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.
And speaking of hoping we have chicken for dinner, we’re NOT going to have chicken for dinner. We’re having cheese pizza because my wife is going with her mother to see Glenn Beck tonight. I get to stay home with the kids, and this is the day after my birthday.
Now I ask you: WHAT KIND OF BIRTHDAY PRESENT IS THAT?!
Then again, my wife gave me a king sized micro-fiber blanket for my birthday. WOW! I never thought I could be so excited about a blanket. It’s like being wrapped in angel wings... or possibly bunnies. Very, very soft bunnies.
It almost makes up for being left alone with the screaming loons this evening. BUT IT DOESN’T MAKE UP FOR THE CHEESE PIZZA! Plastic on cardboard?! Oh that sounds just lovely... maybe we could follow it up with some mud pies or road apple fritters...
Ahhhh... apple fritters. When I was a kid I had a paper route and on fridays I’d stop at a little bakery after I delivered all the papers and buy a carton of chocolate milk and an apple fritter.
There... that’s what hysterical looks like.
happy birthday yesterday! you should have told us sooner, we could have baked a cake or hoisted you on a petard or something
Shhhhhhh! Pretend this is Japan. We'd be held in a place of honor.
As opposed to the Senate of the United States?
well, yes, otherwise you could go crazy trying to read each post! But, it’s still a sneaky way of suberting the rules, you gotta admit
good point
Err... we don’t say that “meant that Peter should be absolute and infallible.”
Double predestination. Chapter Three. While parts of the Confession say man has free will, others show what this means. Chapter Three denies free will. God predetermines and foreordains - heaven or hell "without any foresight of faith, or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving Him thereunto."
Not based or foreknowledge, but "These angels and men, thus predestinated, and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed." Unchangeably designed to believe or not believe. Man does not have this choice.
It critical to free will and salvation that the Confession says it is predetermined whether they will believe or not. The portions you posted have to do with the process, but it is an unchangeable process, predetermined for man. Man cannot but do and choose how he was predetermined and foreordained to.
To me, this is not free will, it programming. The human executes the program, in the same way as a computer does.
Thanks for your post and courteous discussion.
Highly unlikely. The Samaritans didn’t marry outside.
I agree with most of your post. I primarily disagree on double predestination.
I wouldn't say that all want to go to hell. We want what we want when we want it, and the result is hell. On earth. Call it God's subtle direction. Unless we repent and believe. Our difference, primarily, is I believe this is a free will choice.
As a sidebar, I don't think we can fully conceive what heaven and hell really are. I don't know if you've read Dante's Inferno, but it is a thought-provoking work postulating that Hell is where the unsaved only get what they really want.
I repeat; and so may you.
Why am I not laughing
It critical to free will and salvation that the Confession says it is predetermined whether they will believe or not. The portions you posted have to do with the process, but it is an unchangeable process, predetermined for man. Man cannot but do and choose how he was predetermined and foreordained to. To me, this is not free will, it programming. The human executes the program, in the same way as a computer does.
Council of Orange;
CANON 7. If anyone affirms that we can form any right opinion or make any right choice which relates to the salvation of eternal life, as is expedient for us, or that we can be saved, that is, assent to the preaching of the gospel through our natural powers without the illumination and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who makes all men gladly assent to and believe in the truth, he is led astray by a heretical spirit, and does not understand the voice of God who says in the Gospel, "For apart from me you can do nothing" (John 15:5), and the word of the Apostle, "Not that we are competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence is from God" (2 Cor. 3:5).
We have free will in our fallen state. In Our fallen nature we will never choose God.
Cats and Dogs are free to fly, however their nature does not allow them to.
In Our fallen nature we will never choose God.
I agree, but we disagree about man and God.
Cats and Dogs are free to fly, however their nature does not allow them to.
So we would not condemn them for not flying. Neither would we condemn them or praise them for licking themselves - they cannot do otherwise.
A God who creates cats who can only lick and condemns them for would be unjust and cruel. A God who creates a human being who cannot believe and then condemns him for it would be the same.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
This is against Pelagius and not a statement of double predestination. In Our fallen nature we will never choose God. I agree, but we disagree about man and God. Cats and Dogs are free to fly, however their nature does not allow them to. So we would not condemn them for not flying. Neither would we condemn them or praise them for licking themselves - they cannot do otherwise. A God who creates cats who can only lick and condemns them for would be unjust and cruel. A God who creates a human being who cannot believe and then condemns him for it would be the same.
So you do not see man inheriting a fallen nature from Adam?
Man is neutral in your view and God owes him a chance?
God chooses to save some and allow the rest to what they deserve.
If you want pure justice then ALL deserve hell.
Sounds like you are a semi pelagian. Man has been wounded but with help can choose correctly.
Correct ,nor does it say any person is to assume they are predestined to heaven. This would be the sin of presumption since we don't have the right to assume we are worthy of deserving heaven. It shows lack of humility
Scripture says even the just man sins multiple times a day
From Thomas Kempis Imitation Of Christ-Self-Abasement in the Sight of God
I WILL speak to my Lord, I who am but dust and ashes. If I consider myself anything more than this, behold You stand against me, and my sins bear witness to the truth which I cannot contradict. If I abase myself, however, if I humble myself to nothingness, if I shrink from all self-esteem and account myself as the dust which I am, Your grace will favor me, Your light will enshroud my heart, and all self-esteem, no matter how little, will sink in the depths of my nothingness to perish forever. It is there You show me to myself -- what I am, what I have been, and what I am coming to; for I am nothing and I did not know it. Left to myself, I am nothing but total weakness. But if You look upon me for an instant, I am at once made strong and filled with new joy. Great wonder it is that I, who of my own weight always sink to the depths, am so suddenly lifted up, and so graciously embraced by You. It is Your love that does this, graciously upholding me, supporting me in so many necessities, guarding me from so many grave dangers, and snatching me, as I may truly say, from evils without number. Indeed, by loving myself badly I lost myself; by seeking only You and by truly loving You I have found both myself and You, and by that love I have reduced myself more profoundly to nothing. For You, O sweetest Lord, deal with me above all my merits and above all that I dare to hope or ask. May You be blessed, my God, for although I am unworthy of any benefits, yet Your nobility and infinite goodness never cease to do good even for those who are ungrateful and far from You. Convert us to You, that we may be thankful, humble, and devout, for You are our salvation, our courage, and our strength.
Sick or wounded, not dead.
Man is neutral in your view and God owes him a chance?
If you love someone, would you give them a chance to get well, even if they didn't deserve it?
God chooses to save some and allow the rest to what they deserve.
The wounded deserve to die?
If you want pure justice then ALL deserve hell.
A just god would mean all go to hell or all go to heaven - this is the false choice a dilemma of double predestination. An injust god is not a satisfactory solution to it.
Neither is universal salvation. When you have formed a either/or for which both conclusion are wrong, it's a good indication that your formation is in error.
Sounds like you are a semi pelagian. Man has been wounded but with help can choose correctly.
Is believing a work?
Again, your theology presents a false choice. "Either All God or All Man" necessarily means that whichever way you choose, you eliminate the other. If you choose All God, you cannot hold Man accountable for anything - and you do not have Man but a programmed creature you mistakenly call man.
With free will you have relationship. You have the possibility of love. You have reality: God and Man and His love and grace and our response, choices and consequences.
There is no doubt that some passages in the Bible cannot be taken literally, such as where we encounter statements like "And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David?" [Mat 12:23] Clearly, in context, the Greek pas mean all present, not all the people of the world. At other times, verses like "And when he was come into Jerusalem, all the city was moved, saying, Who is this?" [Mat 21:10] it is clearly a figure of speech that cannot be taken literally because we know from context, again, that not everyone in Jerusalem was necessarily moved.
Then statements such as "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive." [Mat 21:22] become a bit more difficult. Some would say "all" in this case means all things agreeable to God, all things God wills, etc. not anything one may ask. But we don't know, do we, what the scribe in this case meant without reading his mind. After all, is this not the same as "with God all things are possible?" [Mat 19:26]
Clearly, although in all instances pas is translated as "all" or words to that effect, the meaning is not always universal. I think we can find "common ground" thus far.
But we were not talking all of the Bible but rather 1 Timothy 2:4. The Calvinist interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:4 simply does not fit the context of the leading verses. 1 Timothy 2 begins with the following verses:
I think you will agree that prayers etc. are intended for all mankind, and that therefore all men in verse 4 would be the same all inclusive statementall mankindor else it would make no sense.
Thank you for clarifying and elaborating. And thanks very much for the wonderful quote from Thomas à Kempis.
When I was involved in a protestant community I was always amazed by the people running around telling everyone they were saved and guaranteed heaven. Meanwhile they would watch the smuttiest TV shows on and talk about it along with speaking about others behind their back. I realize we are all sinners and this is not indicative of all protestants, but this is brazen,it’s as if in saying you are saved gives one a license to be proud of sin
Didn't Adam choose the fruit?
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.