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.
I’ve read chapters. I will read the entire book. But the chapters I’ve read support the contention that Mother Teresa had lost her faith in God and Christ.
You really know nothing about monastic life at all.
“”Nothing about Christ losing His faith in God, as Mother Teresa said she had done.””
Divinity cannot lose faith so don’t be comparing apple and oranges.
Loss of faith can strengthen faith and increase the virtues through battle which is evident in the life of Mother Teresa.
God works in mysterious ways ,Dr E. It’s not always the way we think
Te original Vulgate was not a very reliable translation of the Greek. The term hypostasis is a Pauline invention which appears in 2 Corinthians twice (9:4 and 11:17), and in the Pauline-like Hebrews (1:3 and 3:14).
Newer editions of Vulgate translate hypostasis either as confidence or as substance (matter!), which removes the confusing "person" concept but violates the immaterial nature or essence of the divine hypostatic reality.
The NAB corrects this by using nature rather than substance, which is certainly a better translation theologically speaking but represent another example of a doctrinally-driven translation, which corrupts just about every Bible version one way or another.
The KJV, which was based on the older version of Vulgate as a backup to the available (rather corrupt late Greek copy), translated "hypostasis" as person which is where mnost Protestants get their "mulitple perosnality" idea of God.
The Protestant Bibles, which the Catholics seem to be so quick to condemn, are translations of the oldest and most reliable manuscripts, not translations of a translation, being English from Latin from Greek/Hebrew
The Protestant version is based on Textus Receptus, a 16th century translation of a very corrupt Greek source supplemented by copies of original Vulgate.
The oldest manuscripts (for example NAB) differ quite an bit from Textus Receptus derived Bibles.
The New Testament quotes of the Old Testament are based mostly on the Greek Septuagint (LXX), whose pre-Christian manuscirputs are very few and far in between. The Christian era mnuscripts of the LXX are attempts to bring them closer to the Hebrew text or are translations of Greek into Syriac, and show marked discrepancies, internally and across.
The early Church used LXX as its OT source. It was Jerome (6th century) who proposed including the Hebrew version as well. The East never accepted that and uses to this day the LXX. The Hebrew Bible, of course, is only the Pharisaical Bible which did not agree fully with the Essene version, the pre-Christian LXX, the Sadducee canon, or the Samaritan Torah.
So, no matter how you turn it, it's still an artificial collection of books chosen by someone's personal preference, and doctrinal inclination.
You must be a huge Benny Hinn fan.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Amen.
Which is why Natural Law's statement, "She (Mother Teresa) lost her faith to the same extent Jesus lost His," is wicked and wrong, as you've noted.
Divinity cannot lose faith, but Mother Teresa says she lost hers.
NL's comparison is spurious.
Not even a little bit.
Ha. That's funny. Alluding to Trinity is not the same as dogma. The Bible mentioned the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost in various places but that "Trinity" is nothing like the Triniatrian dogma. If anything is it subordinatonalist with regard to the Son, and the Holy Spirit is a distant third.
All early Christian apologetics professed a very tiered (unequal) biblcal "Trinity" incompatible with the Trinitarian dogma of a co-eternal, co-equal hypostatic reality of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit.
It took the Church good 300 years to figure out the "correct" Trinitarian formula. The reason being, of course, is that it is not found in the Bible. Mentioning Father, Son and Spirit is not a dogma. It says nothing of their nature, how they relate, etc. If anything, the biblical picture of a suboridnaitonalist Son and a distant third Spirit, who is basically an errand boy, is a far cry form the Trinitarian dogma of Christianity.
Because they can't say it with any certainty.
Good grief. I posted excerpts the other day.
Very few of our Bible Believing (tm) friends actually believe in the Bible. They have a scrapbook of snippets that their pastor tells them cut out and arrange in a certain fashion.
Sure they can.
For someone who makes as many typos and grammatical errors as you do, you presume editing abilities beyond your pay grade.
According to your value system you should.
Obviously you know nothing about my “value systems.”
Jesus never lost His faith and neither did Mother Teresa. Allegory isn't your strength, is it?
Good grief, you’ve posted excerpts of them all day.
Since I don't argue against myself at all, I can hardly be arguing against myself again. But I will share some of the Good News with you, if you will permit it:
1 Corinthians 2: 1 When I came to you, brothers, proclaiming the mystery of God, 1 I did not come with sublimity of words or of wisdom. 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified. 3 I came to you in weakness 2 and fear and much trembling, 4 and my message and my proclamation were not with persuasive (words of) wisdom, 3 but with a demonstration of spirit and power, 5 so that your faith might rest not on human wisdom but on the power of God.
6 4 Yet we do speak a wisdom to those who are mature, but not a wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age who are passing away. 7 Rather, we speak God's wisdom, 5 mysterious, hidden, which God predetermined before the ages for our glory, 8 and which none of the rulers of this age 6 knew; for if they had known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But as it is written: "What eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and what has not entered the human heart, what God has prepared for those who love him," 10 this God has revealed to us through the Spirit.For the Spirit scrutinizes everything, even the depths of God. 11 Among human beings, who knows what pertains to a person except the spirit of the person that is within? Similarly, no one knows what pertains to God except the Spirit of God. 12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the things freely given us by God. 13 And we speak about them not with words taught by human wisdom, but with words taught by the Spirit, describing spiritual realities in spiritual terms. 7 14 Now the natural person 8 does not accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him it is foolishness, and he cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually.
I pray that God comes into your life, as I do with all who do not believe in the Faith of Christ. As God has told us, He would have all men be saved, even the Reformed, no matter how stiff their necks and how proud their demeanour.
It's really something to be pitied that they have nothing of substance to get Protestantism on so they have to make things up to misrepresent and accuse us of
You are entitled to your opinion, but spare me the judgment. I wish everyone a good night.
Did the councils and church fathers create church dogma regarding the Trinity? How? What was the basis for their understanding?
It took the Church good 300 years to figure out the "correct" Trinitarian formula.
On what did the church base this "'correct' Trinitarian formula?"
Weather reports.
Valentines?
Tea leaves?
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.