice painted and stained glass in our chapel.
And, from my point of view, what we mostly get in response are either hedges or a retreat to hurling the artillery of Bible verses which we already said seemed to be missing us.
Clearly God's definition is the standard. But how do I know that your (2nd person plural) account of that definition is correct? As far as I can SEE, it's incoherent. (That's not a put down, it means I can't see how it hangs together.)
That SEEMS epistemologically empty to me. Don't we need at least the Spirit? Does what the Ehtipian eunuch said apply in any way>
I’ll take maliciously deceptive for $1000, Alex.
The fact that Roman Catholics don't understand this is continually confounding. How dense is Rome to advocate something explicitly forbidden by God?
Will this be the same sort of investigation that produced the assertion that Pope Gregory III was against the use of images, that Emperor Constantine V was a pope who reigned for 60 years and that the robber council of Hieria was an accepted ecumenical council? If so you're in for a bumpy ride.
Iconoclasm was real, I don't think anyone suggests it wasn't. It was almost exclusively an eastern thing except for some confusion among the Franks during the same time. It could be said to have finally made inroads in the west following the Second Vatican Council but for aesthetic reasons among certain trendy theologians for whom iconoclasm was the least of their faults.
Just one observation.. Catholic works.. right out of the box..
Love is a necessary part
Read your scripture quote..it says not one thing about love being necessary for salvation
1 John 4: 7-11 7Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God
It is a fruit of our salvation not its roots
Scripture says Repent and believe ...It adds no works to it
On James ...again it is taken out its context by Catholics ..
The book of James was written to the jewish (converted) church , not heathens seeking salvation .
It tells them how their conversion is seen by the unsaved world . It is not about becoming saved or being saved. It is about the fruit of your salvation.
Jam 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Jam 2:18 Yea, a man may SAY, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
This is an amplification of the teaching of Jesus that we know a tree by the fruit it bears. It is how we know the saved from the unsaved. It does not declare that the man has faith ...but that he SAYS he has faith.
This addresses a hollow profession of faith , not a saving one .Can a hollow profession save him? NO, any more than works can save.This scripture says to the church that this faith is non existent , it is dead.
The bible is clear that it is God that gives the faith and it is God that ordains the works of the saved
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Hbr 13:21 Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom [be] glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Phl 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of [his] good pleasure.
We can do nothing pleasing to God, He is pleased with His work in us
It is that sense that is drawn from “face”. “To show your face” or “face-to-face” and used to translate “prosopon”, i.e., one’s presence.
You say the Greek reader “takes the meaning from context, for example, when “prosopos” is used in the strictly anatomical sense the reader understand it as “face”, otherwise, as the entirety of the human individual.”
So I must ask,
Have you found any instance of “prosopon” or its variants, being used to refer to “person” in the sense of an individual with all the characteristics of self existence that confer upon him personhood, an individuality not associated with objects or animals?
“I don't disagree at all that the meaning of “person” in Matthew 22:16 is indeed what Thayer suggests. How does that alter the fact that “prosopos” is rightly translated as “person” in that case as well as in various others?”
The difference is the shades of meaning within the English term “person”. As I said before it's “in person” (presence) versus “the person” as defined above. Any dictionary should show those meanings.
“I don't disagree at all that the meaning of “person” in Matthew 22:16 is indeed what Thayer suggests. How does that alter the fact that “prosopos” is rightly translated as “person” in that case as well as in various others?”
Rightly translated? Not if the translator wants to translate the correct meaning to the reader of modern English. Your own apparent interchangeable usage of the definitions of “in person” and ‘personhood’ makes that clear.
To repeat an example I gave earlier (I seem to be doing a good bit of that), Paul writes at 1 Cor. 10:25,
“Whatsoever is sold in the MAKELLO, that eat asking no question for conscience sake”.
“makello” is a Greek word translated “shambles” in the AV. Is “shambles” an inaccurate translation? Not from a technical point of view but from confering understanding, Yes! since few people use the term “ shambles” or understand its meaning AS USED IN THIS VERSE.
To apply to “shambles” the more common meaning would produce a nonsensical meaning when it means an abattoir or meatmarket.
“Presence” is at times acceptable but not in the verses such as Matt 22:16, Gal. 2:6, 2 Cor. 1:11, 2 Cor. 2:10. In either of these “presence” would be if not altogether absurd, a diluted meaning.”
Please? I didn't suggest “presence” was acceptable in Matt. 22:16 or Gal. 2:6. I have shown that “presence” in 2 Cor. 2:10 is and I said I thought 2 Cor. 1:11 unclear to me though again both Vine's and Thayer’s Lexicon indicate “prosopon” can mean the inward intentions and attitudes of the person, his “face”. Thayer’s says of 2 Cor. 1:11, ‘that of many faces turned toward God in gratitude, in prayer’ per “prosopon”, as countenance.
Enjoying the cafeteria?
Today’s Catholic church is a big muddled mess. Either Satan is destroying it from within, or the HS is. Jury’s still out.
On the contrary, The Reformed® typically offer their distorted interpretations of Saint Paul's epistles and pretend it's the Gospel.
It's hardly surprising though, The Reformed® rarely hear the Gospel at their Sunday services.
Here is the website for Geneva Orthodox Presbyterian Church outside of Atlanta (one of the few OPC churches with a current and comprehensive website).
Now, let's take a look at the Order of Worship for the last four weeks and see what The Reformed® have heard on Sunday mornings:
September 19, 2010
Psalm 95:1-2
Psalm 133
Psalm 51:1-8, 16-17
Ephesians 4:1-16
September 26, 2010
Psalm 33:1
Ezekiel 37:1-14
Romans 6:5-6
Ephesians 4:17—5:2
October 3, 2010
Psalm 147:1
Psalm 1
Hebrews 7:23-25
Psalm 38:15-22
Ephesians 4:17 - 5:2
October 10, 2010
Psalm 147:1
Leviticus 19:1-9
2 Chronicles 7:14
Ephesians 5:1-21
So, in a MONTH OF SUNDAY MORNING those attending this den of iniquity have not heard A SINGLE VERSE FROM THE GOSPELS. Repent and flee to the Church which our Lord founded where the Gospel is read at EVERY MASS.
To the Father through Jesus... Not to Jesus through Mary ..found Zero times in the scripture
The fact that Calvinists continually assert that Catholics pray to stone representations of dead people is continually counfounding. How dense are Calvinists to assert that Catholics do something that they do not?
NO ONE says Rome believes that cement and marble are hearing their prayers. The lie Rome teaches is that what the cement and marble represent hears and answers their prayers - some dead person who may or may not be in heaven.
Which is false. No one and nothing hears and answers our prayers but God alone.
No wonder we never see Calvinists on the prayer request threads. No intercession, got it. Not even from so-called fellow Christians.
Again, you’re arguing something no one is saying.
Here’s your answer...again.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2578704/posts?page=10234#10234
Prove that God hears the prayers of the *Elect.* Prove that you are *Elect.* Use scripture.
What are you talking about: there's a Pauline epistle at every service and as you know, Paul is the true "gospel" of Calvinists.
my mail box here and I’m sure others are too, is constantly filled with prayer requests. And despite rumors to the contrary, I dont ask if their babies are baptized, illegitimate or even Islamic. We pray, to God, in Christ’s name
lol. Just one more example of Roman Catholic blindness.
God's word tells us to pray for our fellow man to the Triune God alone.
Rome doesn't get it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.