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.
When I first entered the FR fray, I contended very fiercely with Kosta. I found him to be correct on matters of the early church a lot more than I was, and so I began to trust his testimony on those topics.
I didn't ping you, I simply didn't remove your name from the ping list of the person I responded to.
Perhaps you could ask your fellow travelers to remove your name from their ping list when they are responding to me. That should do it.
“”How would you or daniel11212 know since the Decretum Gelasianum is an acknowledged forgery””
Regardless, it was supposedly still written in the 6th century and it lines up with Carthage 3 and the Septuagint,so it still contains truth. Heck , it rejects a number of gnostic books as well,so there is more truth in it unless you accept the gnostic books rejected as inspired Scripture?
I find this whole issue of some protestant’s rejection of deutercanonical books completely idiotic because if you were to have the luxury of having a Bible before Trent it would contain the deutercanonical books and you would be accepting them. That coupled with the typology of these books should convince most people they belong in the Bible.It was Luther who made changes in history.
Not believing these books belong in Scripture is like saying the Church did not believe in the Divinity of Christ before the Council of Nicea because it was not dogma til then.Complete nonsense!
The Church does not need to act infallibly on issues til prideful heretics like Luther and Arius come along and try convincing the flock the Church is wrong.
Arnold C. Sundberg, a Lutheran scholar, likewise confirms that the early church accepted the deuterocanonicals, in his book “The Old Testament canon of the Early Church”, Harvard Divinity School. Sundberg writes:
http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/deutero.html
“The criteria that Protestants use to exclude these books (the deuterocanonicals)from scriptures are completely useless because they would exclude other books that Protestants accept as canonical. There were some doubts by Jerome on the canonicity of the deuterocanonicals in his report to Pope Damasus. Pope Damasus’ response was to consult the tradition of the churches, and the answer came back with a resounding unanimity by that point in the history of the church (late 4th century) that the churches scattered throughout the Roman empire had a constant tradition of including these books in their lectionaries and that they insisted that the apostles themselves had cited these books as scripture in their preaching and in their catechesis of the early church. On that basis Pope Damasus requested Jerome to include them in the Vulgate and Jerome as a faithful Catholic submitted his individual, personal opinion to the judgment of the church meeting in Council and included them.” Luther revived the Jewish desire to exclude these books from the canon for purely doctrinal and apologetical reasons. He was losing the debate on the issue of whether purgatory was taught in scripture or not. When his opponents hammered relentlessly away at him with the verse from Sacred Scripture ‘It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins’ (2 Macc. 12:46), Luther as a DESPERATE DODGE grasped at the straw of the ancient Jewish caveat against the inclusion of these works.” Luther set a precedent that Protestants have followed ever since, In order to rob the Roman Catholic Church a powerful and undeniable proof text for purgatory. That is not responsible, intellectually honest scholarship.
Many protestant scholars concur with this as well.
The deutercanonical books belong, get over it and start reading them-you might learn to enjoy them.
I thought about it but I took no pride in the gift wrapped game the Patriots "won" in spite of themselves.
Besides I was too pleased with the pitiful performance of Brett Fart to hassle you. :-)
"Does not the Scripture say that the Christ will come from David's family."
"All scripture is God-Breathed."
"These are the scripture which testify about me."
(many more could be listed as well)
... The scriptures from the beginning to end reveal Christ's coming, death, resurrection and coming again...as well as testifying about scriptures itself. They are about Him and without Christ there is no Christianity. Additionally the scriptures are our compass thru life to guide us in understanding His will and desire for us in the present, and allows us to see His plan for the future. Further His word allows us to compare truth to falsehoods. So yes I could say that Scripture reveals Him to us, and He uses it in our life as we meet the challenges of the day. Does that make Christianity a religion of the Book? Perhaps the question should be do other writings trump the scripture...no they do not.
As the early Christians (ca. second century) could have testified: the OT was actually not required for Christian belief, and the very first Christians had no NT scripture at all. The NT scripture was a byproduct of the Church, and not required in order for the first generation of Christians to be saved, right? Now, we have the NT Canon, and we as Catholics are taught to reverence them. However, we also believe, as the early Christians did, that Christ created His Church, which then Canonized Christian Scripture. It did not happen in the opposite order.
There are specific and basic doctrines known within the Christian community...they all should center around Christ. Many churches believe in the Centrality of Christ, all other teachings are secondary.... this even among some catholic churches. That centrality rests in the heart of the believers...who are the church..... Yes, there are differences across the board but Christ remains central. However, when the focus of the believers (church) is sidestepped for other "things" this leaves an opening for all sorts of man designed teachings...and therein is the problem.
Christ does not remain central to many even of the so-called mainstream Christian groups. Look at the repudiation of the Gospels as for the Jews only; the emphasis is on snippets of Paul for many of these groups - as long as they do not agree with Matthew, that is. Look at the heresies on this thread. Early Christianity emphasized one's imitation of Christ and the Beatitudes. Look at the people right who emphasize their own salvation and reject one's personal conduct or imitation of Christ. That is how far one gets when one indulges oneself in a religion of the book, and not the Teachings of the Church.
Regardless of what period of time this behavior is done by both sides Mark...and has been so since I came here. And both sides, at various times, have been given passes by the moderators...they discern when enough is enough. Then there comes a time to just let things go and move on. That 'issue' was dealt with Mark...apologies made. The ball on that one is in your hand...the fact we keep seeing you play it out further evidences a cord was struck pretty hard...for reasons you know, and I think I do too, this one is going to take time to pass. Saying with respect....Mark, And it came to pass"...was written in scripture for a reason...all things come into our life in order to pass as well. It is we who hold onto them.
I only ran across the one apology from the original poster. I believe that that apology was heartfelt and true and I accepted it immediately. I have dealt with the poster many times in the past and believe her to be sincere. I saw no apology or repudiation from any of the high fivers and cheerleaders. The hate speech document episode is over, but the evidence of the departure from early Christianity, accelerated by the Reformation is what really rankles. Part of the bigger picture, as it were. That is the issue.
It does not matter to me what you believe if you label it accurately. There are things being said and referred to as Christian right here on this thread that would make the LDS seem Christian by comparison. That is the danger of religion of the book. If one realizes that much of Christian basic doctrine was set before most of the NT books were even written, and certainly long before the Canon of Scripture was set, one can see that Christianity is a Faith handed down by the Church from the Apostles - even as Scripture itself shows and teaches pretty strongly.
The software removes all names except the person responded to; you had to add it; yet you claim you didn't? Typical of your "logic," and exactly why any discussion with you will involve falsehood and be useless.
Ya back in the good ol' days. When FR still believed in free speech. lol.
Perhaps a matter of relativity. Want to try going to a liberal forum and speaking to the subjects we do in the manner we do? :)
Nothing???? Nothing is sufficient?
Your two "Councils" were local and, by your own standard, did not bind the whole Church. Trent did.
Of course. But the original Aramaic and "original" Koine Greek fragments consist of a badly mangled scrap of paper here and there.
I have a feeling that if good ol' Brett keeps on having extracurricular activities, he's going to sink a long way below just pitiful...
Of course if you wish to rely on forgeries there are plenty of them at your disposal.
Oh! Do you mean that He hasn't Revealed it or is it that it has been Revealed and the RCC just doesn't understand it yet?
After all, it took almost 2,000 years for the RCC to "understand" the Revelation of the Bodily Assumption.
Oh! Do you mean that He hasn't Revealed it or is it that it has been Revealed and the RCC just doesn't understand it yet?
After all, it took almost 2,000 years for the RCC to "understand" the Revelation of the Bodily Assumption.
Hardly a good reason. There are many more knowledgeable than you. You could end up being a yo-yo on the string.
Whatever His purpose was during that time. The Lord is not answerable to me.
Oh! Do you mean that He hasn't Revealed it or is it that it has been Revealed and the RCC just doesn't understand it yet?
There are those who think He hung out in India playing George Harrison 1900 years ahead of time. And there are those who think that He went with Joseph of Arimathea to Britain and establish Christianity and write the KJV, only to have the Roman Catholic Church put them down for 1500 years. I don't know what He did and am not aware of anyone who has the answer.
After all, it took almost 2,000 years for the RCC to "understand" the Revelation of the Bodily Assumption.
Speed reading is not a requirement for Holy Orders... :)
Good point. However, I've been referred to as far worse that that right here...
Good idea. I was having trouble with my eyes until I read Tobit.
Tobit 6:5 "Then the angel said to him: Take out the entrails of this fish, and lay up his heart, and his gall, and his liver for thee: for these are necessary for useful medicines.
6 And when he had done so, he roasted the flesh thereof, and they took it with them in the way: the rest they salted as much as might serve them, till they came to Rages the city of the Medes.
7 Then Tobias asked the angel, and said to him: I beseech thee, brother Azarias, tell me what remedies are these things good for, which thou hast bid me keep of the fish?
8 And the angel, answering, said to him: If thou put a little piece of its heart upon coals, the smoke thereof driveth away all kind of devils, either from man or from woman, so that they come no more to them. And as for the gall, anoint with it a man who has white films in his eyes, and he will be cured.
It's pure magic. We spend big money with Doctors and modern medicine when all we need is a fish.
I habitually copy the posters ping list under the assumption that they wished to include them. It is a common courtesy which you may not be familiar with.
Good one !LOL! I do love that sense of humor.
We can come up with these funny scenarios with lots of Scripture though-look at the song of songs for instance...
"I am the rose of Sharon, and the lily of the valleys. As the lily among thorns, so is my love among the daughters. As the apple tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved among the sons. I sat down under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste. He brought me to the banqueting house, and his banner over me was love.Stay me with flagons, comfort me with apples: for I am sick of love."
Who needs love when you have flagons with liquor and a few apples!
Seriously though, there is some important typology regarding Tobit...
from scripturecatholic Matt.. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.
Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.
Luke 2:29 - Simeon's declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.
Rev. 8:3-4 - prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.
..and of course from Church Fathers..
"'For even now the angel of God.' He shows also, that when Susannah prayed to God, and was heard, the angel was sent then to help her, just as was the case in the instance of Tobias [Tobit 3:17] and Sara. For when they prayed, the supplication of both of them was heard in the same day and the same hour, and the angel Raphael was sent to heal them both." Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, 6:55 (A.D. 204).
“If all is in order you may approach the elevated bench and speak in modulated tones to the deity and if the stars are aligned right he/she may deign to rule withour sarcasm in your favor.”
And if he or she doesn’t, but rather slaps you down hard and, with words dripping with divine disdain (as a witch’s nose drips with poison), denies your humble petition, then you will come to understand the world of “gods” which B-D and I inhabit!
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.