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.
You are.
Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. You stated there were hundreds of incidents where posters failed to ping you, but nevertheless referenced you in their posts. I asked you for three examples. I am not looking for the examples, I just don't believe you can come up with three out of "hundreds." Apparently, I'm correct, because so far, you have failed to even come up with ONE.
Oh, I beg your pardon.
You’re the one looking for the quotes. Go find them.
I accept your apology.
As I said before: you stated there were hundreds of incidents where posters failed to ping you, but nevertheless referenced you in their posts. I asked you for three examples. I am not looking for the examples, I just don't believe you can come up with three out of "hundreds." Apparently, I'm correct, because so far, you have failed to even come up with ONE.
Let me remind you: I am not looking for any quotes. I don't believe any exist. If you do, please post ONE example.
As long as it's read as figurative and understood as anthropomorphism or poetry or analogue; some don't seem to realize that, possibly because human thought is experienced as immaterial.
Homosexuality is addressed as sin in the scriptures+they make clear that a marriage is a man and wife
Just show us where Jesus instructed the apostles to pass on their roles, authority or gifts He gave them for the foundation of the church... The problem MD is that the catholic church makes stuff up and hopes no one notices it is not supported anywhere in scripture
I was asked my opinion and I gave it based on Scripture what do you base your hope on?
Mar 13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.
His elect.. He gets the only vote..
Rom 8:33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? [It is] God that justifieth.
God elects, He saves ,He adopts and He ordains their work..not to be saved, or get the approval or applause of men.. BUT FOR HIS GLORY
“As long as it’s read as figurative and understood as anthropomorphism or poetry or analogue...”
Or maybe a combination of all three. To the question of what God thinks...Well, He has expressed His thoughts on morality, cleanliness, our relationship to Him, etc. so, yes, we know His thoughts to that extent. Perfectly? There in Isa. 55 He said His ways and thoughts are higher than ours so perfectly seems out of the question, thus even Abraham inquired about what God would do in a particular circumstance once and again.
A liberty? Yeah, but not so unwarranted.
Sure mark..
I think grown ups can and should discuss Theology, Discussing God and how he works should be the primary interest of all men
It is odd that Jesus would appeal to "Scripture" given that the word "Scripture" is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament save for the doctrinally harmonized freelance translation of the NIV (Daniel 9:2). It was simply not the way Jews appealed to other Jews.
And when they did say "it was written" as an authority of God, it referred only to the Book of Law (the Torah), otherwise they were references to historical and other events in Chronicles, etc.
Mary's point is spot on given that the Law does not apply to Christians, and that referencing the Torah to the "uncircumcision" is irrelevant.
This does not correspond to the book of Jeremiah (ch. 33). It is a Christian add-on. The OT does not say anything about anything dying before the New Covenant becomes "valid". That is something the Christians made up on the fly. The New Covenant was meant for the Jews and Jews only, the House of Judah and the House of Israel, with god inscribing his laws in their hearts; no one had to die and shed blood for that. The New Covenant did not "replace" the Old Covenant, as the book of Hebrews alleges (ch. 8), because God's covenant with the Jewish people is forever. The book of Hebrews was written for gullible, naive and superstitious Greeks who knew nothing of the Old Testament or Judaism.
As your tagline says...
The Old Testament is written anthropomorphically. It describes a deity akin to Zeus, not a Christian God. What would God "think" about, metmom? The OT God even regrets, repents and says he is "tried" of repenting (see my tag line). Do you believe God repents? Do you believe God gets tired? The Bible says he does.
Wow ... is that panentheism, or is it simply blasphemy?
That is vastly "superior" to the likes of a 30-year veteran professor of the Chicago University and his take on the Gospel of John.
Yeah, I think every half-literate simpleton ignoramus TV Evangelist will tell you their understanding is vastly superior to theological scholarship. They are the bravest people on earth because they have no shame. And God knows there are always enough ingormauses to believe them.
The OT also says that God has to come "down" [sic] in order to "see" [sic] what's going on.
Do you not relaize that biblical literalism is childish?
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.