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)

[bronx2]

As a fundamentalist woman care to share your thoughts on contraception with the group. It might do well for you to inform us of your practices in this area as to spiritually enlighten us concerning the ultra protestant position in this regard. Are we not just all Christians friends?

[wagglebee]

As has been reported, 50,000 people.

Less than expected.

As has been reported by the SAME IDIOTS who underestimated the Glenn Beck rally a couple weeks ago by a factor of ten or so.

[trisham]

The photos are remarkable. Thank goodness we have them.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

They illustrate exactly what has been reported.

A crowd of 50,000.

Less than expected.

[Natural Law]

"Once again we've been provided clear evidence by your post that Roman Catholic apologists label as "lies" any belief or practice that disagrees with Rome."

At least we are making progress when you equate Rome with the truth.

How hard is this for Rome to understand? Disagreement is not "lying." Your opinions carry no more weight than anyone else's opinions.

Were you to limit and identify your comments to opinion I would agree with you. However, when you authoritatively proclaim verifiable falsehoods as fact it is beyond the confines of opinion.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

As a fundamentalist woman care to share your thoughts on contraception with the group.

You presume I am a "fundamentalist."

I presume you are a democrat.

Shall we continue alone these lines?

share your thoughts on contraception with the group.

The only response to your smarmy question has something to do with shorts and lunch.

[Natural Law]

"As has been reported, 50,000 people."

Even if true, however grossly understated, the Pope drew an audience to a single event twice as large as the number of all of the OPCers in the world.

[wagglebee]

So sorry not to answer according to your desires. Let’s try again.

Actually, you didn't answer at all. I half suspect you cut and pasted a canned response.

Who believes 2 + 2 + 7?

I posed a hypothetical to illustrate a point, did it confuse you somehow?

[conservonator]

I posed a hypothetical to illustrate a point, did it confuse you somehow?

I was sure the answer was "B" but based on the response it may very well be "A". It would explain a lot.

[wagglebee]

I took them from markomalley, hopefully he doesn’t mind.

[D-fendr]

We should remember that Catholicism is *not* the state religion, that the Anglicans and Catholics have had a brutal history and that recently there has been controversy. This was the first Papal visit since the Reformation.

In advance of the visit, siren voices had warned that it would all be a disaster. Few would turn up, we were told. Yet 125,000 lined the streets of Edinburgh, according to the police, and 75,000 came to Glasgow's Bellahouston Park. Everywhere the Popemobile went, the crowds were 10 or 12 deep. As reporters moved among them, it was clear that these were not simply the faithful, coming out of a tribal loyalty to their embattled leader, but people of faith and none, simply curious to witness a moment of history – the first state visit by a pope since the Reformation – and to hear a distinctly counter-cultural message, questioning the remorseless march of the me society, with its twin obsessions of consumerism and celebrity.

The Pope's Parting Gift

[stfassisi]

Protestant should be celebrating the work of Christ to satisfy the wrath of God against us

These types of statements confuse the Trinity as if they are not united and CO-Equal LOVE..Thus, come across as the Trinity consisting of a God who is wrath, the other who is only sacrificial satisfaction and would thus leave the Holy Spirit as wrathfully sacrificial.Thus, the angry God needed to be satisfied of His anger by sacrificing God the Son for something He created(mankind)for the sin that God planned mankind to commit according to the Calvinist

It almost seems possible that Calvin thought Christ was totally depraved being Incarnate

Perhaps you should read Bishop Fulton Sheen

In the Divine Essence, the Father not only contemplates His Son, Who is His Eternal Image. As a result of the mutual love for one another, there is also a spiration, or an act of mutual love, which is called the Holy Spirit. Just as to speak means to pronounce a word, and to flower means to produce blossoms, so to love is to breathe love, or sigh, or spirate. As we know that a rosebush is in flower by its blossoms, so the Father gives intellectual expression to all knowledge by His Word. Now we know that the Father and Son are in love, both for themselves and even for us, through their Holy Spirit of Love. This mutual love of Father for Son and of Son for Father is not a fleeting love like ours, but so eternal and so rooted in the Divine essence as to be personal. For that reason, the Holy Spirit is called a Person. The love of friend for friend is sometimes said to make them one soul; but in no sense does it breathe forth a new person. In the family, however, the analogy is better, for the mutual love of husband and wife does "breathe," not wholly in the order of the spirit but in the order of spirit and matter, a new person, who is the bond of their love. But all this is imperfect, for regardless of how much love there is among humans, the good which is loved remains separated and external.

[D-fendr]

They illustrate exactly what has been reported. A crowd of 50,000.

Ok, we'll only accept your acceptable reports then. :)

[RnMomof7]

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.

I knew that.. Thanks

[wagglebee]

It could actually be both, I guess I should have had a choice C.

[OLD REGGIE]

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.

History according to Natural Law? Karl Mark died in 1883, almost 50 years before your "proof" dates.

In any event Social Justice, Liberation Theology, and Marxism have developed into a common "Social Justice" buzz word term.

THINKING CATHOLIC STRATEGIC CENTER

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

[wagglebee]

This was the first Papal visit since the Reformation.

This is the first visit to Scotland. Pope John Paul II visited England in the summer of 1982 and I think that was the first time that any pope had ever been to the British Isles.

[RnMomof7]

As a fundamentalist woman care to share your thoughts on contraception with the group. It might do well for you to inform us of your practices in this area as to spiritually enlighten us concerning the ultra protestant position in this regard. Are we not just all Christians friends?

Maybe Dr E is shy, but as the mother of SEVEN I am not

I believe in a sovereign God, that not one child is conceived that He has not ordained.. Scripture tells us that God opens and closes the womb. He is sovereign

So the issue of birth control is relatively unimportant in the scheme of Gods plans

If God ordained a child it will be, no matter birth control,or tubal ligation or vasectomy or hysterectomy

Man only THINKS he is sovereign over his life and his reproduction

How many children do you have?

[bronx2]

Remembering well Lk 12:9 and Mt 10:33 are you denying and disowning the Divinity of Jesus and His words along with the doctrine of sola scriptura ? We will interpret a non answer or evasive one to be the surrogate of an affirmative one.

Your salvation might well hang in the balance.

[OLD REGGIE]

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.

Your cut and paste without attribution is becoming tiresome.

I have no interest in continuing with this endless spam.