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.
Stick to the premise...The conversation wasn't that Jesus was not divine...It was when He received His divinity...
When Jesus said, 'Who do you you say that I am', was after the Holy Spirit landed on Him at the baptism...
Now you seem to be suggesting that those people that believe that lay no divinity on Jesus...
Did you miss your 90 degree turn, or are you just providing deception???
I have a lot of sympathy for your perspective but not 100%
A lot of the ideas some of us contend against are outragouesly heretical, idolatrous, blasphemous . . . pretty important issues to warn lurkers on the fence about.
However, am decreasing my minutes devoted to such many days of the week.
I am sticking to the premise, I'm going to give you the opportunity to reconsider your words. Pay attention to what you wrote, if Jesus received His divinity then He didn't have it before He received it, and divinity isn't a "what", divinity is a "who". The Person of Jesus Christ is God, it is not something that was attached at some point.
Quix pay attention here because you just got all high and mighty about Protestants having a perfectly Biblical understanding of the divinity of Christ. Did Jesus Christ become God?
Being a devout Hindu, I consider many theological beliefs of other believers in God somewhat incorrect, or incomplete. But I also consider every sincere Christian or Jew a brother or sister in the fight against atheism and secularism, which are the real evils. Sincere believers are not the enemy. If someone believes “wrong” ideas, but is sincere, God will correct them from within and without.
If those who believe in God would recognize and respect the beliefs of others, even if somewhat different or even considered “wrong”, and unite together to fight atheism, secularism and hedonism, then we will have plenty of time later to discuss theology without the barbarians destroying the world about our ears.
Look at it this way - they hate ALL believers! And then there is Islam. They hate everyone except Moslems!
Fighting amongst each other - Christian, Jew and Hindu - is the best favor we can do for atheists and Moslems.
You would be well advised to peruse 1Cor 1:2 and 8:9 to obtain some biblical exegesis to enable yourself discernment instead of merely cherry picking verses for your own convenience. The entire biblical milieu where Jesus refrains from marriage gives Paul and the Church an outstanding example to follow.
I do not understand your comment of “You guys”s. Originally I was am the product of the Free Presbyterian sect whose members who would not take kindly to the vitriol in your posts.
A child of God would remember that Jesus preached LOVE not the uncontrolled passion of animosity exhibited by some. Yet the unearned mercy of Jesus is for the taking even for the presumptuous who deny the Bride of Christ and manifest sinful PRIDE in their interpretations.
Pray for the indwelling of the Spirit who will guide and protect you through these turbulent times.
So, when do you believe Jesus became God?
But I find that belief far less harmful than to believe Mary is my co-Redeemer...Or Mary dispenses all the Grace I need...OR that Mary is the Queen of Heaven that God warns to stay away from...
What do you think each of those mean, in your own mind?
I stand by that statement. Here's why:
In the Catholic Christendom of the 1300s there were various kinds of governments: feudal monarchies (Spain, France), elective monarchies (Scotland, Poland), an elective Empire (Holy Roman Empire), republics (Venice, Iceland), dukedoms (Parma, Burgundy), leagues (the Swiss Federation, the Hanseatic League, the Holy Roman Empire itself).
These governments had various constitutions: oligarchical rule by the wealthy (Venice), democratic rule by the people (Florence, Iceland), aristocratic rule by nobles (Poland), tribal rule by heads of clans (Scotland).
These governments had varying levels of sovereignty: complete independence (Portugal), feudal alliance (the states of the Empire), union through treaty (the Hanseatic cities, the Swiss), association through royal blood (Normandy with England).
They also had differing legal systems: Salic law, common law, Roman code and "Danelaw". Moreover these laws, and the canon law of the clergy, overlapped considerably and the same person could often seek redress under more than one legal system.
There is also the amazing variation in size of these states: some Swiss cantons numbered hundreds of people as did some Italian republics while the French kingdom numbered more than a million.
I repeat: no society on earth has ever been as politically pluralistic as the Catholic Christendom of the Middle Ages.
What do you think the difference is between the two?
Why are you so defensive? And you do realize that he is the one that brought it up. So, it's his straw dog, not mine.
Each according to their own private interpretation of Scripture.
All the RC blather to the contrary is a stadium full of straw dogs--
You all are the ones in the habit of feeding the straw dogs. It is not us who raised the prospect of Jesus becoming God once He was baptised. Some on FR, with their private scriptural interpretations, don't even believe in the trinity.
I used no Roman Catholic Daffynition, Alice-In-Wonderland-School-of-Theology-&-Reality-Mangling weasel words.
Which of the following words did you not understand?
THE TIMELESS, ETERNAL, ALWAYS WAS, IS AND WILL BE DEITY OF CHRIST
Quix:
Folks who think that the frequent Proddy posters hereon have a weak conviction, belief, understanding of the VERY BIBLICAL ASSERTIONS ABOUT THE TIMELESS, ETERNAL, ALWAYS WAS, IS AND WILL BE DEITY OF CHRIST are simply clueless, ignorant and/or willfully blind.
OR . . . PERHAPS willfully perversely obtuse and ornery.
Where did you learn that??? From your catechism???
In Scripture. Give it a try.
There’s a lot of truth in your assertions.
I just don’t believe that truth is 100% of the whole truth to be applied in all situations etc.
The measure of sinful spiritual PRIDE is overwhelming from those who arrogantly hold fast to private sinful interpretation without realizing that it is Satan speaking to them; the very one who refused obedience to God. To emulate Satan’s example is to align oneself with the secular humanist agnostic types insuring eternal damnation.
It would do well to accept the Love of Jesus and His Mercy and consider how such mercy is tempered by His Justice both of which demand perfection. Remember it is a narrow door and so you would be well advised to abandoned the smooth highway for the narrow door and cross Jesus provides for salvation.
You are likely more of the expert on that than I am.
I’m still a little skeptical but you could be right.
I’m quite willing to be wrong about that.
Naw, y’all bring it up relentlessly.
YES IT IS. At least the first time I read it was in an RC post.
Sheesh.
Proddys might be persuaded to take up a collection for a mirror for each of the RC rabid clique groups.
So, you claim. You guys talk about it more than any of us. And again, in this case, it wasn't us who brought it up.
No it's not. Double sheesh.
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.