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.
16Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in ChristPaul was specifically dealing with the Judaizers who were claiming that Gentiles had to keep the old law that has passed away. This text has nothing to do with the Church establishing the New Covenant "law of Christ
Now concerning the contribution for the saints: as I directed the churches of Galatia, so you also are to do. On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come.
Oh, BALONEY. I gave plenty of reference to dispute that nonsense back in #2576, and there is PLENTY more where that comes from.
Perhaps you would care to peruse Rome's Challenge once again, to seal it perfectly in your mind that the Roman church claims it's authority from the very act of changing the Sabbath day. In the article, any notion that the Early Church observed Sunday, or that there is ANY basis for a Sunday sabbath in the Bible is firmly denied.
Rome's purported power stands upon it's presumed ability to change the Laws of God:
Dan 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
The Church celebrates on Sunday as Christ did.
Christ observed the Sabbath day.
Around the years 80–90, Christians were thrown out of the synagogues. This may have provided further stimulus for Christians to change their worship from Sabbath to Sunday.
DEM JOOOOOS! More baloney. Rome and Alexandria are the only places that observed a Sunday sabbath for many, many years.
One implication of this is that with the passion, death, and resurrection of Christ one eternity had ended and another had begun. God could therefore abrogate an everlasting law and still not contradict himself.
Implication does not trump declaration.
In Paul’s letter to the Romans,[...](Rom. 14:5–6). The apostle is speaking here about the day which is being observed to the Lord, i.e., the day of worship.
Romans 14 is talking about fasting / days for fasting, and how to handle the disparities thereof. No Sabbath there.
The Didache [...[ Justin Martyr [...]
You may quote any early work outside of Scripture that has extant copies dating before 300. The rest (basically all) are suspect, and I will reject them outright. The Roman church has proved itself immune to conscience when it comes to forging documents.
And even those few I might consider do not trump the Word, as John warned that the spirit of antichrist was working in his day, and that the false religion sprung forth from the Early Church... Historicity means nothing in the face of that.
Seventh-Day Adventist prophetess Ellen White [...]
Ellen White is a false prophetess. I set no store by her (though I consider 7th Day Adventists brothers).
True.
Communication is of course a two way street. Obviously, written communication has been undergoing a revolution for the past 20 years. The two of you are, I think, in your 60s, I’m in my 40s. Everything we were taught that concerns written communication has gone out the window. We no longer write letters that take one week to arrive and another week for an answer to return. The “old” usenet, web forums, blogs and texting have forever changed how we correspond.
We have to find effective ways to pack more meaning into what we write, to convey a sense of the writer’s intent in ways that are more engaging than traditional writing styles. Emoticons, other creative punctuations, the use of caps, colors and other formatting styles, these are all useful in meeting that goal. Nevertheless we can’t get too far out in front of the people we’re trying to engage.
I’m again reminded of the journalist who spent some months “undercover” with car salesmen, observing and attempting to understand their sub-culture (”Confessions of a Car Salesman” I think). Indeed it turns out they are a sub-culture with styles of dress, speech and social conventions that are entirely their own which severely hinders their ability to function and communicate with society at large. We watch their locally produced commercials that are almost identical nationwide and wonder how in the world they think they are communicating any message other than “I’m as crazy as a loon”.
Catholics have a similar, growing and still unaddressed problem within the community of our priests. These men are educated and socialize with each other and to the extent that they are isolated from the population at large they are becoming inept at socializing and communicating with the people. When rectories were full and there was always a new guy and every family had a priest and there were cooks and housekeepers and constant social functions this wasn’t the same kind of problem. This needs to be recognized, addressed and corrected immediately.
Academia has always had this problem, it’s well known and hardly needs to be considered. They’re nuts, they know they’re nuts and they don’t care.
Even as we develop these new ways of using old tools we have to resist the tendency of balkanization. Our communication still has to meet other people where they are, it is cross-generational and cross-cultural. Not only must care be given to the way we decorate words but the words themselves must be chosen with some reference to the target audience.
So yes, I support experimenting, but the goal of an experiment is to determine if something works. If it doesn’t it has to be at least adjusted.
“I want to be me” is probably more “I want to be known” and it’s fundamental in our relationship with God but it’s just as real in our relationships with His creatures. God “wants to be known”, the revelation of the Trinity was entirely gratuitous in the purest sense of that word. This glimpse into the inner life of God expands our ability to know and love God almost endlessly, certainly to the very limit of our finite abilities. There will never come a time when we will plumb the depths of that great mystery. So too we, His creatures, seek among ourselves also to be known, incompletely and fallibly but constantly trying. God communicates perfectly to imperfect creatures, we communicate imperfectly. When the method becomes an obstacle we have to make adjustments.
And so that is my point, the problem is not always with “the other”. I don’t speak to my wife the way I speak to my children, I don’t speak to God the way I speak to anyone else. We always tailor the message to the intended recipient even while keeping the same goal of making ourselves known to another.
It is a neverending shock to my ten year old daughter when I remind her that she is no better than her three year old brother. When I point out that her mother and I have the same age difference as they do she freaks out a little. At the ripe old age of ten she thinks herself so worldly wise and sophisticated, from where I’m sitting she just barely got out of diapers so she can just climb down off that high horse and play UNO with him and it doesn’t have to be a family crisis every time he decides to play by his own rules. (How’s that for a run on sentence?) He still needs to learn the rules though. I hope I’m not being too subtle. :)
GWARSH. THANKS TONS.
BLESS YOU, TOO.
I doubt it.
I don’t think they believe anything unless it’s sealed in red wax on white hankys from the magicsterical or from the fantasized “Mary.”
Don’t they have a history of eating their own . . . Spain & the Middle Ages etc?
Besides, he’s a wonderfully decent man who puts God first. That’s not the script of the rabid clique types hereon.
TRUE. TRUE.
I wouldn’t expect that before Jesus returns.
The joke is that Rome fancies itself founded upon “reason” when, in fact, it is riddled with superstition and fallacy because it departs so drastically from the word of God.
ABSOLUTELY, INDEED.
Mary is the mother of God (RC catechism 963, 971, 2677.)
Mary is the mother of the church (RC catechism 963, 975.)
Mary is the co-redeemer because she participated with Christ in the redeeming the entire world (RC catechism 618, 964, 968, 970.)
Mary was assumed bodily into heaven at her death (RC catechism 966, 974.)
Mary is the mediator to whom we can entrust all our worries and prayers (RC catechism 968-970, 2677.)
We should surrender ourselves wholly to Mary "at the hour of our death." (RC catechism 2677.)
Mary is Queen of heaven and earth (RC catechism 966, 971, 2675.)
These things a Roman Catholic MUST believe and some of them are complete idolatry. We're all sinners and we all grieve God daily. But this kind of blindness is almost incomprehensible to anyone with a Bible and the ability to read.
-----------------
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.
THANKS FOR ANOTHER VOICE OF SANITY AND CHRISTIANITY on a thread so shy of both.
That’s not what he said, although it makes for some colorful squeals on your part.
You keep right on fighting those straw men. One of these days you’re bound to knock one over.
THANKS. INDEED. Though I thought they were black shrieks dripping red.
IT’S THE DIVIDE AND CONQUER DANCE OF THE DWEEBS
A fantasy of premeditated construction?
A fantasy of premeditated construction?
When the goal seems to be merely to shred everything not on one’s personal white hankys . . . I wouldn’t think any of it would be worth bothering with.
THANKS THANKS.
AREN’T YOU TECHNICALLY a currently mass attending RC, too?
I’m thinking you’re right.
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.