FourSquare cult ahoy!
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.
Peter Popoff, who used a few trusted collegues to scout for healing candidates among the crowds that came to his healing services. Popoff's scouts always asked people in wheelchairs if they could walk a little or not at all. Any that could walk a little were called up to the front for 'healing' during the subsequent service. The technique was exposed by skeptic James Randi who placed actors in the audience to claim that they had disabilities. Randi's actors were interviewed by Popoff's scouts, and the information transmitted to Popoff via a radio transmitter. Randi intercepted and recorded the transmissions, which fed Popoff information on various audience members, including which of them would make good 'healing' candidates.and
Evangelist/ missionary David Hogan often uses this technique. Every time he speaks to groups, he claims to have raised 400+ people from the dead and performed many amazing miracles. Although he relates many incredible stories, he never actually performs miracles at his meetings . . . he just talks about all the miracles that he supposedly performed somewhere else.are not correct --> do you have proof for THESE?Hogan's fans often describe him as a great man of God who heals the sick and raises the dead. When directly asked, however, they admit that they have never actually seen Hogan do any miracles. The only reason they have to believe that Hogan has ever performed any miracles is that Hogan himself claims that he has.
What does that mean?
I don't even remember what this tangent is even all about. Was it you claiming you were healed and other people saying that doesn't make you the pope?
I'm beginning to remember, my primary interest in this subject is that we are instructed not to make things "about individual posters" and this is about you. Whether it's at your invitation or not we're on shaky ground and it's probably not appropriate.
Additionally this sort of thing is destined to degenerate into dueling miracles. I have hundreds of witnesses, Catholic and Protestant, family, friends and strangers who can attest that I was almost totally unable to walk for a couple of years and now I can. Does this somehow validate my religious beliefs? My wife thinks it does, but then she's just as rabidly Catholic as am I so a lot of her prayers went through Mary and the saints. All I really know is that now instead of a few steps at a time I can walk for hours and it might have been the removal of my gall-bladder that did it, although my surgeon is somewhat unconvinced. Funny for a doctor to be skeptical of science.
But, while I am no Unitarian, I kind of thought by definition that Unitarians did not affirm the Trinity, else they'd be Trinitarians.
As to the relationship between Jesus and God, I would htink there would be choices all of which could be "unitarian". He could be not quite God. He could be God in a modalist way.
I'm just offering this for rigor, not to come down on this or that side.
Praise God! His mercies endure for ever ("vain repetition", I know, but it's a psalm, so it's okay.)
Someday you need to write an article, if you haven't already.
Peter Popoff, who used a few trusted collegues to scout for healing candidates among the crowds that came to his healing services. Popoff's scouts always asked people in wheelchairs if they could walk a little or not at all. Any that could walk a little were called up to the front for 'healing' during the subsequent service. The technique was exposed by skeptic James Randi who placed actors in the audience to claim that they had disabilities. Randi's actors were interviewed by Popoff's scouts, and the information transmitted to Popoff via a radio transmitter. Randi intercepted and recorded the transmissions, which fed Popoff information on various audience members, including which of them would make good 'healing' candidates.and
Evangelist/ missionary David Hogan often uses this technique. Every time he speaks to groups, he claims to have raised 400+ people from the dead and performed many amazing miracles. Although he relates many incredible stories, he never actually performs miracles at his meetings . . . he just talks about all the miracles that he supposedly performed somewhere else.are not correct --> do you have proof for THESE?Hogan's fans often describe him as a great man of God who heals the sick and raises the dead. When directly asked, however, they admit that they have never actually seen Hogan do any miracles. The only reason they have to believe that Hogan has ever performed any miracles is that Hogan himself claims that he has.
Since Wielki Reggie keeps answering for Pente-coastals and Presbyterians and others, I wanted to know if he now accepted the Trinity affirming their support for his cause, or if they (the Ps and Ps) had suddenly now rejected Christ’s divinity
Oh.
Tuh! [Rolls eyes.]
So NOW we're supposed to MAKE SENSE?
That is just SEW un-FAY-ur!
Will these oppressions never cease?
I have no idea why you are pinging me.
I don't really much care about your circumstances. Whether or not something supernatural happened to you or not isn't keeping me up nights. Being Catholic, I believe that God acts in everyone’s life, calls everyone to a life of grace, and certainly may perform miracles in the lives of folks to call them to repentance and to faith in Him and communion with His Body, which is the Catholic Church. To what degree He may have done that in your life, and to what degree you have responded to that call, I don't know, and have no real way of judging. Nor interest, either.
Frankly, I'm unsure why anyone would care in the context of Cronos’ postings. He is a Catholic, too, and is unlikely to deny that God performs miracles where He wants to perform miracles. Your tale isn't relevant to the fact that Cronos points out that many “Pentecostal” preachers and miracle-workers are frauds. Just because many (most?) of these folks are frauds doesn't mean that God doesn't perform miracles. We Catholics certainly believe that God performs miracles. But we try not to be too credulous about it, and we try not to get taken in by the likes of those folks noted by Cronos.
Thus, your particular circumstances aren't really of much interest to me. I'm only interested in the stupidity of asserting something in an Internet chat forum and saying, “And if you don't believe me, just ask the other fellow on the Internet chat forum - he'll tell ya that I'm tellin' the truth!”
ROTFLMAO!!
As to your particular offer, there are so many problems with it, I wouldn't know where to begin. The most basic problem is that we Catholics don't generally call things genuine, supernatural miracles in which one may properly repose one’s faith without fairly rigorous investigation, the sort of which isn't going to be conducted via Free Republic, or privately by the parties involved. Unless we're going to hire some independent doctor consultants, send all your previous medical records to them, including all imaging and other test results, and then have you submit to rigorous medical screening now, I'm willing to believe that it is possible that you aren't a liar, and you're not making stuff up, and that you felt very poorly previously, and that you now feel much, much better now.
This happens everyday, and in my own view, often as a result of prayer to God. I'm the sort that will pray for just about anything, including a parking space when I'm running late for an appointment. I believe that God cares about me and about every detail of my life, and that I may ask Him for anything (although I may not tell Him what His answer must be to me). But that's not what we Catholics mean by a supernatural miracle. Short of a full, independently-conducted medical investigation by trained consultants who are expert in the appropriate medical fields and some having at least some experience in investigating claims of miracles, I'm unwilling to make any judgment concerning the supernatural nature of your healing, other than to mark it as, “doubtful.”
However, the evidence that you might put forward from the likes of other posters that you mention is without any probative value at all, because you and they are not credible posters to me.
In fact - I will try to speak in the abstract - I have concern for the existence of actual fraud or professionally unethical behavior [or possibly mental illness, but no one should try to offer mental health diagnoses via the Internet, especially mental health professionals] which would lead me to discount entirely what might be offered, and to disbelieve such testimony until proven true by actual reliable sources. I hope I haven't violated the [stupid] rules of the Religion Forum by noting that I'm concerned about fraud or professionally unethical behavior. And no, I will not comment further, as I wish to remain as vague as possible so as not to violate the [stupid, anti-Catholic] rules of this forum.
And therein is the real problem - the credibility of the posters involved is at the heart of the matter. But the credibility of individual posters may not be questioned via actual evidence, according to the [stupid] rules of the forum.
That's my issue, not the specific circumstances of your mobility.
sitetest
BRAVE OF YOU.
AND IF God Almighty HIMSELF is telling you to do so, I won’t quibble.
Short of that, I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO WITHDRAW YOUR OFFER.
Betty Boop and Mad Dawg are about the only two RC’s I’d trust with a pic of my dog . . . or of myself.
SOME—a surprising number, actually—of the more rabid clique types routinely demonstrate such
fierce bitterness, resentment, vengeance, hostility, virulent anger, spitefulness, mean-spiritedness, harshness etc.
that IT IS EXCEEDINGLY UNWISE TO TRUST THEM WITH A SHRED OF PERSONAL INFORMATION WHATSOEVER.
AND MANY of them seem to be awash in such WILLFUL BLINDNESS that the Pope himself could be giving them proof of the facts of a Proddy’s honsest and true healings etc. documented on a stack of white hankys straight from Mary
and they’d still uhhhhh spit on it all and the person, too.
I commend you for your generous attitude and heart.
That just sounds like a horrifically risky proposition for no good result.
Folks of pure heart and rational minds already believe you.
Trying to prove it to others seems like an exercise in exceeding folly, to me. I’d have to pray about even being a part of it.
And where demonized perspectives are involved, giving fodder to such is unwise if not dangerous foolishness.
Sorry but that’s my best sense.
I love your candid attitude and perspective.
Thanks.
INDEED. LOL.
You seriously expect us to consider a multi-colored-font spewer of nonsense as a sane, credible witness?
Beautiful. Now would that include various bones, Peter's teeth, tears of Mary, wood from the Cross, sweat from a Saint, or water from the Holy Land? And just how does one go about investigating these claims in order that these relics be placed under the alters of your churches?
Yes, if I needed absolute PROOF that a miracle had occurred, the first place I would check is the Catholic Church. As soon as I lit my lottery candle and prayed for the elusive powerball number.
LOL!
INDEED.
I confess to being a math geek and thus put heavy emphasis on the premises involved in our reasoning whether formal or in theological discussion.
Indeed, I testify that if the Creation were not orderly we would not be able to understand it at all. There would be no basis for semiosis, i.e. signs or language.
Indeed, I testify that the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences is like God's copyright notice on the Cosmos.
Ironically, in the Catholic v Protestant debates there is wide agreement on the first premises, i.e. Who God IS and that He does not lie. The divergence stems from there or more specifically the premises we accept based on His promise to the Church, the spiritual body of Christ v. the spiritual + physical body of Christ.
Math geek that I am, I look for differences in premise before reasoning based on premises and I note that the additional premise is itself based on reasoning from the first premise and (geek that I am) personally do not include it in my theological premises for that reason.
By the way, when I debate an atheist or agnostic, I also focus on their premises. More specifically, their belief that reality consists of matter in all its motions - or that the only source of knowledge that can be trusted is sensory perception plus reasoning - or that the laws of logic must apply to the Creator of them.
In sum, I again aver that faith and reason are complementary but that reason cannot substitute for faith.
Promissory note: I owe you one thoughtful reply within 36 hours. Things are about to get exciting here, but the dust should settle before bedtime tomorrow night.
You mean like the ones that say, looky here...Follow me...I can change this cracker into the actual flesh of Jesus Christ...
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.