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.
Which makes it Paulianity by definition.
Or have RC apologists like that not been "catechized properly?"
The Reformed® sell Bible Christianity™ as no rules with the promise of Heaven once a certain phrase is uttered.
AMEN.
Oh, I think, like marcinites they consider Paul their god and his letters the only NT scriptures.
There are a few poster's around here who try and paint Saint John Chrysostom in bad light because of this,but they don't have a clue of the situation of the times.
Another outstanding post,dear brother!
"Paul wrote as little as half of his purported letters; did Peter actually write either? Who wrote Matthew, Mark Luke and John?"
Well come on then, prove it. Where are your signed copies? Where is your proof?
You have none. Your statement is invalid. You are wrong. Another error in a looooong string of errors. Ever consider getting a job as a weather girl?
Don't get your hair shirt in a knot here. Much of what purports to be “Christian” is such only nominally and would be unrecognizable to any of Christ's apostles should they take a tour of Christendom in the flesh today.
They could certainly repeat with fervor Jesus’ words of Matt. 7, ‘I never knew you’. It was less for what the objects of that dismissal did than the spirit in which they acted.
On that we can agree and it's hardly news to any thoughtful person. But I find it curious that a person such as yourself who has obviously been educated in the background and contents of the Bible so easily misses or ignores what it says at times.
Example?
“to pray thus” you quote. What does that mean? That only those words can be used in prayer? Obviously not as the entire seventeenth chapter of John is a prayer offered by Jesus. He parayed out of doors at Gethsemane (Matt.26:36), he prayed before thousands. (Matt. 14:19)
So how does one “pray thus”? “outos”, In this fashion, in this way, so, thus. What Jesus said carries no thought of repeating verbatim that model of priorities that deserve prayer. (Matt. 6:9)
Peter and John prayed in a group with an ‘invented’ prayer.(Acts 4:24-30)
“If Christian worship is not an example of the most blatant violation of Jesus’ words I don't know what is!”
Curiously you're silent on the most obvious and truly blatant violations of Jesus words about being a follower of him, being Christian.
Try to imagine Peter in papal regalia or John taking or accepting titles of “Reverend, Father, Most Reverend, Holy Father”, and what self glorifying distinctions religious “leaders”, Catholic and otherwise, lay upon each other.
Or picture Paul saying he would preach to the Gentiles only if he had the right robes and rituals and suitably impressive building.
Instead he preached in the public squares and in peoples’s homes. (Acts 20:20)
“Or maybe some people think the verses apply only to the hypocrites and of course no Christian sect will consider itself hypocritical, so it must not apply to them!”
Then measure ALL, church, sect, branch, faith tradition, rite, orthodox and schismatic, protester and traditionalist against all the verses of the Bible if any are to measured against any of its verses.
“If Christian worship is not an example of the most blatant violation of Jesus’ words I don't know what is!”
Do you know what Christian worship is as distinguished from what passes today as “Christian” worship and doctrine?
Without a doubt.
The Church ,of course rejected this part of Augustine teaching,not that he was wrong about Salvation outside the Church,but for not understanding the invincibly ignorant who love -and others who can be mystically saved through the church
Of course, +Gregory of Nyssa also taught some error, but no one ever believed Church fathers were without error. The east of course considers Blessed Augustine a Saint despite the fact that many of his teachings are not accepted by the Eastern Church.
As I said, and as we’ll all seen for months now, Rome apparently has a great rapport with agnosticism.
Like the agnostic, Rome knows nothing for certain.
Perhaps The Reformed® aren't aware of it but actual Christian historians have long acknowledged the problems in saying for a certainty who wrote which portions of the New Testament. The FACT is that without the Apostolic authority and tradition of the Catholic Church, there wouldn't be a New Testament Canon.
It amazes me that you latch on to the admission of a FACT that Christians have debated for centuries while you IGNORE heresies like the belief that Christians shouldn't say the Lord's Prayer or that the Pauline epistles aren't even Scripture.
Christians CARE about correcting the heresies of others, anti-Catholics care about attacking Christianity.
Right on the mark, Mark. :)
Soooooooooo,
what has led you to spread unmitigated flasehoods, too?
Rome has been changing her ways so much lately I now think of it as *The New Adventures of old Pristine*
Irresistible. It's a miracle the whole world is not Protestant. There is hope. :)
I wonder if the percentage of alcoholic RC’s is worse with frequent attenders . . . confessing/assuaging guilt etc.
or with the unfaithful “RC’s?”
ROTFLOL!!!
And it's been canceled!
LOL! They DO, however, stand by James as the author of James. The only thing they DON’T stand by is that JAMES IS THE HALF-BROTHER OF JESUS. Everything seems to be a problem. If it’s not the author, then it’s the words, if not the words, it’s what was IMPLICITY stated between the words.
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.