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)

[Judith Anne]

Your hew and cry of “racism” is invalid.

Considering your record for accuracy, I cannot agree.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I cannot agree

Now see, here's the difference. I don't scream that you don't have a right to disagree.

Isn't that nice? Practice.

[OLD REGGIE]

Re: Honorius Isn't it about time you gave up on the CatholicCulture website?

Remember what we said of "A pope’s private theological opinions are not infallible, only what he solemnly defines is considered to be infallible teaching" Honorius did not teach Monothelitism, all the facts, every history shows that he did NOT teach Monothelitism

Pay attention. The Sixth Ecumenical Council INFALLIBLY convicted Honorius of heresy and excommunicated him.

Try a web site which denys the infallibility of the Council rather than chasing your tail on the Honorius diversion.

[OLD REGGIE]

The pope is infallible, except when he’s not.

The amusing thing is, though I have been bombarded with spam declaring Honorius was not speaking "Infallibly" I have not seen a single post denying what I really said:

The Sixth Ecumenical Council INFALLIBLY convicted Honorius of Heresy and excommunicated him.

[Forest Keeper]

Let us now consider these statements of authoritative Catholic doctrine one at a time.

Outstanding analysis, Dr. E. Great post!

Social justice is a leftist term that has no meaning in the real world. There has never been and can never be a society that has social justice. Social justice is simply a Marxist slogan the effect of which is to delegitimize every existing society, or rather, to delegitimize Western political society.

Amen. If only more people saw that this is the main aim of the Obama presidency. Perhaps they will. May God make it so.

[wagglebee]

As I said, all media reports have put the crowds at less than Rome had first hoped for.

You mean the media is downplaying how many people attended events where someone was talking about the immorality of things like abortion and homosexuality? Shocking!

There is a God.

Are you thanking God for the leftist media now?

And just because there were other groups who didn't want him there, either, does not negate the fact that thousands of Anglicans protested Ratzinger's appearance at Westminster.

The story I posted said there were about 200. I realize that may seem like a lot of people by OPC standards, but it is really very small.

You do realize don't you that the Anglicans who were protesting the Pope were the Anglicans who LIKE the secularization of Christianity?

[Judith Anne]

Now see, here's the difference. I don't scream that you don't have a right to disagree.

And if you did, I would laugh.

Isn't that nice? Practice.

Once again, you attempt to command others to do YOUR will.

[RnMomof7]

Immaculate Conception remains utterly unknown to the East.

That is interesting, I never knew that . I have always felt that the EO's traditions were closer to the traditions at the time of the break ...

On the resurrection, I noted as you do that Christ was raised by the power of the Father.. that is consistent through scripture

[Legatus]

Drop what?

[RnMomof7]

I am a sinner saved by grace.

[RnMomof7]

You guys give me Paul and Isaiah. I give you Jesus.

Actually Mark, I quoted Jesus to you.. but we need to remember that all the words of scripture are equally inspired. It was the Holy Spirit that brought to mind all os the NT accounts and quotes ..there was no one taking notes or recording the words of Christ.. the memories are Holy Spirit inspired as is Acts and the epistles

[wagglebee]

That is interesting, I never knew that . I have always felt that the EO's traditions were closer to the traditions at the time of the break ...

It's worth noting though that the Eastern Orthodox DO BELIEVE that the Blessed Mother lived a life without sin.

Many Catholics and Protestants are also unaware that the Orthodox understanding of that nature of Original Sin and its consequences are quite different from ours. Catholic and Protestant beliefs regarding Original Sin are based on the teachings of St. Augustine and the Orthodox reject a lot of these teachings.

[Natural Law]

"Social justice is a leftist term that has no meaning in the real world. There has never been and can never be a society that has social justice. Social justice is simply a Marxist slogan the effect of which is to delegitimize every existing society, or rather, to delegitimize Western political society."

It would appear that your authoritative source, Austen, is as wrong about social justice as he is about the inferiority of Africans. The Catholic Church has defined and taught the desirability and goal of social justice long before there was ever a Karl Marx.

1928 - Society ensures social justice when it provides the conditions that allow associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and their vocation. Social justice is linked to the common good and the exercise of authority.

1929 - Social justice can be obtained only in respecting the transcendent dignity of man. The person represents the ultimate end of society, which is ordered to Him.

What is at stake is the dignity of the human person, whose defense and promotion have been entrusted to us by the Creator, and to whom the men and women at every moment of history are strictly and responsibly in debt.

Now that you have been made aware of your error all subsequent repetitions will legitimately be classified as lies.

[Cronos]

And, of course, to remind you, what IS Monothelism? It tries to understand how divine and human relate in the person of Jesus. It taught that Jesus had two natures but only one will. This is contrary to the more common Christology that Jesus Christ has two wills (human and divine) corresponding to his two natures.

What was the historical background? In the 5 century AD there were debates on the nature of Jesus Christ. Although the Church had already dogmatically defined that Christ was the Son of God, just what his exact nature was was open to debate. The Church had declared the notion that Jesus was not fully divine heretical in the 4th century during the debates over Arianism and had declared that he was God the Son become human. However, as he was both God and man, there now emerged a dispute over exactly how the human and divine natures of Christ actually existed within the person of Christ.

The Christological definition of Chalcedon, as accepted by the Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Anglican, and Lutheran churches, is that Christ remains in two distinct natures, yet these two natures come together within His one hypostasis. This position was opposed by the Monophysites who held that Christ possessed one nature only. The term Monophysitism covered two specific versions of this form of Christology. The first, Eutychianism, held that the human and divine natures of Christ were fused into one new single (mono) nature. As described by Eutyches, his human nature was "dissolved like a drop of honey in the sea", and therefore his nature was really divine.[2] The second is referred to as Miaphysitism, which contends that, after the union, Christ is in one theanthropic (human-divine) nature, which is generated from the union of two natures, the two being united without separation, without confusion, and without alteration. It is this version of Monophysitism to which the Oriental Orthodox churches currently adhere.

This internal division was dangerous for the Byzantine Empire, which was under constant threat from external enemies, especially as many of the areas most likely to be lost to the empire were the regions that were in favour of Monophysitism, and who considered the religious hierarchy at Constantinople to be heretics only interested in crushing their faith.

In these provinces, the Non-Chalcedonians were far more numerous than the Chalcedonians. In Egypt for instance, some 30,000 Greeks of Chalcedonian persuasion were ranged against some five million Coptic Non-Chalcedonians. Meanwhile, Syria and Mesopotamia were divided between Nestorianism and Jacobitism, while the religion of Armenia was wholly Cyrilline Non-Chalcedonian. Consequently the Monothelite teaching emerged as a compromise position. The Byzantine emperor Heraclius tried to unite all of the various factions within the Empire with this new formula that was more inclusive and more elastic.

[Cronos]

And, in all of these discussions about the Trinity — what do YOU, as a Unitarian believe in regarding the Trinity? Don’t unitarians deny the Trinity and the divinity of Christ?

[D-fendr]

Why is then the "off" human being sent to hell and the "on" human (the one who is actually consciously sinning (!) is "saved"???

I know the "correct" answer (both deserve it/original sin), but as you illustrate, even with that - I can't make that work.

What I was trying to do was deal primarily with free will. How one can personally experience it daily and think it doesn't exist. That's the biggest hair-puller for me

[bronx2]

The Immaculate Conception isn't unknown in the sense the Orthodox don't know of the concept's existence, it is unknown in the sense the Orthodox didn't accept it and have the concept of the Theotokis which really has to studied in light of other Orthodox beliefs.

[count-your-change]

Ahhhh...for the good old days when Bing Crosby wore a collar and choir boys kept their mouths shut.

[wagglebee]

And, of course, to remind you, what IS Monothelism? It tries to understand how divine and human relate in the person of Jesus. It taught that Jesus had two natures but only one will. This is contrary to the more common Christology that Jesus Christ has two wills (human and divine) corresponding to his two natures.

Many Protestants seem to have this romantic idea that early heretics were basically Protestants who just wanted to practice sola scriptura but were persecuted by the Church. What they need to understand that these early heretics were actually heretics who were preaching heresy that is every bit as repulsive to Protestants as it is to Catholics and Orthodox.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

lol.

But in “the good old days” Bing Crosby beat his children mercilessly. All four boys hated him. Gary wrote a scathing autobiography of his family life, and two of Crosby’s sons, Dennis and Lindsay, committed suicide.

The sins of the father...