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.
Just observant.
You misrepresent the idea of papal infallibility, and you misrepresent what Cardinal Newman First, to answer OR -> since the declaration, there has been only 1 instance of it's invocation, but if one takes this back in time as did Catholic theologian and church historian Klaus Schatz who made a thorough study, published in 1985, that identified the following list of ex cathedra documents (see Creative Fidelity: Weighing and Interpreting Documents of the Magisterium, by Francis A. Sullivan, chapter 6):
>> "Tome to Flavian", Pope Leo I, 449, on the two natures in Christ, received by the Council of Chalcedon;
>> Letter of Pope Agatho, 680, on the two wills of Christ, received by the Third Council of Constantinople;
>> Benedictus Deus, Pope Benedict XII, 1336, on the beatific vision of the just prior to final judgment;
>> Cum occasione, Pope Innocent X, 1653, condemning five propositions of Jansen as heretical;
>> Auctorem fidei, Pope Pius VI, 1794, condemning seven Jansenist propositions of the Synod of Pistoia as heretical;
>> Ineffabilis Deus, Pope Pius IX, 1854, defining the Immaculate Conception;
>> Munificentissimus Deus, Pope Pius XII, 1950, defining the Assumption of Mary.
This is of no never mind to me. I am on record as saying there is no official list.
Some posters talk about Pope Honorius I. He became pope on October 27, 625, two days after the death of his predecessor, Boniface V. His pontificate was marked by considerable missionary work centered on England, especially Wessex.
Well, I am probably at least one of the "some" you mention. The fact is Honorius was infallibly convicted of Heresy and excommunicated by the Sixth Ecumenical Council.
Session XIII: “After we had reconsidered, according to the promise which we had made to your highness, the doctrinal letters of Sergius, at one time patriarch of this royal God protected city to Cyrus, who was then bishop of Phasius and to Honorius some time Pope of Old Rome, as well as the letter of the latter to the same Sergius, we find that these documents are quite foreign to the apostolic dogmas, to the declarations of the holy Councils, and to all the accepted Fathers, and that they follow the false teachings of the heretics; therefore we entirely reject them, and execrate them as hurtful to the soul. But the names of those men whose doctrines we execrate must also be thrust forth from the holy Church of God, namely, that of Sergius some time bishop of this God-preserved royal city who was the first to write on this impious doctrine; also that of Cyrus of Alexandria, of Pyrrhus, Paul, and Peter, who died bishops of this God preserved city, and were like minded with them; and that of Theodore sometime bishop of Pharan, all of whom the most holy and thrice blessed Agatho, Pope of Old Rome, in his suggestion to our most pious and God preserved lord and mighty Emperor, rejected, because they were minded contrary to our orthodox faith, all of whom we define are to be subject to anathema. And with these we define that there shall be expelled from the holy Church of God and anathematized Honorius who was some time Pope of Old Rome, because of what we found written by him to Sergius, that in all respects he followed his view and confirmed his impious doctrines.”
Was this Council in error?
Apologetics can attempt to, but cannot rewrite or redefine history.
A statement of opinion from one with such a veracity deficit simply isn't credible, but I no longer find it offensive.
I recognize this is a long and painful process, but at least your attention is in the right place. Eventually, your prodigal heart will be there too.
"Unitarians, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Hindu's and Buddhists" do not, as a rule and practice of their faith, slaughter Protestants, as Rome does.
They do not wage war on those who proclaim the Bible, as Rome does.
They do not damn to hell those who believe in salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, as Rome does.
Animists
Pagans fall under the rubric of Roman Catholicism.
Muslims
Muslims are Rome's brothers, not Christians'.
That statement is making it personal and therefore against the rules of the religion forum.
If you can't abide by the rules set down for the benefit of all of us, perhaps you should stick to another forum.
There, fixed it for you.
It is encouraging to see that the Holy Spirit keeps the Church before your eyes. One day they will be opened.
Just one Hindu?
I eagerly await your many threads on the above groups, to demonstrate your own "honest concern for the Godless".
Let she who is without sin cast the first stone.
Your question should not be why a Catholic such as me spends so much time on Catholic topic threads, it should be why those like you, who are not Catholics, have such a fascination with the Church.
PERHAPS THEY ARE NOT SUFFICIENTLY interested in ministering to the Hindus.
They do, however, seem to be gearing up to minister to the Alpha Centaurians:
The following can be discussed on this thread, here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2549002/posts?page=691
This appears to be yet another indication that the Vatican is ready to join the globalists in leading the world's citizens down the yellow brick road to the satanic global government that the fallen angel critters and their technologies have been aiding for at least 6 decades.
FROM:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20100917/tsc-intelligent-aliens-god-s-children-4b158bc.html
When and if I break the rules I get chastised.
Same with you. Don’t continue to “make this personal.”
Gibberish is not a sound defense for your faith. Keep reading your Bible and pray for ears to hear.
I will accept chastizement from a properly authorized Moderator. Anything from you is just unwarranted noise.
Accept whatever you want. When you break the rules, you break the rules.
“”Unitarians, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Hindu’s and Buddhists” do not, as a rule and practice of their faith, slaughter Protestants, as Rome does.”
Of those groups the only one I’m aware of that will not slaughter anyone at all (Catholic, Protestant, whatever) is Jehovah’s Witnesses.
You've made this statement more than once this morning.
And I'm delighted to see that you acknowledge that THIS THREAD SPECIFICALLY is a "Catholic topic thread."
That it is.
Legatus: I knew when I typed out that very brief description I was opening myself up for this kind of thing
Legatus: openly posting personal experiences is an invitation for public comments
Dear lady... if someone can't see what's actually written it's no wonder the wrong conclusions are reached. One wouldn't be in error to surmise if that's a failing in common discourse it might also extend to a complete inability to read, comprehend and apply the lessons of Sacred Scripture.
Not much more can really be said sadly.
It just amazes me that something taught AS FACT for hundreds of years was not "doctrine" so it can just be eliminated at the will of the pope..
If someone doesn’t want comments on their private life, they shouldn’t post long paragraphs about their private life.
Fourteen years of not wanting anyone to touch them is a rather bizarre result from reading one book.
She put it out there. No one solicited her life story.
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.