Intended Catholic Dictatorship

Independent Individualist ^ | 8/27/10 | Reginald Firehammer

[Hank Kerchief]

Intended Catholic Dictatorship

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.

—Reginald Firehammer (06/28/10)

[narses]

“I’m sure Mary will dump an extra load of white hankys into the laps of such eager petulant tyrants in her name.”

What are you calling me? “Petulant”? “Tyrant”? Hmmm?

[Quix]

I try to avoid telling shoe customers whether their shoes fit, or not.

I figure that’s mostly between them and God.

Of course, I’m skeptical that the rabid clique types have enough personal insight to know when their shoes fit, or not.

Maybe God has a solution for that. I don’t.

[narses]

So neither courage nor honesty fit into the Foursquare cult?

[smvoice]

LOL! At what point do you say "Lady, those size 10s are just NOT going to get squeezed into a size 7, no matter how much you suck it in?"

And yet, there are a surprising number of people who squeeze, and poke and prod, trying to make them fit. And then wobble through life, practically crippled with hurt. But hey, the shoes sure are pretty...I say, get a comfortable Bible. Sit down, put your dogs up, and read His truth. There is no more beautiful sight in the world.

As long as we have the "but EVERYONE has Pradas. One billion people have Pradas and they say they are perfect, so they must be perfect, what are you going to say? ..."Hey Lady, those size 10s are just NOT going to get squeezed into a size 7...that's what you say.." lol! Truth, truth, truth. And let the arches fall where they may..

[Legatus]

So when the Lord Jesus Christ asked this Pope why he should be allowed into heaven, what do you think the popes reply was or better yet what should any good Catholics reply be?

THROUGH THE MERITS OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST. AMEN.

It was right there did you not bother to actually read it?

[Quix]

INDEED.

THANKS for your kind and reasonable reply.

So many of the posts of so many of the RC’s seem to be straight out of

ALICE’S WONDERLAND SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY AND REALITY MANGLING.

They seem to just love putting bald faced inaccurate, thoroughly wrong words in Proddy’s fingers, too.

[Belteshazzar]

Quix wrote:
“Certainly Christ insisted that he who would be greatest of all must be servant of all.”

Well, yes, of course, how can those who follow Him who is their head not endeavor to be and do as He. However, what is often missed, and this by both the Romanist and Reformed, is the essential character of the ministry of reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:18-21) which Christ established. Under Rome it tends to be the case that the clergy are held to be so much higher and better than the laity that the latter end up serving the former, and the cart is placed before the horse. Under the more radical of the Reformed it tends to be the case that everyone is considered to be a minister, and, of course, when everyone is a minister then no one is a minister, and the ministry which Christ established simply evaporates. The truth lies somewhere between.

[Quix]

Personally,

I think the truth lies in I Cor 12-14 . . . where Paul describes

HOW TO HAVE CHURCH

with respect to several aspects of a congregational meeting.

Certainly I agree that heavy handed power-mongering theological elites are deadly to authentic Christianity . . . as is no wise folks being anointed and recognized as above average in God’s wisdom and heeded accordingly.

[Lera]

Well when the Pope makes something like the Nostra Aetate official doctrine it shows that he has trouble distinguishing what other groups worship.

So that means either the pope who made this doctrine and the church members that proposed this can not discern evil when he/they see it or he/they do worship the same beast as the muslims do.

That makes him either falliable at discernment or just as evil as the muslims.

Please don’t start making excuses that the muslims worship the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob just in the wrong way.
The God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob does not play dirty tricks on people to get them to murder others .

The God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob does not write two exact opposite books and the koran is the exact opposite of the Bible . Every thing that is Holy in the Bible is considered a blasphemy in the koran , everything that is holy in the koran is a BLASPHEMY in the Bible.

Again I say the God of Abraham , Issac and Jacob is no deceiver and he does not play dirty tricks on me to get them to sin and do evil .

Jas 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

[Cronos]

Yes. Once again I ask — do you believe in the Trinity?

[Cronos]

One of their claims is that they are Unitarians so not to be led into errors by the "teachings of men". But, in remaining outside Christianity, and truly grasping the teachings of Jesus, they fall into the same trap they propose to be hiding from --being misled by men who teach them false doctrines. The Unitarians reject the doctrine of eternal damnation, the Trinity (triune God), and the divinity of Jesus. Universalism is the theological doctrine that all souls will ultimately be saved and that there are no torments of hell.

Unitarian emphasis on the exercise of human reason caused Unitarians to cease to regard the Bible as the ultimate authority in matters of faith. In the 19th century the Universalist church was the first to ordain women. The American Unitarian Association was organized in Boston in May of 1825 and met annually in Boston until the merger with the Universalist Church of America in 1961.

They reject the Biblical and historic person of Christ, do not believe that His sacrifice on the Cross had any validity, and believe that all men will see God if God can be seen (whether they like it or not). The Unitarian Universalist website states (uua.org):

"Some Unitarian Universalists are nontheists and do not find language about God useful. The faith of other Unitarian Universalists in God may be profound, though among these, too, talk of God may be restrained. Why? The word God is much abused. Far too often, the word seems to refer to a kind of granddaddy in the sky or a super magician. To avoid confusion, many Unitarian Universalists are more apt to speak of "reverence for life" (in the words of Albert Schweitzer, a Unitarian), the spirit of love or truth, the holy, or the gracious. Many also prefer such language because it is inclusive; it is used with integrity by theist and nontheist members. Whatever our theological persuasion, Unitarian Universalists generally agree that the fruits of religious belief matter more than beliefs about religion-even about God. So we usually speak more of the fruits: gratitude for blessings, worthy aspirations, the renewal of hope, and service on behalf of justice."

The Unitarian/ Universalist Association is, because of their own scant doctrinal structure, nearly impossible to offer a defense against. If you ask a UUA member what they believe in, their mere reply will be "I believe in God". The Bible has a reply for such a little belief:

James 2:19-20 "Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?"

The Bible makes it clear that scant belief in only God ("Yeah, I believe there's a god") is useless in our Father's eternal plan of redemption. The Unitarian/ Universalist Association cannot be called, even by the greatest stretch of the imagination, neither Christian nor a Church

The UUA does not believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. The Unitarian Universalist website states (uua.org):

"We do not, however, hold the Bible-or any other account of human experience-to be either an infallible guide or the exclusive source of truth. Much biblical material is mythical or legendary. Not that it should be discarded for that reason! Rather, it should be treasured for what it is. We believe that we should read the Bible as we read other books (or the newspaper) - with imagination and a critical eye."

The Unitarian Universalist believes that Jesus was only a man, born just like all other men. The Unitarian Universalist website states (uua.org):

"Classically, Unitarian Universalist Christians have understood Jesus as a savior because he was a God-filled human being, not a supernatural being. He was, and still is for many UUs, an exemplar, one who has shown the way of redemptive love, in whose spirit anyone may live generously and abundantly. Among us, Jesus' very human life and teaching have been understood as products of, and in line with, the great Jewish tradition of prophets and teachers. He neither broke with that tradition nor superseded it."

[Cronos]

YET AGAIN, THE AGENDA OF THE FORESQUARE AHOY! DESK JOCKEYS SURFACES.

WHEN THEY CANNOT

SUCCESSFULLY

!!!!DEMAND!!!!

THAT FR BECOME AN OFFICIAL ARM OF THE OPC OR UNITARIAN OR FOURSQUARE TEMPLE DIRECTED TOTALLY AND DIRECTLY BY THE NEW GURUS AFTER MACHEN / SISTA AIMEE . . . STRICTLY COMPATIBLE AND NURTURING OF ALL THE THIN-SKINNED SENSIBILITIES OF THE PENTO-Co-Lactic 2 YEAR OLDS TEETHING ON THEIR OBVIOUSLY INADEQUATE PACIFIERS,

THEN

THEY DEMAND THAT EVERYONE BE THROWN OUT OF THE POOL;

Ain't that sweet. I'm sure Sista Aimee will dump an extra load of white hankys into the laps of such eager petulant tyrants in her name.

[Mad Dawg]

Wait! You’re saying a Dominican corrupted an Augustinian?

I’m guessing Luther missed the obedience part.

[Mad Dawg]

though not, per se, to the structure you involve.

But, but, can a non-Catholic ever know the deep spiritual joy which follows NOT giving one's superior the kick in the pants he so richly deserves?

;-)

[Mad Dawg]

Oh my.

That makes him either falliable at discernment or just as evil as the muslims.

There is no doctrine among Catholics that a pop cannot err. He is only infallible in certain fairly clearly defined situations.

An encyclical carries great weight -- and in fact I happen to agree with this one, but it is not necessarily an exercise of the charism of infallibility. One could, even a Catholic could (but he'd better have some really good reasons) dispute parts of the encyclical without questioning papal infallibility. Your arguments against the doctrine of infallibility might be more effective if they were directed against what we actually teach.

Please don’t start making excuses that the muslims worship the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob just in the wrong way.

I haven't started making excuses, so I can't stop. I will endeavor to continue to refrain from making excuses.

It seems to me that someone can go to New York and spend all his time below 4th street and east of Lexington Avenue. He will have an opinion of Manhattan which will be correct in some respects, but he won't have experienced Times Square.

Another person can go to NY and do the whole city from Harlem to the Battery. He will have seen the Met and the Museum of Natural History and MOMA and the theatre district and St. Patrick's and on and on and on.

One will say, New York is basically a slum with a few big buildings for rich people. The other will say, "Wow! The museums! The orchestras! The parks! it's an amazing place.

Both are talking about the same city. One is dreadfully wrong, and that wrongness could have dreadful consequences. The God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob does not play dirty tricks on people to get them to murder others .

[Mad Dawg]

First read, THEN snipe. Make sure of your target and of what is behind it, as we say in the NRA.

The pope in question says,
through the merits of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
and I'm guessing he said so on purpose.

[D-fendr]

FYI there is no such thing as a "Unitarian group member".

Dodge of the Question # 236. If one has a problem stating and owning up to his views on the Divinity of Christ, they lose any standing in questioning Christian doctrine.

[Legatus]

First read, THEN snipe.

And it wasn't like I was hiding it, I got all catty about it and then it was even quoted in the response to me. So I'm wondering if we are to understand that the merits of Jesus Christ are insufficient.

I must admit that my brain almost squirted out my ears when I saw that last night. We are regularly told that we trust in our own merits to attain salvation, then when there's specific evidence to the contrary apparently it's invisible.

I'm serious about this. That prayer covers all the bases. "O my God, I believe in Thee", "All my hopes are in Thee", "I love Thee with my whole heart", "I am sorry that I have offended Thee", "Grant that I may...obtain Heaven, through the merits of Our Lord Jesus Christ". Whatever happened to all that "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved" business?

[bkaycee]

THROUGH THE MERITS OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST. AMEN.

Offcourse i read it. But what does that mean? It sounds somewhat biblical to protestant ears but when elaborated on becomes something else.

Certainly, the pope would not mean to say that he was saved by Grace alone, thru Faith alone, in Christ alone.

[bkaycee]

First read, THEN snipe. Make sure of your target and of what is behind it, as we say in the NRA.

The pope in question says, through the merits of Our Lord Jesus Christ. and I'm guessing he said so on purpose.

I guess the devil is in the details. While sounding orthodox to some extent, the unpacked meaning reveals details not quite biblical.

I was actually looking for a more theoretical personal repsonse to the Lord's question of why one should be let into heaven.