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.
Ok, so generalizations like “All Moderators are +++++” when I post TO YOU, is ok? Come on, that’s an attack. It’s easy when you have folks who belong to no real group or don’t tell you which group they are in and they then resort to this tactic and say “oh, it’s not personal”.
How sad these truth challenged individuals are struggling to interpret man made statutes on this forum yet these same, blithely claim the insights to discern the word of God in the bible while in reality only providing prideful sinful interpretations or cartoon gibberish. No indwelling of the Holy Spirit in them .
If they truly can't discern this obvious inconsistency ,God might have some mercy on their souls.
God bless and keep Mt 5 44:48 and Ps 22:16 in your heart before posting.
Also, evidently a majority of the rabid clique folks are shoe salesmen.
. . . bare foot shoe salesmen.
They only believe in other folks wearing their shoes. They never want to try them on their other foot.
You omitted “mackerel snappers”. I wonder after seeing some of the posts following the RM’s proposed new rules, if there is a justifiable reason to exclude anything.
From where I sit,
This RM often does a long series of back flips trying to figure out ways to
FAIR MINDEDLY AND EQUITABLY
ACCOMMODATE EVEN SOME OF THE OUTRAGEOUS SENSIBILITIES AND !!!!!DEMANDS!!!!
OF A DOZEN OR TWO INSENSITIVE, RIGID, NARROW, HARSH, DUPLICITOUS, HYPOCRITICAL, THIN-SKINNED, OUTRAGEOUSLY PAROCHIAL, CHRNOICALLY WAILING, WHINING AND NEVER SATISFIED
emotional 2 year olds.
At many points in such a process and dance, it begins to turn my stomach to see the genetic “NEVER SATISFIED” mentality.
Personally, I think our RM deserves the Nobel Price for Peace.
It has been this way as long as I have been the Religion Moderator. You can say “Scientologists are crazy” but you cannot say “You are crazy.”
Goodness! At that rate, you’d end up shredding 55% of Cronos’ vocabulary!
I vote to leave him to it.
I know it has been this way and I agree that it’s difficult to come up with a better way — I just wanted to point out that the proposed new rules do not help this and it may be best to leave the rules as they are.
“I wonder after seeing some of the posts following the RM’s proposed new rules, if there is a justifiable reason to exclude anything.”
My point exactly. Why ban, “You're bearing false witness,” when one can engage as follows:
Poster 1: “I try to keep my eyes on Jesus and not stare instead at Satan and his works.”
Poster 2: “Evidently trying harder is greatly in order.”
Although using a grammatical structure that formally avoids it, Poster 2 is effectively commenting on the status of Poster 1's spiritual state, making and posting a personal judgment thereof.
It's a far more personal comment than, "You're bearing false witness."
But it seems to be quite well tolerated.
LOL.
That's why I think the “open” threads should be renamed the “food fight” threads. Or perhaps the “demonic sludge” threads. Or perhaps the “filth of non-Catholics” threads.
“Open,” in any meaningful sense of the word, they are not.
Because they are closed to fundamental decency or any sense of absolute morality, they are also closed to real, genuine, worthwhile dialogue.
sitetest
Thank you for illustrating yet another example of masking a personal attack.
While I see your point, I'm not sure you are thinking this through all the way. Certain words (the "N word" for instance) were used a great deal in the past and there would certainly be reasons to post documents or reference documents that made use of these words, that does not mean that the words themselves are appropriate to use in normal discourse on FR.
If a thread was posted about the Torah in the Religion Forum and someone came onto the thread and said, "The kikes are trying to take over FR like they try to take over everything else," that poster would almost certainly be banned for being an anti-semite and the zot would be 100% warranted.
On the other hand, if a thread was posted about the Immaculate Conception and a poster came onto the thread and said, "The papists are trying to take over FR like they try to take over everything else," Catholics who were offended would likely be told to leave the thread.
I apologize for not pinging any Jews to this post, if I had a list I would have done so. Please know that I did not post this to be offensive to Jews in any way. If you or anyone else finds this post too offensive, please remove it and I will understand completely.
Quixo, quixo, how’s the conversion to Raelism going?
Agreed. I think it might make more sense to really open up the “open” threads. As it stands now, the designation is a misnomer.
Agreed.
I don't know why but I'm reminded of "Yes, Prime Minister" and irregular verbs.
"I have an independent mind. You are an eccentric. He is round the twist."
"I give confidential security briefings. You leak. He has been charged under section 2a of the Official Secrets Act."
Just move everything from singular to plural and drop the second person entirely: We believe in God, they are purple monkey bottoms. We are good people, they are vicious, homicidal cricket bats.
LOL!
You certainly have a way with colored fonts. Are you classygreeneyedblonde? We’ve all wondered what happened to it.
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.