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.
I asked you to defend the proposition that the entire Bible was read during Mass. I was kind enough to extend it to "a 10 year" period.
Still ducking?
If this is a real person, he’s 26 years old, and hopefully has his whole life ahead of him. The older he gets, the more intelligent his parents get. No one, including you or his wife, knows what he really believes or what he will do in the future years. Many young people, especially after they have children, go back to their beliefs.
Would you prefer his Methodist uncles? This is Texas where there is a Baptist church of some flavor on nearly EVERY other corner.
I’d post what I really think your antics but you’d cry to the RM. Typical. Do you sneer at Quix for the recitation of his cartwheel doing teen?
Well you’re the author of these tales, pick any flavor you want to, or switch to glide and tell us some Catholic holy roller fun facts
Good news indeed! Thanks for adding those Scriptures to my far too brief reply.
no I would never sneer at Quix for anything, I have known him for years and he’s the real deal
I never said I knew his heart. I asked what the OSAS thought. I wouldn’t be so arrogant as to say he never believed in the first place. He chose the more traveled path in his early 20’s. He could turn back tomorrow or next year.
Dr E NOW says:
The subject was Bible study and the understanding that comes with that study.
However what she said THEN was:
I’d really like to see some Roman Catholic “authority” urging RCs to open up their Bibles at home and read them.
I quoted from the Enchiridion [emphasis added]:
READING OF SACRED SCRIPTURE. While a partial indulgence is granted to those who read from Sacred Scripture with the veneration which the divine word is due, a PLENARY INDULGENCE is granted to those who read for at least one half an hour.
Indulgences are granted by "Roman Catholic" authorities. So, with the exception that it does not mention WHERE the reading is to be done (and many Catholics, like Dominicans and Franciscans do not have homes), this is EXACTLY an answer to the challenge.
But the other side eschews reason, since it is totally depraved, in favor of unreason (which somehow escapes total depravity) so an answer precisely tailored to the challenge is considered changing the subject.
Now, strangely (or it would be strange to someone who had not become accustomed to the perversion of discourse which characterizes some on the other side) in the post to which this is a response, Dr. E. says:
And MD veered off into the fact that the real goal for the RC is not understanding God’s word, but something material in return, i.e. an indulgence. Time off for good behavior.
This is why I emphasized a portion of the excerpt above. The indulgence is clearly (at least to those who think now and again) not available to someone who approaches the Bible with a tit-for-tat frame of mind. If it did not involve a concession to our side I think the other side would agree that reading the Bible that way would be, almost by definition, NOT "with the veneration which the divine word is due".
Of course, the other side does not distinguish between veneration and worship, so it is possible that this prepositional phrase is incomprehensible to them. This might explain why it was ignored in the criticism of my answer.
It is also interesting and indicative of the incoherent metaphysics of the other side that an indulgence is considered "material".
In any event, an instance was asked for. Instances have characteristics. It is a rule for some on the other side that they simply cannot appear to 'lose' a single point. Consequently, when a challenger is answered by the presentation of an instance, one way to avoid acknowledging the answer qua answer it to seize on the unavoidable fact that instances have characteristics, and to take the characteristic for the instance.
So, we may suppose that if I had adduced some Bishop urging his diocese to read the Bible, we could expect an attack on bishops. If it were an abbot, an attack on monasticism would follow. If it were a Dominican (and we once had a Sunday 'instruction' on Lectio Divina) a tirade about "the Inquisition" (as though there were only one) would result.
The issue itself is scarcely worth the time spent on analyzing it, but it is good to demonstrate, as exchanges of this kind do so very well, that some on the other side are not interested in true dialog. So we must be on our guard against the kind of energy-sapping rope-a-dope to which they so often tempt us.
As a general observation, in the attempt to dismiss my answer, we see the grudging parsimony of the other side. Our faith is rich in treasures, warmth and love. We hear a grandmother say,"I have a present for you, give me a kiss," and smile. They look at the same thing and say "tit-for-tat." We see gift piled on gift, and they see bribes. Perhaps we should not be surprised at their anger.
A long, long time ago there was a cosmic lottery. If a name was drawn they got to go to Heaven, if not Hell. You can't lose your ticket, exchange your ticket or anything else, that's a the beauty of the cosmic lottery. You are either saved or damned and you NEVER had anything to do with it. So, all that's left to do is CLAIM that you are saved and sadistically taunt those that you don't believe are saved (nevermind the fact that you have no idea who wins).
I've asked the same question and gotten the same results.
I'm thinking the FR Catholic Defense Corp has caucused and decided it was a trick question. :-)
According to Exodus and Psalms, it is the book that God writes the names of all the men that He has created. Where are you getting your information from?
My name is in that book Mark, because I have been born again Every man's name is written in that book according to Scripture.
I am a citizen of heaven
Nope. Your Judgement will result in your final destination. If you are contacting us from Heaven right now, then you have obvious credentials that you'd be able to present - in fact, I'd think that you'd be showing them off. Are they signed by Jesus? Until then, we have the words of Jesus:
Matthew 25:31 14 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, 32 and all the nations 15 will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 34 Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.' 37 Then the righteous 16 will answer him and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?' 40 And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.' 41 17 Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.' 44 18 Then they will answer and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?' 45 He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.' 46 And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
Has Jesus sat on the Throne and Judged you yet? No. Therefore these things are in the future for both you and me.
Interesting. You posted to me, without attribution, words that you said I posted. I asked you for the post number and thread since you made the claim, with a courtesy to Gamecock. I notice that you didn't make any effort, but Gamecock did, for which I thanked him kindly.
It does seem that some send others to do their bidding; in that you are correct.
Am DEEPLY humbled and blessed by your kind comment.
I don’t do as well as I’d prefer at very much.
I do try to be as real and honest as I can, by God’s Grace, possibly be.
They actually don’t have to chase down any posts. Alex Murphy keeps them all categorized and looks them up for any prod who wants one. He goes back YEARS. A reasonable person might call that stalking-type behavior.
Actually it’s no different than having a court reporter present to record what is really said, as opposed to hearsay. Accusations are made daily around here, and Alex is doing all of us a favor. He’s an internet god, cia spooky
Like we didn’t already know that.
Now now Mom, be reasonable. The actual claim did not say "each Mass". The claim did say "in its entirety".
Based on that I asked for proof and specified a very generous 10 year time span.
I actually got one brilliant reply asking how much was read in a Unitarian service. Come to think of it, that wasn't brilliant, it was a stupid misdirection. Sigh!
the only way you know that is at present between you and me. Let it go or I’ll add the other person
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.