And rightfully so. You need to realize that the good Dr. E. has a direct line from God, and is able to interpret His pronouncements beyond the abilities of mortal men.
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.
Dr. E: RANSOM: a) The release of property or a person in return for payment of a demanded price. b) The price or payment paid for such release.
I know what ransom means. Where does the Bible say Christ paid ransom to God? Did God hold mankind hostage? So, why would God pay himself for those held by the devil? And did Christ pay the devil? Did the devil receive anything that he could keep?
But this view zooms in on a single passage and appears to make the assumption that this use of the concept of holiness is the only proper one in Christianity. The totality of scripture clearly shows that the concept is broader than that and that "being holy" and "being made holy" are not incompatible at all. For example,
Here we see the compliment of what Paul said in the other passage. Obviously the statement “Be holy, because I am holy” in this context is an ambition, something to strive towards. We should try to be holy in all that we do, even though it will be impossible in this lifetime to reach that goal. Getting closer to that goal is indeed possible, and expected, and is what sanctification involves. In addition, we have the positional use of the concept such as in:
So within the Biblical concept of holiness the first passage focuses on what God continues to do in us throughout our lives as His children (sanctification). The focus of the second passage is what Christ has already done for us and can never be undone. These are not incompatible as there is more than one facet to the concept of the word "Holy".
It is untenable logically. If we can make ourselves holy, then the whole Calvinist and Protestant illusion of being the elect falls down like a house of cards and becomes a Pelagian heresy.
We do not and cannot make ourselves holy because holiness originates in God. Phrases like "make yourselves holy" are encouragements to have the correct mindset in appreciation of God's work. The totality of scripture is clear that it is God alone who sanctifies (makes holy). We "participate" in the sense that His work is done through us. So, "Be holy", as a command, functions as an encouragement and appeal to our human experience. The theology behind that encouragement and appeal is that God will indeed keep His promise to His children and cause holiness to come forth from us.
“”As New Advent made clear, Christ paid the ransom for our sins to the perfect judgment of God according to His mercy....You should read the article, stfassisi.””
I did read the article and here is what the article ALSO says...”But we can never rest in these material figures as though they were literal and ADEQUATE. As both Abelard and Bernard remind us, the Atonement is THE WORK OF LOVE.”
Anselem’s document focuses too much on Divine Justice and is misrepresented by calvinists and others instead of understanding that the REAL starting point of Atonement and the main focus is really based on DIVINE LOVE,not Divine justice
From the Catechism..
It is love “to the end” that confers on Christ’s sacrifice its value as redemption and reparation, as atonement and satisfaction. (CCC #616)
More from Pope Benedict encyclical Deus Caritas Est...
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20051225_deus-caritas-est_en.html
“We have seen that God’s eros for man is also totally agape. This is not only because it is bestowed in a completely gratuitous manner, without any previous merit, but also because it is love which forgives. Hosea above all shows us that this agape dimension of God’s love for man goes far beyond the aspect of gratuity. Israel has committed “adultery” and has broken the covenant; God should judge and repudiate her. It is precisely at this point that God is revealed to be God and not man: “How can I give you up, O Ephraim! How can I hand you over, O Israel! ... My heart recoils within me, my compassion grows warm and tender. I will not execute my fierce anger, I will not again destroy Ephraim; for I am God and not man, the Holy One in your midst” (Hos 11:8-9). God’s passionate love for his people—for humanity—is at the same time a forgiving love. It is so great that it turns God against himself, his love against his justice. Here Christians can see a dim prefigurement of the mystery of the Cross: so great is God’s love for man that by becoming man he follows him even into death, and so reconciles justice and love.”-Pope Benedict XVI
Off to Adoration-Lots to pray for!
So you have no idea why some people are “born better off than others?”
It remains a mystery to you, right?
My mistake. Sorry. I forgot that pleasant turn of events.
> “Because I don’t know it’s God’s word.”
.
Cheap cop-out defense mechanism!
.
I haven’t pinged you on this thread since before that fateful day. Don’t include me in that.
I checked my posting history to make sure.
And rightfully so. You need to realize that the good Dr. E. has a direct line from God, and is able to interpret His pronouncements beyond the abilities of mortal men.
First, 1 Peter 1:13 speaks to people before they are converted: "fix your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ." (NAB) or your version "set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed."
Clearly, the author is telling the (presumably Jewish) audience to hope of receiving grace as an act of free will in line with the Jewish belief that God gave man everything necessary to save himself:
It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will go up to heaven for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may do it?'
Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will cross the sea for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may do it?'
But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it. [Deu 30:12-14]
And how does Judaism propose man save himself? By obedience to God. Thus Peter tells his Jewish audience to be holy by your own doing (see 2 Cor 7:1), because it is a mitzvah (commandment) of the Law (to which every Jew is bound):
Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am holy. And you shall not make yourselves unclean with any of the swarming things that swarm on the earth. [Lev 11:44]
and
You shall consecrate yourselves therefore and be holy, for I am the LORD your God [Lev 20:7]
This is hardly left as an option of ambition, as you suggest, but as a commandment to do it yourself. Your whole example of 1 Peter flies in the face of the Pauline idea that God had made you holy and that this somehow "created" a need or ambition to be holy. The Petrine Epistle states unambiguously that it is the duty of all Israel to be holy and that it is incumbent on each individual to consecrate himself to God.
Your example of Heb. 10:10 actually denies what 1 Preter and the OT say by stating that "we have been made holy by the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." For if you are made holy, passively, and for ever, then you are and can only be holy and will be holy, and "trying" to be holy is nonsense because it is a finished act. In the eyes of God you can do no wrong and are therefore holy as far as he is concerned no matter what you do, think or say. Just as you cannot lose your salvation, which is based on justification, you cannot lose your holiness, which is based on justification as well.
But I understand why Protestants insist their sanctification is a life-long process: they would be laughed at if they insisted they are holy! So, this is a way of "explaining" their imperfections and unholiness, which can be fixed by works, while insisting than in God' eyes they are perfectly holy no matter what. These two concepts, FK, are very, very incompatible, for if you truly believe that you have been made holy in God's eyes, then who are you to tell God you need additional work to be holy?
And calling someone to be holy flies in the face of another rationalization, namely that it is God's work that sanctifies you throughout life, when it is obvious that it is you who is called on to make yourself holy.
We do not and cannot make ourselves holy because holiness originates in God. Phrases like "make yourselves holy" are encouragements to have the correct mindset in appreciation of God's work
The Bible tells you otherwise, FK. God tells you that you can "do it," and yet you insist it is not possible. They are not phrases of "encouragement" but commandments (grammatically speaking, imperatives).
Again, what the Protestants are saying is that they are both holy and unholy at the same time, which is nonsense, and a ridiculous rationalization.
Generally speaking, no.
It remains a mystery to you, right?
As it is to every human being, except that you may choose propose a hypothetical reason, and I choose not to.
Cheap cop-out answer.
We are positionally holy (righteous)in Christ not in ourselves.. The problem with Catholics and agnostics ( I guess ) is they confuse holiness with morality ....
I realize that this is the delusion Protestants hang on to, but this is not what the scriptures say.
First, the OT God calls on Israel (the people of God) to be holy all on their own, without the need for an "intermediary."
Second, the author of Hebrews insists "we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." I you have been made holy, then you are ontologically holy and can not be something different. It's an either or state.
If you are human, then you are human no matter how good or evil you are—you are still ontologically human.
Hebrews doesn't say we are made holy in [Greek en] Christ...but through [Greek dia] Christ.
The problem with Catholics and agnostics ( I guess ) is they confuse holiness with morality ....
No, the problem is that Protestants apparently believe one can be "holy" and immoral.
Somehow I doubt it. I will miss Natural Law here; he has shown me that he is a Christian, unlike many on this thread.
Kosta..”New Advent...so the one who demanded ransom and who paid it was God himself to himself? Why would God pay himself when the one holding people hostage was the devil? Of course, Anselm couldn’t reconcile this.”
You’re correct,it cannot be reconciled and New Advent goes on to further say....”But we can never rest in these material figures as though they were literal and adequate”
Both Pope Pius XII,Pope Benedict XVI and others did not agree entirely with Saint Anselm ,rightfully so because Divine love is the key to understanding this,not Divine justice
Pius XII encyclical- Haurietis Aquas
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_15051956_haurietis-aquas_en.html
“The mystery of love was, as it were, both the foundation and the culmination of the Incarnation and the Redemption. For frequently and clearly we can read in their writings that Jesus Christ took a perfect human nature and our weak and perishable human body with the object of providing for our eternal salvation, and of revealing to us in the clearest possible manner that His infinite love for us could express itself in human terms.”
....And Cardinal Ratzinger(Pope Benedict XVI) book- “The Yes of Jesus Christ” 1991
http://www.amazon.com/Yes-Jesus-Christ-Spiritual-Exercises/dp/0824523741
“Jesus did not reject the principle of equality as a basic legal principle but rather wanted here to open up to man a new dimension of his behavior. Law in isolation and made absolute becomes a vicious circle, a cycle of retaliation from which finally there is no way out any longer. In his relationship with us God has broken through this circle. In the face of God we are in the wrong, having turned away from him in the search for our own glorification and thus fallen victim to death. But God renounces the punishment that would be just and replaces it by something new: salvation, our conversion to renewed “yes” to the truth of ourselves. For this transformation to occur he goes ahead of us and takes the pain and suffering of transformation upon himself. The cross of Christ is the real discharging of the saying: not eye for eye, tooth for tooth, but the transformation of evil through the power of love. In his whole human existence, from the incarnation to the cross, Jesus does and is what is said here. He burst our “no” open by means of a stronger and greater “yes.” “
“...our conversion to renewed “yes” to the truth of ourselves.”
To our created purpose....
He’s very good, this Pope.
This is very odd theology, at least to me; "positionally...righteous in Christ"? Just what do you mean?
As it says in +James, who was so odious to Luther, "mercy exults (triumphs) over judgment" (2:13). In that the Church doctrine is one. The God of the catholic and apostolic Church is a God of mercy; not of human justice.
“you are ontologically holy and can not be something different”
But you can act different. Just today my said to me “why don’t you act your age”. I’m 70, but apparently she didn’t think I was taking things seriously enough.
Holiness is coming in contact with the deity. “Christ in you the hope of glory”. Ethical holiness is the deity working out His plans through you. “Don’t quench the Spirit”.
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.