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)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

The beauty of being a Reformed "Christian" is that one can make up whatever he or she wants and believe it's true.

No, the "beauty of being" a Protestant Christian, reformed or not, is that our faith is founded on the word of God.

Unlike the absence of faith of the self-proclaimed agnostic who believes not much of anything.

Funny that one such as yourself who says you know nothing for a fact is so certain about the error of other people's beliefs.

[kosta50]

That is basic Christianity, and I wouldn't expect an agnostic to understand it

I agree. I see no ghosts, or hear voices in my head, you are absolutely right. But grammatically Paul says the opposite of what you are saying.

Anyway, what if life-long is only an hour long? Is their sanctification "fast forwarded" and "downloaded" via super fast connection? And why do you think God is "perfecting" you rather than just make you "perfect?"

What else would be a better evidence of God's work than perfect little Calvinists walking around? Wouldn't that speak volumes more than the Bible? Perfect little holy Calvinists! Now that would be much more convincing.

Imagine, it took God only seven days to create the world, and it takes him a whole life-time to perfect a Calvinist! Now I know I am not mistaken when I say Calvinists are difficult! :)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

But grammatically Paul says the opposite of what you are saying.

Nope.

What else would be a better evidence of God's work than perfect little Calvinists walking around? Wouldn't that speak volumes more than the Bible? Perfect little holy Calvinists! Now that would be much more convincing.

Your obsession with "perfection" reveals a certain anxiety, Kosta. Relax. Christ's perfection covers our failings.

But if you don't believe that, then I suppose it doesn't for you.

Thus, the anxiety.

But you still seem to be seeking "convincing."

Read your Bible and pray for ears to hear.

[boatbums]

Kosta has never declared himself an unbliever. Kosta has confessed himself an agnostic. But I don't expect simple minds to discern the difference between atheist and agnostic.

Matthew 10:32-33
32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.

33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

[kosta50]

No, the "beauty of being" a Protestant Christian, reformed or not, is that our faith is founded on the word of God

If they all believed one and the same thing, that might have some merit. But Protestant Christians believe all sorts of things.

Unlike the absence of faith of the self-proclaimed agnostic who believes not much of anything

I either know something or I don't. I see no reason to blindly believe in anything imaginary.

Funny that one such as yourself who says you know nothing for a fact is so certain about the error of other people's beliefs

Everyone can be in error, Dr. E. How can you be absolutely certain that your faith is right and my doubt is wrong?

[kosta50]

Nope.

Yup, right here.

Your obsession with "perfection" reveals a certain anxiety, Kosta. Relax.

LOL. There is no obsession with perfection, except by people who claim to be walking saints.

Than you should appear perfect!

But you still seem to be seeking "convincing."

When people talk fantastic tales I ask for substantive proof the way you would (I hope) if I were insisting on pink unicorns on Jupiter. :)

Read your Bible and pray for ears to hear

Hear what?

[kosta50]

Matthew 10:32-33...whosoever shall deny me before men

Was Jesus real? I honestly don't know. That's not the same as denying him. So, why Matthew 10?

[Quix]

INDEED.

[metmom]

That bears repeating in Quix font.

Funny that one such as yourself who says you know nothing for a fact is so certain about the error of other people's beliefs.

[MarkBsnr]

Paul also mixes his bag on that as well

Assuming it's all Paul, which I doubt. Most poeple are internally and linguistically consistent.

With Pauline verse, it is pretty clear that it is not all Paul. But for the children of the Reformation here; we started off this thread with the pious Protestant protestations of pretty positive Christianity. But over the course of the contentiousness, we have discovered that at the basis of their belief system lies a pagan and thoroughly unChristian set of seemingly unconnected and almost random series of stream of thought snippets that are not stable and are liable to change, and often do.

There is no consistency. A look at the interweb of American Presbyterianism bears that out:

[Religion Moderator]

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

[MarkBsnr]

So it seems - and Jerusalem (and Bethany) are a good day's trot from the Jordan, as well

But it's not "across". There is no Bethany across (the) Jordan.

My map of the times says what yours obviously does.

Jewish Christians didn't like what was happening because the rabbis at Jamnia basically kicked them out of the synagogues and labeled them as the minim (usurpers, heretics). Christianity had to be Hellenized in order to survive. All of a sudden, we have a Platonic deity enter the stage, a concept alien and blasphemous to a Jew. John's Gospel was written (at the end of the first century) to show Jewish Christians that Jesus is the same Jewish God they believed in all along.

Without it, Christianity, suddenly finding itself outside Judaism, had no divine authority, and John's Gospel clearly tries to establish that Jesus is not only God but the same God Jews believed all along, and not the Jewish messiah the Nazarene Christians believed him to be.

Most Jewish Christians could not accept a Hellenized Jesus, because it violated the basic principles of Judaism, and the Faith became decidedly Gentile as it attained more and more a Hellenic character.

Most of the work of "harmonizing" the Jewish mystical spiritualism with Hellenic Platonism of the late 1st century was based on the works of Philo of Alexandria, a Jewish philosopher, whose contribution to Hellenized Christianity and the concept of a Logos was of such importance that the first Church historian, Eusebius, Bishop of Cesarea in the late 3rd century, refers to him as "St. Philo!"

Those Greeks!!! A rather impossible task - to insist that Jesus was the same Messiah as the Jews believed in, but that the Jews had been blinded to that all along. I think that they did an admirable job, overall. And they would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for you meddling Serb!!!! (with apologies to Scooby-Doo)

[MarkBsnr]

The word lytron is the price for redeeming, the price. It's not extortion. It is something you voluntarily offer. Christ offered to die (offered himself to "death") in exchange for all those held captive by it. The Church does not say he offered himself to satan.

My sources say that Athenaeus and Origen did.

Death is used as a personalized concept by Paul when he combines the controversial Isaiah 25:8, with Hosea 13:14, namely "death is swallowed up in victory, o death where is thy victory? Where is thy sting?" (1 Cor 15:54-55).

But what is that victory? How did it come about?

More specifically, lytron was the price paid for slaves or captives.

That is not extortion? That is ransom which by definition is a type of extortion. Paid by one entity to another - grieving family to warlord or one king to another.

[MarkBsnr]

All vector, no force.

If you concede random vector, I will agree with you.

[MarkBsnr]

If you were paying any attention, you too would know that Kosta has declared himself an unbeliever, thus I need only rely on his own honesty. (IOW, you fail again in your absurd accusations)

Absurd? Your accusation of unbelief is as wrong as your proclamations. Kosta is not an unbeliever; he is unsure.

And he knows a lot more of Scripture and Church belief and doctrine than you have displayed knowledge of. Knowledge? Not in your posts, at least the ones I have seen here.

[kosta50]

That bears repeating in Quix font.

It would if it were true. But it seems to me Protestants can't handle the truth, so they make one up.

If I ever said that "I know nothing for a fact," as Dr. E alleges, please tell us when and where did I say such a thing and in those exact words.

[kosta50]

A picture’s worth a thousand words. Talk about a dysfunctional family...

[kosta50]

And they would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for you meddling Serb!!!! (with apologies to Scooby-Doo)

Darn, the truth is in the way... :)

[kosta50]

As random as it gets. :)

[metmom]

Coming from someone who’s claim to fame is not knowing anything for sure about God....

What a hoot.