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.
Yup, and he (omnipotent and omniscient deity) also allowed Satan to hijack his most beloved creation right under his nose so he can become man (a few thousand years later, just to be fashionably late), undergo self-imposed torture, and die only so he could pay Satan in his own blood as ransom to get his believed prized creation back (this is the theology of a Protestant I received not so long ago). Pagan to the core.
Amen
Great article
What if you are predestined to not believe in free will?
It surpasses the wrath of Odin or Zeus. It goes back to bloodthirsty Dagon, or the Aztec and Mayan gods, who required the cutting out of a beating heart of a human being on the sacrifice table on top of the pyramid and offering it to their tyrannical and insatiable gods.
> “I care to have a discussion with rational human beings.”
.
But we limit our conversation with you to exposing you to God’s word, which you reject.
End of conversation.
Well, when Rome says it first infallibly defined the apocrypha as it now defines it, and when Rome actually did canonize the apocrypha as most universally held can be two issues. But when you infallibly define yourself to be infallible, then you can also infallibly define the criteria for when that is the case, and when that was met. But apart from an infallible list of all infallible teachings, and when they were, then this and other controversies will continue. Yet such a list would not stop the disputations within the RCC as to what certain infallible declarations mean.
Your description is of Rome and not Protestants who believe Christ paid the penalty for our sins to God and certainly not to Satan.
As the Westminster Confession of Faith reminds us in Chapter VIII (Of Christ the Mediator)...
V. The Lord Jesus, by His perfect obedience, and sacrifice of Himself, which He through the eternal Spirit, once offered up unto God, has fully satisfied the justice of His Father;[34] and purchased, not only reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for those whom the Father has given unto Him.[35]
Beautiful Alamo-Girl....as always in context and on message.
Further not all Christians are on the same level of learning, which you referenced, so not everyone is at the same level of understanding. God prepares us as we go....Students of Gods word learn the basics then move on as the Lord takes them, and as He has prepared for them. His Spirit is our teacher and knows the pace of learning of each indidvidual.... Just as a sixth grader does not yet comprehend what a twelth grader does...or a Senior in High School comprehend as one with a Masters degree.
Since Christ is God try explaining why God who is perfection would penalize Himself to Himself?
The core of calvinism is that God made a mistake creating humans and satan and He needed to sacrifice Himself to Himself for reparation
stfassisi: Since Christ is God try explaining why God who is perfection would penalize Himself to Himself?
Is it possible Roman Catholics have departed so far from historic, orthodox Christianity that they don't understand to whom Christ paid the penalty for our sins???
Absolutely stunning. I can't even believe your church teaches this stuff. It's more likely RC apologists on this website simply refute anything spoken by anyone who's not a Roman Catholic just for the sake of disagreement.
Read the Roman Catholic New Advent website, stfassisi, and learn what your church teaches...
It cannot be questioned that this theory also contains a true principle. For it is founded on the express words of Scripture, and is supported by many of the greatest of the early Fathers and later theologians. But unfortunately, at first, and for a long period of theological history, this truth was somewhat obscured by a strange confusion, which would seem to have arisen from the natural tendency to take a figure too literally, and to apply it in details which were not contemplated by those who first made use of it. It must not be forgotten that the account of our deliverance from sin is set forth in figures. Conquest, captivity, and ransom are familiar facts of human history. Man, having yielded to the temptations of Satan, was like to one overcome in battle. Sin, again, is fitly likened to a state of slavery. And when man was set free by the shedding of Christ's precious Blood, this deliverance would naturally recall (even if it had not been so described in Scripture) the redemption of a captive by the payment of a ransom. But however useful and illuminating in their proper place, figures of this kind are perilous in the hands of those who press them too far, and forget that they are figures. This is what happened here. When a captive is ransomed the price is naturally paid to the conqueror by whom he is held in bondage. Hence, if this figure were taken and interpreted literally in all its details, it would seem that the price of man's ransom must be paid to Satan. The notion is certainly startling, if not revolting. Even if brave reasons pointed in this direction, we might well shrink from drawing the conclusion. And this is in fact so far from being the case that it seems hard to find any rational explanation of such a payment, or any right on which it could be founded... A debt to Divine justice has been incurred; and that debt must needs be paid. But man could not make this satisfaction for himself; the debt is something far greater than he can pay; and, moreover, all the service that he can offer to God is already due on other titles. The suggestion that some innocent man, or angel, might possibly pay the debt incurred by sinners is rejected, on the ground that in any case this would put the sinner under obligation to his deliverer, and he would thus become the servant of a mere creature. The only way in which the satisfaction could be made, and men could be set free from sin, was by the coming of a Redeemer who is both God and man. His death makes full satisfaction to the Divine Justice, for it is something greater than all the sins of all mankind... Sin is represented as a state of bondage or servitude, and fallen man is delivered by being redeemed, or bought with a price. "For you are bought with a great price" (1 Corinthians 6:20). "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; because thou wast slain, and hast redeemed to God, in thy blood" (Revelation 5:9). Looked at in this light, the Atonement appears as the deliverance from captivity by the payment of a ransom. This view is already developed in the second century. "The mighty Word and true Man reasonably redeeming us by His blood, gave Himself a ransom for those who had been brought into bondage. And since the Apostasy unjustly ruled over us, and, whereas we belonged by nature to God Almighty, alienated us against nature and made us his own disciples, the Word of God, being mighty in all things, and failing not in His justice, dealt justly even with the Apostasy itself, buying back from it the things which were His own" (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses V, i)...
Do the colors and font size help you to understand what is being taught correctly here? Christ paid the ransom for our sins "to satisfy a debt to divine justice."
Every once and awhile Rome gets it right and STILL FR RC apologists get it wrong.
Well, that is a very sad statement to make. You have my pity.
Besides, I never said there is no "sign of grace" in my life. I will be the first to say that I have been "blessed" and that I am deeply appreciative of that
So you see no grace in anyone else, but you do see signs of grace in your life?
Wow. That's quite elitist of you, dontcha think?
but I don't know the source of that with any certainty.
Just some free-floating good luck, eh?
Does God hate sin?
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." -- John 3:35-36 "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.
Read your Bible.
Ok...Time for someone to define “Grace” again. I think too many have a wrong understanding of how the Lord sees Grace and how man sees it. You up for it DR?
Who determines the wind velocity and air pressure working on the coin? Who gives the strength to toss the coin?
It sure sounds like you believe in luck. Do you believe in luck?
Yes, they do. And a merciful God.
However, that's not the conclusion resulting from Calvinist theology.
Calvinists believe ONLY in mercy. Without mercy, every one of our good works would condemn us because anything not of faith is sin, and faith is a free, unmerited gift from God by His mercy alone and not in payment for services rendered to Him.
Read your Bible.
AMEN! Thank you for that wonderful Scriptural lesson. Isaiah is exactly correct. God's word accomplishes all He ordains. God's word brings light to the darkness and hope to the despairing. God's word is the sword of the Holy Spirit. It pierces the heart and renews the mind. It is power and strength and truth and victory.
Jesus Christ, the word of God made flesh. What a splendid, comprehensive and exhilarating plan of salvation.
The question brought to mind the series finale of "Tudors." Henry the VIII had just chewed out the parliament for their various interpretations of Scriptures and the resulting discord among them - and reasserted his benevolence in allowing the Scriptures to be translated and made available in the native tongue - and his authority in the Church of England to interpret them. In response, the Queen privately remarked to her ladies (paraphrased) that it was irrational to give the people the ability to read the Scriptures in their native tongue while at the same time disallowing them to interpret what they were reading.
I found that particularly fascinating considering the anti-Christ attitude of Hollywood we often see in their scripts.
Every once in awhile a snippet of gold is slipped in among all the tinsel. "The Book of Eli" and "Places in the Heart" are two good examples. Sadly, 25 years apart. 8~)
Thank you so much for posting this, Dr. E. I was ATTEMPTING to explain this a few days ago, and was accused by someone, with absolutely zero spiritual eyes to see or ears to hear truth, of saying that Christ paid the ransom to Satan. Nothing could have been further from the truth. I decided to remove this person from my replies in the future. If my beliefs aren’t known by now to this forum, then posting to this person is not going to change anything. Anyway, thank you for posting the TRUTH, as always.
You have No idea what historic orthodox Christianity even is and New Advent says "Atonement APPEARS by the payment of a ransom"
God DID NOT have to pay anything to save man who freely sinned outside the will of God. It was an act of mercy and extreme love beyond our comprehension that destroyed death,not a debt owed to God or satan.
Who was the debt paid to Dr E and how can God pay a debt to Himself or satan without being perfect?
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.