Intended Catholic Dictatorship

Independent Individualist ^ | 8/27/10 | Reginald Firehammer

[Hank Kerchief]

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.

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.

—Reginald Firehammer (06/28/10)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Only a hateful and cruel God needs to force love.

That is the modern, Hallmark version of God.

Scripture gives us another, better revelation of who God is. God loves His children so much that "while they were yet sinners, Christ died for them."

Not after they were good; not after they believed, but before they came to faith, while they were yet sinners Christ redeemed them, and "made them accepted in the beloved."

Read Ephesians 1.

That is love -- that God takes a sinner and turns his eyes from self to Christ for no other reason that it pleases Him to do so.

Congratulate yourself all you want on your clever choice to believe. As for me, I will praise the God of my salvation.

"Faithful is He that calleth you, who also will do it." -- 1 Thess. 5:24

[Quix]

Good points.

[Quix]

Do you REALLY insist

that the Vatican documents are NOT on all sides of that issue?

[D-fendr]

All who seek the Lord will find Him.

Except, according to double predestination, those doomed in the womb are created incapable of this, it is impossible for them - and they will be punished with eternal fire for this incapacity.

[Mad Dawg]

Once again, you are debating a proposition that was not made. The statement I called false was
Rome says outside the Roman Catholic church, there is no salvation.

THAT is false. It is also not equivalent to “Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus”.

While I think you do not know what “Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” means, even if it meant what you think it means, it would not disprove my allegation that the original statement was wrong.

Hint: there is only one Church.
Suggestion: if you want to know what Catholics teach about the Church, read Dominus Iesus.

In general, if you want to attack catholic teaching you'll save a great deal of your own precious time if you find out what it is BEFORE you attack it.

I'm sorry if this sounds, or is, condescending, but this is another case of your firmly asserting something easily shown to be untrue.

[Quix]

Very excellent points and rather close to my own perspective, it appears.

[D-fendr]

All who seek the Lord will find Him.

And, according to double predestination, those saved in the womb are created incapable of doing otherwise - and they will be rewarded for being created with the inability to do otherwise, just as their brothers and sisters burn for being created otherwise. .

[metmom]

I'm sorry if this sounds, or is, condescending, but this is another case of your firmly asserting something easily shown to be untrue.

Nevertheless, widely taught and virtually universally believed.

There's a HUGE disparity between what the Catholic church's official position is supposed to be and what happens and is taught, at the local level.

[Quix]

INDEED.

a helmet with wipers . . . and built-in perfumed aroma dispensers.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

God freely gives His grace to ALL

Nonsensical. If God wants all men to be saved, then all men would be saved.

Does God give all men the same amount of grace? Did it take more grace to turn Paul's eyes to Christ than it did Mary's eyes? Yes, it did.

Therefore, if God gives men differing amounts of grace, according to what it will take to open their eyes and ears, then why doesn't He give enough grace to open all men's eyes and ears?

If you say He does give all men enough grace, then you are proven wrong by simply looking around. I can point to a dozen men who do not believe because the grace of God is not in them. If God wanted those men with Him in heaven, one could rightly assume God would exert enough effort to bring those men to Christ.

The clearest understanding of this life is that it is progressing according to the will and purpose of God for His glory and the welfare of His saints who were named and numbered from before the foundation of the world for His good pleasure and not according to any merit in themselves because salvation is purely a result of God's free, unearned mercy and not His debt owed to men for their clever decision to believe.

[Hegewisch Dupa]

What is ‘double predestination’? And so you know I’m not asking sarcastically, I am desperately fighting off the urge to make a ‘double secret predestination’ crack...

[Quix]

Christianity is blessed with martyrs who refused to water down or deny Truth. Leaders of Christian churches have to be stronger just as the congregations have to be stronger. It’s not enough to silently disagree.

---

WELL PUT.

THX.

[D-fendr]

God loves His children so much that "while they were yet sinners, Christ died for them."

Nice - if we ignore Calvin's Limited Atonement: God loves his children so much that he dooms some in the womb to eternal hell.

You "love" a God who capriciously torments your brothers and sisters in the womb. Why? Because he didn't doom and torment you as well?

Stockholm.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I think that if the records were ever published you would lead all in number of posts pulled.

lol. That is laughably wrong. But I understand why someone would want to deflect their own posts being pulled (which yours have been on this thread) onto someone else.

Pathological.

[1000 silverlings]

so in this "one church" can we boldly appear before the throne of God or do we have to be drawn to Christ through Mary and only then have access to the throne?

What do you as Catholics believe? Mormons believe they have to go thru Joseph Smith to God. Most of us agree that that contention is not a Christian belief.

Is there One Mediary or several, or many? What does the bible say? Are we then bigots for insisting that the bible and not man made ideas, are true?

[metmom]

You know, with all the links and sources showing official church statements (like that there is no salvation outside of the Catholic church), and for any other teaching that former or ex-Catholics call the church on and you guys vehemently deny, when you guys keep telling us that we’re wrong about doctrinal things that make the church look bad, you guys come off looking a bit silly.

When you have to explain away how what is said isn’t really what is said or what it really means, it appears disingenuous. If it doesn’t really mean what it says, then it should be made much more clear. I’m sure there are literate enough scholars within the Catholic church who could rewrite some of this stuff to say what you guys want it to mean so that what it says and what it means are the same thing and you don’t have to go into long, convoluted, linked, and cited explanations of why it doesn’t mean what is says.

[1000 silverlings]

what if you stated "that is love--- that mary takes a sinner and turns his eyes from self to Christ for no other reason that it pleases Her to do so." Is that acceptable Catholic theology?

[Mad Dawg]

Yes.

They are enough "all over the place" that if one wants to one can draw a false conclusion. This is not simply done.

Your side tends to bring to the discussion the prejudicial principle that the Church has been in decline since early on and until you all came along. Alternatively there is the small remnant, too small for any conclusive data to exist to prove its existence, which kept the flickering flame alive in the storm of papist oppression .... and so on.

In a parallel way, hour side tends to think of English Common law as the ONLY paradigm for law.

But our view is one of continuing unfolding and refinement, of increased detail and nuance. So the broad principle is articulate by, say Augustine, while the refining element, well attested in Scripture, lives in tension with the broad principle.

Just as (in our view) stress and dialog led to the divinely assisted conclusion about what to do with the uncircumcized, so also with the Trinity, and the relationship between Christ and God, and with the union of two natures in one Christ, and with the relationship between grace and will.

After all, we can choose to go with a disastrously oversimplified explanation such as that of Calvin's. OR we can acknowledge that these are mysteries beyond (but not contradicting) reason, and therefore expression, and that over time, the firm points, the landmarks will be determines and their location ascertained and we will achieve formulae but not exhaustive depictions which will put an end to all questions.

I think the latter is the correct, or MORE correct, view and I think it is the view of the Church.

For example, Aquinas did not END the conversation on the Eucharist. But he discovered the fixed points within which all subsequent discussion must take place.

[Mr Rogers]

I do not REJECT logic, but neither do I think it adequate to bring us to God. Logic, like everything else that springs from man, is fallen and imperfect.

As for relate - that is what family involves. Relations. It is what exists between two people, and the God of the Bible is personal. He is not a principle to be comprehended or observed, but personal.

Logic has little to do with my marriage to my wife - BOY does it ever have little to do! And logic will not compel us to know God or enjoy Him. My love for my children is not produced by or limited to logic, nor my love of my dogs or my horses. Logic is the wrong tool for the job.

Gratuitous daughter & horses pic...even horses like relations:

[metmom]

FWIW, there is no salvation outside of Christ.

Christ is Christ and the church is the church.

We come to God through Christ, not His church, as it is faith in HIM which results in salvation, not faith in the church, or baptism, or communion, or anything else that one wants to add to Christ.