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.
CANON 13. Concerning the restoration of free will. The freedom of will that was destroyed in the first man can be restored only by the grace of baptism, for what is lost can be returned only by the one who was able to give it. Hence the Truth itself declares: "So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed" (John 8:36).
Thank you. Roman Catholics conveniently forget about the Council of Orange and skip right over 1,000 years of theological understanding of God's predestination until they arrive at the Council of Trent, called and instituted to rebuke the reformation and its Scriptural teaching.
Then at the Council of Orange in 529 AD, the Christians united to reject free will in favor of God’s sovereign grace. And again in 855, the Council of Valence affirmed a double predestination. During the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century, Martin Luther called the doctrine of predestination the cor ecclesia, the heart of the Church. Luther wrote more about predestination than did John Calvin, even though the term “Calvinism” was unfortunately applied to the doctrine. If one looks at the greatest theologians in the 2,000 years of Christian history—Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Edwards—although these men disagree on other issues and are by no means infallible, all of them agree on this question of predestination.
—Council of Valence, 855 “Predestination to Life is the everlasting Purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) He hath decreed by His counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom He hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honor.” —Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England, 1563 St. Augustine (543-430) “From all eternity God decreed all that should happen in time, and this He did freely and unalterably, consulting only His own wise and holy will.... The angels and men who are the subjects of God's predestination are clearly and irreversibly designated, and their number is unalterably fixed.” —The Baptist Confession of 1689 ... About the year 400, Augustine and Pelagius fought over this doctrine—and Pelagius was condemned as a heretic for his doctrine of free will.
“We confess a predestination of the elect to life, and a predestination of the wicked to death; that, in the election of those who are saved, the mercy of God precedes anything we do, and in the condemnation of those who will perish, evil merit precedes the righteous judgment of God.”
More from the Council of Orange...
Canon 18. That grace is not preceded by merit. Recompense is due to good works if they are performed; but grace, to which we have no claim, precedes them, to enable them to be done.
Canon 6. If anyone says that God has mercy upon us when, apart from his grace, we believe, will, desire, strive, labor, pray, watch, study, seek, ask, or knock, but does not confess that it is by the infusion and inspiration of the Holy Spirit within us that we have the faith, the will, or the strength to do all these things as we ought; or if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, “What have you that you did not receive?” (1 Cor. 4:7), and, “But by the grace of God I am what I am” (1 Cor. 15:10).
lol. I should have kept reading. You’ve got it covered. 8~)
Why are men called to preach the Gospel? So that those whom God has given ears to hear will hear the truth and believe the truth.
How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!" -- Romans 10:13-15 "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
However, Rome doesn't show me that same courtesy. Rome says outside the Roman Catholic church, there is no salvation.
So who's the real "bigot?"
For much of the NT, it was very smooth. The 4 Gospels and the writing of Paul and 1 Peter and 1 John were, IIRC, all accepted almost immediately as scripture. Revelations and Hebrews were not, and 2 Peter, 2,3 John were also in doubt.
From my perspective, the Good News does not rest on 2 Peter or Revelations or Hebrews. I read them and accept them as scripture, but I wouldn’t have to change any of my beliefs if they fell out of the Bible.
Over a year ago, I posted this thread on how we got the New Testament, and kosta50 & I discussed things at length at that time. I post it here for any who want to re-read the articles or the debate.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2320483/posts
The Baptist in me says each of us is responsible for his/her decisions under God, and we make them and will be judged for them as individuals. As I’ve explained (admitted?) to kosta50 before, I BELIEVE what I believe, but I do not think logic forces us to become Christians, or to believe the scriptures.
I sometimes argue with birthers on other threads because I do not believe the courts are the proper place to settle a political question. In like manner, I don’t believe logic is the proper tool for relating to God or other people.
I’m an Arminian, not a Calvinist, but I appreciate the scripture that says, “14 One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.” (Acts 16) As an Arminian, I don’t believe we come to God by our own power - God has to draw us. But we can reject the will of God, and will do so if we insist logic must be our guide.
Long ago, I read a book called “A Severe Mercy” (http://www.amazon.com/Severe-Mercy-Sheldon-Vanauken/dp/0060688246/ref=sr_1_1_title_0_main?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1284485093&sr=1-1). Logic lead him to the point of decision, but he realized that decision required faith. However, he also realized that refusing to take the step of faith was also a decision...and we will be held accountable for the decisions we make. It takes a leap to accept Christ, but also one to reject Him.
I’m not saying I agree. But this is a very thoughtful account. I understand the respect given to Sproul.
Rome is permeated by the "feminine," to the near exclusion of the masculine God the Father and God the Son.
Rome teaches "God the mother." "God the woman."
Paganism.
Thank you for re-affirming your complete misunderstanding of life, men and God.
"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." -- Isaiah 45:7
False.
I'd say one indication of bigotry is the persistent misquoting of texts even after correction is offered repeatedly and the consistent misinterpretation of texts after other interpretations are provided again and again.In general, if, despite the ready accessibility of the truth, someone persists in presenting false accounts, I would tend to conclude that that person's judgment is more important to him than the truth.
False.
I'd say one indication of bigotry is the persistent misquoting of texts even after correction is offered repeatedly and the consistent misinterpretation of texts after other interpretations are provided again and again.
In general, if, despite the ready accessibility of the truth, someone persists in presenting false accounts, I would tend to conclude that that person's judgment is more important to him than the truth.
Nonsense. The good that we do is the good work of Christ within us. And that good work of Christ will stand in testimony to God's love for us when we are judged. Judged not by our sins, but by the righteousness of Christ within us.
The evil that men do, when not covered by the blood of Christ, will condemn them.
Read Hebrews 10. Or don't and remain clueless.
Then at the Council of Orange in 529 AD, the Christians united to reject free will in favor of God’s sovereign grace.
Those are two extreme distortions of the outcomes. I'm not surprised. It is to be expected when you get your information from dubious anti-Catholic websites.
LOLOL. "Manners." Yeah, that's the ticket.
If JPII had really known the history of Islam, he would NOT have kissed a book that demands death to all Christians.
Satanic. Absolute blindness. Utterly depraved. Debasing.
Rome cannot apologize enough for this pope's total insanity; for his crude and detestable "manners."
I assume this is just another attempt to ratchet up the rhetoric to get some Catholic to lash out in response, not unlike a wide receiver trying to draw an interference call. It surely doesn't represent anything the Catholic Church teaches.
Again, RC apologists offers no Scripture nor support for their prejudices.
Your assumption is imputing motive. Please stop breaking the rules.
Oh, well, in that case...
On the contrary. the "I assume" was a disclaimer, indicating an opinion of your post. You know about disclaimers, right?
As Scripture tells us, men are either slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness. Your misunderstanding of that fact has been noted.
Tell us some more about bigotry.
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.