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.
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH . . .
MORE OF THAT LEGENDARY MARIAN CHARITY . . .
TRANSMITTED BY SHIPPING CONTAINERS FULL OF WHITE HANKYS NO DOUBT.
Perhaps yours went to the wrong address.
THANKS THANKS. MUCH APPRECIATE YOUR RESEARCH.
This comment? Or is there another?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2578704/posts?page=1710#1710
“Good stuff. When you empty your heart of hatred and learn the Law of Love you will embrace this book.”
Obviously, this book has not been renounced by all Catholics.
Or even any, yet.
Your comment is gibberish.
You need to slow down and think before you type.
Well, it certainly appears to have official Roman Catholic approval.
Aside from unofficial Roman Catholic approval.
No one is yet denouncing the heresies and outright unscriptural statements about Mary contained in this publication.
Tell us what the article is talking about, Cronos.
Good stuff. When you empty your heart of hatred and learn the Law of Love you will embrace this book.”
Obviously, this book has not been renounced by all Catholics.
Or even any, yet.
INDEED!
FOR SURE.
WHAT A WISE AND PERCEPTIVE PERSON THE LORD HAS MADE YOU!
PRAISE GOD!
CONGRATS.
I've never even heard of it until it showed up here. Some (a lot?) of the statements seem bizarre and I have no interest in defending it. In order to properly express my personal opinion on the content of a lot of devotional material I'd have to use language that would get this post deleted. My devotional practices tend more in the direction of the old Divine Office than to anything particularly Marian, I just don't have a Marian spirituality.
The Daughters of St. Paul publish a lot of stuff, most of the mainline Catholic publishing houses have churned out a lot of garbage over the last 40-50 years. Amazon doesn't even stock the Ferraro book and when I searched "rosary meditations" and sorted by bestselling it showed up at #50, it doesn't even seem to be available from Pauline Books.
I spent about an hour writing a post that I subsequently deleted because after all that time and effort I'd only made it through the first few items. I junked it because what we do believe is so likely to send people into orbit that I wonder what the point is. So many people are already convinced that we never actually mean what we say and are inclined to jump on the worst possible interpretation that I'm not sure it's worth the effort.
I will say I wouldn't waste my money on that book.
Yep...just catching up here but I noted that as well. Stunning hardly says enough....
No, Rome's attempt at moral equivalency is a lie proven by history.
Protestants argue with their enemies and try to persuade them by the weight of the Scriptures.
Rome murders those who disagree with Rome.
Hundreds of thousands slaughtered during the Inquisitions, the St. Batholomew's Day Massacre, the Albigensian Crusade, the Crusades against the Eastern Orthodox church, the reformers who dared to preach from the Bible...the list is endless.
And to that we can add the 800,000 Protestant Tutsis who were hacked to death by the Roman Catholic Hutus in Rwanda in 1994.
What a racket. Rome pretends to be Barry Fitzgerald when in fact it is much closer to Barry Soetoro.
Or maybe not. Maybe they know and they don't care since Rome damns to hell all those who rest assured they have been saved by Jesus Christ.
"The Holy Inquisition in its full vigor is something modernity sorely lacks" -- 328 posted on 08/01/2008 4:59:56 PM PDT by annalex
Clearly, even today they find it difficult to restrain from violence.
You and Christopher Hitchens are not much different...
Then why do Roman Catholics look to Mary as their "co-redeemer" and to priests as "another Christ?"
"Calvin did not, on this account, modify his own opinion, but he could not make it prevail. On October 26th he wrote again to Farel: 'Tomorrow Servetus will be led out to execution. We have done our best to change the kind of death, but in vain. I shall tell thee when we meet why we had no success.' (Opera, XIV, pp. 590, 613-657). "Thus, what Calvin is most of all reproached with — the burning of Servetus — Calvin was quite opposed to. He is not responsible for it. He did what he could to save Servetus from mounting the pyre. But, what reprimands, more or less eloquent, has this pyre with its flames and smoke given rise to, made room for! The fact is that without the pyre the death of Servetus would have passed almost unnoticed." Doumérgue goes on to tell us that the death of Servetus was "the error of the time, an error for which Calvin was not particularly responsible. The sentence of condemnation to death was pronounced only after consultation with the Swiss Churches, several of which were far from being on good terms with Calvin (but all of which gave their consent) .... Besides, the judgment was pronounced by a Council in which the inveterate enemies of Calvin, the free thinkers, were in the majority."20 That Calvin himself rejected the responsibility is clear from his later writings. "From the time that Servetus was convicted of his heresy," said he, "I have not uttered a word about his punishment, as all honest men will bear witness."21 And in one of his later replies to an attack which had been made upon him, he says: "For what particular act of mine you accuse me of cruelty I am anxious to know. I myself know not that act, unless it be with reference to the death of your great master, Servetus. But that I myself earnestly entreated that he might not be put to death his judges themselves are witnesses, in the number of whom at that time two were his staunch favorites and defenders."22"...On August 20, 1553, Calvin wrote to Farel: 'I hope that Servetus will be condemned to death, but I desire that he should be spared the cruelty of the punishment' — he means that of fire. Farel replied to him on September 8th: 'I do not greatly approve that tenderness of heart,' and he goes on to warn him to be careful that 'in wishing that the cruelty of the punishment of Servetus be mitigated, thou art acting as a friend towards a man who is thy greatest enemy. But I pray thee to conduct thyself in such a manner that, in future, no one will have the boldness to publish such doctrines, and to give trouble with impunity for so long a time as this man has done.'
Rome condemned Servetus to death for denying the Trinity.
So the death tally stands at one for Calvin and millions plus one for Rome.
NATURAL LAW: Sure you do or you wouldn't keep blurting out the same falsehoods ad naseum in the hopes of corrupting me.
Not only are you once again breaking the FR RF rules by "mind-reading," but you flatter yourself that I care about what you think, say or do.
It is every Christian's responsibility to preach the Gospel in truth, and that is what dozens of Protestants are doing on this forum every day. Whether or not Roman Catholics will be given new eyes to see and new ears to hear, or instead whether God will continue to give them strong delusion that they should believe lies, is all in the capable hands of God from whom all blessings flow.
Pray for His Holy Spirit to lead you away from the idolatry of Rome to the light of His perfect word.
LOL.
Behold, for peace I had great bitterness: but thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption: for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back. " -- Isaiah 38:16-17"O LORD, by these things men live, and in all these things is the life of my spirit: so wilt thou recover me, and make me to live.
If RCs would just read the Bible, they'd learn the comfort that God gives those who know their sins were forgiven at Calvary, for He has cast all my sins behind His back.
Calvin only agreed with Rome which had earlier sentenced Servetus to death for denying the Trinity.
So the death tally stands at one for Calvin and millions plus one for Rome.
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.