BESS HER LIL OL HEART!
Maybe a new shipment of
white hankies will make it all better.
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.
God's covenant with men didn't begin with the Incarnation of Jesus? Wait a minute - I thought that God was in control. Are you saying that God was powerless until men agreed to His New Covenant. Odd, wouldn't you say? Same with Moses - did the pact begin with God or did it begin with the blood?
Jesus told you when it began and you prefer the Catholic encyclopedia ..what can I say ?
The Gospels tell differently from your claims. Luke 1 is very clear. John 1 is also instructive. The pact that God offers is in effect when He offers it, unless you would have men have more power than God to accept or reject pacts with Him, which makes no sense whatsoever in Reformed theology.
Your witnessing is as faulty as your theology, Dr. E. Which Roman Catholics, and which chapter from Matthew, to follow up on your claim?
Literally? Hundreds? Name some for me please, just to humour me and the lurkers. Better still, show me where I have addressed you by name and not notified you. I'll bet that you can't show a single instance.
Excellent verses - they of course do not address the point of when the Spirit of God came to men in the context of the New Testament. Luke 1 does.
Moses prayed to God and God changed his mind...
God may have seen it all from the beginning but somewhere along the line, God changed His plan...
The bible tells us to pray...Why??? To effect change...
2Ch 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
The point is, God changes His mind with respect to our actions...
You should have seen her posts last night! I asked her to name three out of the hundreds. That did not happen. I said that I would settle for one. That didn’t happen either.
LOL!
Sad to say, Cronos and I have had this discussion before -- twice even, if you don't count the linked statistics below....
By doing "nothing to practice his faith except attending Sunday and Daily Mass (and the few Holy Days), in two years' time (after which the reading cycle ends), a Mass-attending Catholic will hear 13.5% of the Old Testament (3378 verses), and in three years' time (after which the reading cycle ends) a Mass-attending Catholic will hear 71.5% of the New Testament (5689 verses). That all adds up to a total of 9067 out of 33001 verses mentioned in the chart, i.e. only 27.5% of the entire Bible (excluding Psalms) is heard by a daily-Mass-attending Catholic........I'd consider [27.5%] to be something to be ashamed of, myself. I'd be even more embarrassed if I had to admit that the amount that I thought was ["the NT, OT in their entirety", quoting Cronos] was really [only slightly more than one-quarter]. That would betray a severe ignorance of how much content is actually in the Bible!...
...."Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ!"
-- Alex Murphy, November 1, 2009
on the thread Lectionary Statistics - How much of the Bible is included in the Lectionary for Mass? (Popquiz!)
Synod to Focus on Proper Use of Scripture [article from Catholic World News]
The Church should combat widespread "Biblical illiteracy" among the Catholic faithful, Archbishop Eterovic saidA Literate Church: The state of Catholic Bible study today [article from America: The National Catholic Weekly]
....The flip side of this embarrassment is the presumption among many Catholics that they “get” the Bible at Mass, along with everything else they need for their spiritual lives. The postconciliar revolution in liturgy greatly expanded the readings, with a three-year cycle in the vernacular that for the first time included Old Testament passages. Given that exposure, many think they do not need anything else. As Mr. McMahon put it, “The majority still say you go to Mass, you get your ticket punched, and that’s it for the week.”
Get Cracking, Catholics![article at the National Catholic Register]
A formative, family-friendly factoid from a recent study or survey in the news.
November 19-25, 2006 Issue
Posted 11/16/06 at 8:00 AM
According to a study released in September by Baylor University’s Institute for Studies of Religion, evangelical Protestants are a whopping eight times more likely than Catholics to read the Bible on a weekly basis. Of course, the survey only looked at private Bible reading; it did not take into account the Scripture passages Catholics take in at every Mass. Still, we tip our hats to our separated brothers and sisters in Christ for their zeal for the Word of God.
Thank you, Thread Killer!
Perhaps they think that
God uhhhhh . . .idly . . . without thought . . . uhhhh . . . burps
. . . and new multi-verses are created by accident???
It’s probably projection . . . those having difficulty rubbing two pseudo pre-thoughts together
can’t handle the notion of a God Almighty Above them who actually thinks thoughts higher than their thoughts.
Or maybe they think that God Almighty is
‘intellectually’ stuck on the
‘ETERNAL OOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMM!’
mode.
With nothing novel or new transpiring between Creator God’s ‘ears.’
Of course, I don’t think I ever claimed that such folks could ever think outside the box of their !!!!!TRADITIONS!!!!!
If the idolatries and blasphemies weren’t set in so much granite and marble . . . they might even mindlessly wander OUT of those!
/s
All those? In their entirety?
Sure.....
They must have taken some dandy reading classes to accomplish that in order to get it all done in less than 45 minutes not counting all the liturgy on top of it.
I stated no theory!
Really? Here is what you wrote in post #10613:
The Pope was another Bishop, nothing else, and Constantine V was the effective leader of the Church.
There are no history books that I am aware of that suggest that the Byzantine emperor was in charge of the Church in the 8th century.
In the absense of facts to support your claim, it is merely a theory.
You are asking us to believe that the Byzantine Emperor (who lived in Constantinople which is more than 1000 miles from Rome) was in charge of the Church and sometime AFTER the 8th century authority was transferred to the Bishop of Rome. You are asking us to believe that an emperor would give control to a bishop over whom he had no ability to apply political pressure (an ability he WOULD have with the Patriarch of Constantinople). So, I don't think it is a "game which is based on a dishonest premise" to ask for you to provide some verification of your claims. So, let's try this again:
1. When did this transfer of authority take place?
2. At what event did this transfer take place?
3. Who was involved? Which emperor, which bishops?
4. What was the reason for this transfer? Why did the emperors want to surrender authority?
5. Why was authority given to the Bishop of Rome and not the Patriarch of Constantinople?
Yeah. That’s an important verse.
As Pastor Henry Wright asserts . . .
RECOGNIZING ANOTHER PART OF THE BODY OF CHRIST IN A BROTHER OR SISTER WITH THE RESPECT DUE CHRIST IS CRUCIAL . . . and a reason many are sick.
That’s one reason a couple times a year or so they take a whole Saturday—the whole congregation . . . and go to each of one another with the bread and juice and insure that there’s nothing between any of them that needs put aright. I understand it’s a very powerful day rich in The Lord’s Presence.
So.... Does God think?
That ought to be a simple yes or no question, but if you choose to explain your statement, that will do also. I'm all ears....
Psst, gamecock.... Another one for your homepage.
Where 2 or 3
are [authentically] gathered in His Name . . .
is church, and He is there.
I can see no reason whatsoever for continuing to post on this thread. This has been a complete waste of time. There was nothing to learn that has not been repeated on any other “neverending” anti-Catholic thread.
This is worthless.
Some . . . uhhhh . . . burps . . . I ignore more than others.
Thank you so much for sharing your insights, dear brother in Christ!
I'm not quite sure. This may be the first anti-Catholic thread where someone has acknowledged the belief that Catholics will burn in Hell and the belief that Benny Hinn is more "theologically solid" than the Church.
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.