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.
Roman Catholic apologetics may well be filled with "dimwits and liars" but that isn't a good reason not to understand the Bible.
Why did Jesus speak in parables?
That's a pretty basic question of Christianity. RCs are always touting the fact they quote Christ (a fact not in evidence, but stated nonetheless.) So since Christ Himself tells us He does indeed speak in parables and why He does so, it isn't a stretch to wonder why a Roman Catholic wouldn't know the answer.
Maybe Roman Catholics haven't read those words of Christ to know the answer He's given us.
Or maybe they don't understand the words of Christ to know the answer.
What does the Roman Catholic church teach as to why Christ spoke in miracles?
I have seen so many definitions from both Protestants and Catholics I can't know exactly what you mean by "sola scriptura crowd" except that it is most likely derogatory.
I imagine any people, including agnostics and athiests, who celebrate Christmas on December 25th do so because it is a "traditional" date to do so.
However, I doubt the "sola scripture crowd" prays to the legendary and fictitional "Saint" Nicholas. Do you?
No, Catholics hate (or at least we’re supposed to hate) the way the doctrines taught by St. Paul are twisted and used against their purpose. So yes, sometimes he’s a pain in the backside because people bend his teaching into every conceivable shape... St. Peter warned about that, and it wasn’t an idle warning having no basis in reality.
As for personal preferences based on his writing style, I think that’s up to the individual. The Church doesn’t require that we like the personality of the Sacred Writers and St. Paul revealed much of himself. He doesn’t have to be likeable to be right. Jeremiah would probably drive me crazy too but being a prophet of God doesn’t mean being a nice guy with whom I’d enjoy an evening discussing hobbies.
What I do understand is that catholics have more faith in Mystic visions than they do in the scriptures.. which is how the deception entered
Those who have noetic prayer in their hearts do, however, communicate with one another. In other words, they have the ability to sit together, and communicate with each other noetically, without speaking. That is, they are able to communicate spiritually. Of course, this also occurs even when such people are far apart. They also have the gifts of clairvoyance and foreknowledge. Through clairvoyance, they can sense both other peoples sins and thoughts (logismoi), while foreknowledge enables them to see and talk about subjects, deeds, and events in the future. Such charismatic people really do exist. If you go to them for confession, they know everything that you have done in your life before you open your mouth to tell them.
Satan can and does all these things.. they all add up to witchcraft ...
All of human history is only properly understood through the lens of Christ, not in some abstract manner, but directly. Not only does St. Paul not make any sense without oblique reference to Christ but he doesn't make sense without direct reference to what Jesus Christ said and did. In that sense, St. Paul doesn't explain Christ, Christ explains St. Paul.
And from that you got:
Wow Catholics really hate Paul, the man God assigned to be the primary teacher to the NT church.
Are you kidding me?! You believe St. Paul stands on his own and that Christ isn't the necessary lens through which everything must be understood? You can make sense of St. Paul without Christ?
oh, and this one time? The cousin of a friend of my neighbor's uncle by marriage on my grandma's side, had this friend of a friend who knew this guy who was married to this guy's sister who had a nephew whose wife's sister's husband's cousin's girlfriend went to this Catholic church once and left in horror when the priest kept looking at a choir boy all thru mass. It was just disgusting and it's true!
That is open to interpretation. If Jesus really meant the thief would be with Him in paradise on that day it was the only person Jesus promised an immediate "trip to paradise" when he died.
lol
Don't have much time today, so I will be brief. There is plenty of evidence to show that Isaiah's reference to the "Suffeirng Servent" is about Israel and not some future God-man.
Don't unbelievers believe in prophecy?
I don't know. You need to ask an unbeliever. I do not deny God, so you must have me confused with someone else. If you don't know something, that is not a denial.
At last! You acknowledge Mary as the Mother of God!
Excellent find, SFA.
It realy gripes me when the reformed think they are our instructors, that they can examine our inmost beliefs at will simply by demand. I wonder if they think they can give us all tests?
It makes me wonder who they think they are. Certainly not examples of Christ’s healing Love.
Gamecock, we've got another one for you.
The very reason for Paul's life was to "explain Christ" to Jews, Gentiles, you, me and the world.
"We preach Christ crucified...Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God." -- 1 Corinthians 1:23-24
Have RCs even read the Bible? Or do they just take the word of their church what the Bible says? What do they think the meaning of "preaching" is? "Preaching" is "explaining Christ."
Rome doesn't much care for preaching. Rome prefers its anti-Scriptural rites and superstitions.
But that is not how God tells us men are saved. Men are saved by hearing the Gospel with new ears and understanding it for the first time so they are brought to faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.
And what is the explanation of the Gospel?
As Paul explained to all who could hear...
"And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." -- Phil. 2:11
So here Paul explains to us that Jesus Christ is God.
Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus." -- Romans 3:23-26" For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Here Paul explains that Christ died to pay for our sins, wherein His righteousness would cover those who believe in His name as Lord and Savior.
Paul lived and died to "explain Christ." That is the same job you and I are supposed to be doing on this forum.
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." -- Mark 16:15-16"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
(Note that Christ says all men are to believe and be baptized in His name, but only disbelief will damn a person.)
This goes back to the OT law that men born or injured with certain conditions could not hold the priesthood. Sometimes, like lepers and prostitutes, the official religion was unaccepting of them. The social outcasts were the people he went among and preached to.
when the priest kept looking at a choir boy all thru mass.
Well, that part's true.
Amen. Thanks for that Scriptural, simple explanation of something Rome has erected a false facade of ritual around, wrongly elevating celibacy above marriage and family.
Indeed. A case for Sola Scriptura if there ever was one. It doesn't include tradition or word of MOUTH. It's the Word of God.
Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
If Pauline theology is not grounded in Christ it’s pointless, and yet you don’t seem to be saying that, you just seem to be arguing for no actual reason. Are you REALLY saying that St. Paul can be understood without the Gospels or are you just being needlessly argumentative? Or is there some third reason?
Jesus Christ is the center of everything, Christ is not dependent upon St. Paul, St. Paul depends upon Christ. How is that strange? Paul “lived and died to explain Christ” but he was not necessary, Christ is necessary. It is ONLY by hearing St. Paul in relation to what Our Lord said and did that St. Paul makes ANY sense. Do you deny that? I don’t think you do, but good grief...
"Pauline theology" of course is grounded in Christ.
Anyone who would think otherwise has not read the Bible.
Well don’t look at me, you’re the one who took exception to what I wrote.
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.