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.
No doubt you will fill us in on the correct history.
I'm sure that the handful who don't often wind up in the tents, buying snake oil salvation and making the likes of Joel Osteen and Benny Hinn rich. The majority of Catholics, who do, understand the allure of the religions of man such as all that which came from the Reformation.
Can you explain to me how 1/4 of the OPC is listed as a member and not baptised? How does that work?
We don't have to make anything up. Calvin wrote things that would have made Dr. Timothy Leary at the height of his LSD experimentations proud, and the 8 or 9 generations of Protestants that have come about after him have only improved on that original craziness.
while Protestants point to actual practices and rites and beliefs Roman Catholics hold and then demolish those errors by the truth of Scripture.
Just as Calvin got his salvational teachings backwards, so do the anti Catholics get their points backwards. How can somebody claim to have the truth of Scripture when most of Scripture is either ignored or reduced to out of context snippets? The WCF is a perfect case in point. Meaningless gibberish generated from the mind of a madman, utilizing snippets of the OT and out of context snippets of Paul, and calling it based on the Gospels, which are either wholly ignored or reduced to tertiary commentary, not primary proofs.
Weelll, that's true.
Never denied it.
Thank you, wagglebee!
That's not quite true.
The term Protestant is taken from the "Protestation at Speyer" when a group of German nobles aligned with or sympathetic to Martin Luther signed a letter that began with the words, "We protest" to the Holy Roman Empire's decision to basically destroy Lutheranism.
Do I agree with what Luther did? No, but I have always admired his conviction. Luther's "95 Theses" addressed many LEGITIMATE areas of corruption in the Church, things that have long since been corrected. The Church NEVER sanctioned the sale of indulgences, but a great many in the Church also looked the other way when it happened. There were things that NEEDED to be addressed and it is unfortunate that the outcome was what it was. I have long believed that Luther's desire WAS NOT to divide the Church, but I think he was pressured by a noblemen who had a great deal to gain by having a German Church that was was not subject to the Vatican.
The Augsburg Confession is the fundamental to the Lutheran Church and it is something that Catholics should certainly understand. In the mid-1970s, Pope Benedict XVI expressed his belief that it could possibly be seen as a Catholic document. However, the Augsburg Confession was rejected by other Reformation leaders and this lead to the the division among Protestants.
So basically, I think it is wrong of us to lump Protestants together. While we have our differences, I believe that Lutherans, Anglicans and many who come from this tradition truly are united with Catholics in our belief in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
As usual, your posts are filled with emtpy, sarcastic generalities.
Is it because you have no point other than to deride your Scriptural opposition with name-calling?
Blessed Augustine gives us a glimpse into understanding this through typology of Psalms
From Blessed Augustine...
"Christ bearing humanity,setting a model for us,shows a certain private will,in which He figured both His will and ours,because He is the head and,as you know,as limbs(membra) we attached are attached to Him : Father,He said:"if it can be ,let this cup pass from me"(en. Ps.32.2.1.2.13)"- Saint Augustine
Uh, oh... ALL "...men shall rise again with their bodies..."
What does ALL mean? Are their exceptions for those you (men) declare as "Saints"? Is there an exception for "Bodily Assumption" as declared by mere men?
Nah! She'd be so poorly Catechized it would be a waste of time for all involved.
We are not saved by our good works..if we were Ted Turner would be a saint
lololol.
It would be difficult not to cut class and go off and do something really rebellious like reading the Bible.
Who said I was OPC?
So you know..we see Calvin as a flawed man that put his pants on one leg at a time..
We have not called him a saint nor do we plan to pray to him.. BUT I will say that He proclaimed Christ as Savior and Lord.. something Mother Teresa never did ...
Correct. The Church sees the human being as spiritually ill, but not dead, and in need of a spiritual physician (Christ) and a spiritual hospital (Church).
[The Council of] Trent reiterated its condemnations of Pelagianism and and semi-Pelagianism as well as condemning the Calvinist view.
HD has this thing about the Church being basically Pelagian and obviously thinks that any free will is a confession of ay least semi-Pelaginaism, which is of course completely off the mark. The Church, both East and West, has maintained that salvation is neither accomplished by man's free will (Pelagianism), nor initiated by it (semi-Pelagianism). The Church steadfastly taught that man can do nothing without Grace, and that it is God who initiates and carries man's salvation.
But the Church also teaches synergy, where man, through his own free will cooperates with God the way a patient cooperates with a physician. That is not (semi)Pelagianism.
“
Still more. It does not mean that the Father, the first person of the Trinity, left the Son, the second person of the Trinity, or that the Father was in any way displeased with Him. The Lord could say, “My Father loveth Me because I lay down My life for the sheep.” The Father loved the Son!
What does it mean? It means this. That God, in eternal love for His people, now takes the hot coals of the holy judgment that our sins deserved and places them upon His beloved Son and gives His Son to suffer what we would deserve in an eternity of the darkness of hell. The cup that the Lord saw in Gethsemane, a cup that was forged by the holiness of God as it reacts against and consumes the sins of which we are guilty — that cup He has now willingly taken and He has drunk it all.
It pleased the Lord to bring this to Him (Is. 53). Voluntarily our Lord has entered into this darkness for us. In love for us, the Father hath placed it all upon Him. God the Father took the judgment, which would consume us eternally in hell, and poured it all into the soul of His Son. A darkness deeper than a hundred midnights has been brought to Calvary. And Jesus now has endured that darkness for us.
Let us allow the Scriptures, then, simply to explain the mystery to us. II Corinthians 5:21, “For he (that is, God) hath made him (that is, His Son in the flesh) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” Galatians 3:13, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.” The One whose delight it was to commune with the Father is now made to suffer all that it means to be cast out by a holy God into the darkness of eternal hell.
The darkness that He deserved? Oh no! The darkness that we deserved. God has placed upon His Son the judgment that the elect of God deserved in order that they would not bear that judgment but be made righteous in Him.
I know why He was abandoned of God. Do you? No, I cannot comprehend, I cannot at all fathom the depth of what is being revealed to us. Jesus abandoned by His God! In a sense I am glad that I will never comprehend the depth of that. But I do know why this had to be. Do you know why? The answer is this: So that I might never be forsaken of God.
http://www.reformedwitnesshour.org/2004/2004apr04.html
Crude and loony images to go with your crude and loony remarks.
Capital H on "He," the pronoun indicating Calvin? Mercy! So, Mother Teresa never proclaimed Christ as Lord and Savior? Really? Do you have a source for that remarkable statement?
Nonsense. We know exactly what Roman Catholics think because they tell us what they think every day.
It's an impossibility. I'll be long gone, cremated, and my ashes scattered in the ocean, "Filling" you in on hundreds of years of history.
Stick to your Childrens Catechism Comic Book version.
Capital H on "He," the pronoun indicating Calvin? Mercy! So, Mother Teresa never proclaimed Christ as Lord and Savior? Really? Do you have a source for that remarkable statement?
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.