Intended Catholic Dictatorship

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.

"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!

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.

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.

Once again, I enter here where angels fear to tread.

There can be no doubt that life experiences and personal anecdotal experiences can color our perception of things. This can happen in the sphere of religious experiences in life, and of experiences in our familial history and in our professional life.

And we all know in just the living of ordinary lives that we have a “history” that has left footnotes in our memories.

I don’t need to give my personal history other than to say that I have memories of my childhood and adolescence in the Protestant (mixed Presbyterian and Methodist)milieu.

I have vivid memories of the “shunning” that was my lot with my two best friends in high school who were Baptist and pretty much went ballistic when I decided to become a Catholic.

My neighbor when I was raising my family was the principal of a Christian high school in my area. He had daughters the same age as my daughters, but told me that they could not spend any time together as they believed that they were to “come out and be separate” from Catholics, who were considered to be basically non-Christian.

I don’t choose to dwell on these incidents because the only person that is affected by any negativity about them is me. As my priest tells me: “Bearing grudges is like walking around with a dead fish in your pocket—you’re the only one who smells.”

As to bad or faulty catechesis: I was received into the Church as an adult in 1949. I think even then there was a need for a new look at catechesis and the catechumenate. But the one thing that made a difference for me (personally) was that I never wanted to stop learning about the faith that I had been baptized into. From the time I was baptized up to this moment, I made an effort to continually study and understand my faith.

Teaching in the catechetical programs I was working with I was required to take a lot of courses before I went into any classroom.

I also believe that the Dei Verbum of the VAT II Council documents was the catalyst for a very big up-take in Scriptural studies. It was the impetus for the sprouting of parish Biblical studies, which is now an on-going thing in parishes. I was very fortunate to have had two outstanding Scripture teachers.

It’s only right and good that each generation of those who profess belief in the Triune God and the Redemption of the Cross should always be improving the Message and the understanding and transmission of it.

I believe that this is happening now in the Catholic Church. Not only are we experiencing the uptake of Young Adult groups using the “Theology on Tap” program, but we are also seeing something new in the parishes; there are programs now in which whole families are engaged together in the catechesis of their children. They come together as FAMILIES to the catechism classes and these families and these children interact together on a weekly basis.

There are also small Catholic colleges springing up that are enjoying early accreditation and an enthusiastic student body—the latest one being a Catholic College in Utah.

There is always room for improvement in Catholic education and the on-going transmission of the Faith; and it’s not lacking now.

Meanwhile, the “lay” communities are growing so fast that sometimes there isn’t enough room to accomodate all those who wish to enter. In my Carmelite Lay Community alone there are already 10,000 members and the roster grows every year.

About that book about Mary posted by Quix:

I have a library of over 300 books, most of them the more or less “classics” of Catholicism. These books are some of the best we have in Catholicism, from Augustine and deSales and aKempis, etc., down to Sheen and von Hildebrand and Kreeft, to mention only a few.

None of these books place Mary in any other position than what is Scriptural and is perfectly presented in her “Magnificat” in the first chapter of the Gospel of Luke.
That one small book (which easily could be perceived as in excess),should be used as an iconic demonstration of Marian devotion seems to me to be the same kind of lop-sided “expose” as any complaint about the “misrepresentation” of the UFO phenomena.

Isn’t there something quite wonderfully Scriptural about the Lord’s words from the Cross—the important words of the dying Savior: “Son, behold your mother”-—”and from that day he took her into his home.” This is what we Catholics do to this day—we take her into our homes. We understand the literal words of Jesus spoken to John as surely as we understand “this day you shall be with Me in Paradise.”

I will concede that there is always a need and a time to improve catechesis. The ever-evolving social milieu and culture always calls us to look anew at the absolutes of our Faith and find a way to improve the understanding and transmission of them.

It is the work of a lifetime and from one generation to the next.

Deo gratias.

I had no thought that I was done. LOL.

6. That’s why I think of it as beneath you to cling to that rationalization.

Petitio principii. It is not a rationalization. and to say it is is a personal attack AND mind reading.

NOT AT ALL. For a given sequence of language followed by another typical sequence of language THAT = RATIONALIZATION--to more than psychologists, actually. As Skinner would likely say--one doesn't have to care about what's in the black box; or infer goings on therein. That sequence thing by definition = RATIONALIZATION.

NOW, it is arguable in virtually every case, as to whether the EVIDENT OBVIOUS IS TRULY FACT. However, on the face of it--A RATIONALIZATION is in play. And, yes, of course, this cuts both ways . . . in Proddy land as well.

Besides, given our complex minds, I don't think either one of us wants to put on hip waders and muck about in the other's mind, trying to 'mind-read' therein.

I think what speaks to Proddys that RATIONALIZATION is going on is the knee-jerk application of that phrase "poorly catechised" IN EVERY CASE--100% OF THOSE I've read for 10+ years on FR.

I realize this is going to result in tons more Latin, however, I HATE THE LATIN. I find it arrogant, condescending, obscuring, obsfucating, haughty, cheeky and elitist. English has the largest vocabulary in all of history and plenty words to use to get the most complex or nuanced idea across.

I have given two examples when someone both claimed superior knowledge and went on to say things demonstrably false. Actually, with the false accusation that we withhold the chalice, that's three matters of fact. They do not depend on agreement with the Church or anything of that kind. They are statements about the Church which are simply false.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

What even you seem to either NOT UNDERSTAND or dismiss overly glibly are the following:

1. As my Dissertation Chairman said--LIFE IS SO COMPLEX, JUST ABOUT ANY COCKA-MAY-MEE EXPLANATION WILL DO.

2. Which, being interpreted in this case means . . . THE CATECHISM IS INCREDIBLY COMPLEX. Y'all keep minimizing that--but it is an inescapable fact.

3. The PRACTICES REGARDLESS OF and often contrary to THE CATECHISM ARE INCREDIBLY VARIED AND COMPLEX AS WELL AS PERVASIVE ACROSS THE GLOBE. This is often denied. However, the cat is out of the bag.

4. Not only are the EXPERIENCES of former RC FREEPERS GREATLY VARIED ACCORDING TO ANY SINGLE CLAIM OF WHAT THE CATECISM REALLY TEACHES, the experiences of virtually all us PRODDYS WHEN WE TALK TO RC'S IN OUR NETWORK=ARE ALSO GREATLY VARIED --PARTICULARLY compared to ANYONE'S SINGULAR INSISTENCE of what the CATECHISM REALLY says.

5. You or anyone has plenty of opportunity to say VIRTUALLY any combination of things are true or untrue and in some significant corner of Roman Catholicism, such would likely be true.

THE SAME IS TRUE FOR FORMER RC'S AND EVEN FOR PRODDYS OBSERVING RC'S IN THEIR SOCIAL NETWORKS!

The Church does permit married priests. I know of several.
The Church does offer the chalice, usually.
.
The Church does not teach anything that would lead anyone who knew the teaching to expect that the failure of the Sacred Body to look like flesh or the failure of the Precious Blood to behave like blood serves to contradict the teaching.

6. However, we have had repeatedly on FR claims of flesh appearing . . . 'bread' and blood appearing 'wine' . . . which, IIRC, was claimed to have even been blood typed.

7. Some of those sorts of things sound like exceptions. Some of them seem to be regional things. Some of them seem to be particular Parish's reflecting their leader's perspectives, sensibilities etc. as is normal for effective, powerful and/or controlling leaders.

8. Certainly it is clear to Proddys and to our minds and observations, ANY FAIR-MINDED OBJECTIVE OBSERVERS, that IN SPITE OF a standard liturgy etc. etc. etc. THERE'S A LOT OFFICIALLY SANCTIONED, OFFICIALLY PROPAGATED, OFFICIALLY MANAGED VARIABILITY (HOWEVER INFORMALLY OR 'with a wink and a nod' or ostensibly under the table or in spite of the Catechism) under the Vatican Umbrella. YOU'VE EVEN ARGUED SUCH WHEN IT WAS CONVENIENT FOR YOU TO DO SO.

These are ascertainable things, and in all of them false assertions were made. Shall I then say the teaching was good?

9. I think that's also a straw dog unbecoming of what I construe to be your above average integrity.

10. YOU SEEM TO TRY AND CONVINCE PRODDYS THAT 100% OF ALL the 10,000's of data points of the Catechism are all LOCK STEP BELIEVED *AND* ACTED OUT 100% THE SAME WAYS IN 100% OF THE PARISHES ALL AROUND THE GLOBE. Laying aside the nonsensicalness of that inferred stance . . . that we PRODDYS FEEL SLAPPED WITH 24/7 . . . AND IT JUST AIN'T SO. CAN'T BE SO IN SUCH A LARGE COMPLEX ORGANIZATION--AS YOU HAVE ALSO NOTED--WHEN IT WAS CONVENIENT TO DO SO.

11. OF COURSE, in ANY organization that large and that spread out and that old, there are going to be SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES from congregation to congregation; county to county; State to State etc. etc. etc. AND ALL THOSE EXPERIENCES ARE GOING TO BE GENUINE, TRUE, ROMAN CATHOLIC EXPERIENCES; AUTHENTIC ROMAN CATHOLIC EXPERIENCES. And it is a very CHEEKY pile of nonsense to pretend, much less INSIST otherwise.

11.1 I can hear some screaming that they can't be authentic Roman Catholic experiences if they are contrary to some tiny corner of the Catechism and THEIR personal interpretation thereof. etc. etc. yada yada yada.

That's not my definition. My definition of authentic Roman Catholic experience is a given typical mind set and more or less accepted body of belief and practice in a particular congregation or subgroup of a particular congregation that endures over time without strict hierarchical discipine to root it out--and usually with abundant hierarchical aiding and abetting said beliefs and practices if not actually propagating them, instructing them and modeling and leading them.

Heck, I was told when I was in protestant seminary that one reason transubstantiation was first put forth was to assure people precisely that it would look, taste, smell, or feel or anything like flesh and blood. So it is even more amazing. As a Protestant I knew the doctrine better than that! Would someone well catechized make these gross errors of fact? And we're not talking about errors of

That's just another illustration of what I've said above. YES! SOMEONE WELL CATECHIZED might well make such gross errors. NO ONE--NOT EVEN THE POPE RUNS AROUND LOOSE WITH EVEN THE READER'S DIGEST PURIFIED CONDENSED VERSION OF THE CATECHISM ON THE TIP OF HIS ACTIVE MEMORY. SHEESH! It's tooooo huge a body of pontifications.

AND, AS I'VE ILLUSTRATED ABOVE, NO TWO CONGREGATIONS, much less different regions are going to provide EXACTLY THE SAME RC EXPERIENCE OR EDUCATION. Sigh.

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.