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.
. Oh, but yes they do! - Absolutely everything is in the epistles.
Negative. The letters from Paul are communications to his flock. The Gospels are the words and the deeds of Christ on Earth. Ummm, now what to choose - Christianity or Paulianity?
Stick with your pagan Papism; its all you know.
.
wow!
So you’re omniscient too - - Hooda guessed.
I am a sinner. Paul, blessed though he was, was a man. Calvin was a heretic. Only God is omniscient.
I’m glad you didn’t take the bait on the last 2 posts to you.
It’s better taking the high ground
My error—the first one of the last 2 posts was to Markbsnr
Most Protestants do not sing to or about or to a Goddess we leave that to others
“The priestesses of The Great Pagan Goddess Cybele (Kybele - cave dweller) would, through a transformation by the Greeks, be confused with and eventually known as the Sibyls. The Great Goddess of Asia Minor is the oldest true Goddess known, predating the Goddesses of the Sumerian and Egyptians by at least 5,000 years. While there have been Goddess figurines found which date to 30,000 years ago, they come to us without knowledge of their origin or character of the Goddess they represent. A figurine found at atal Hyk, dating to 8,000 year ago, depicts the Mother Goddess squatting in the process of giving birth while flanked by two leopards. In later centuries, the leopards would be changed to lions—the metamorphosed Atalanta and Hippomenes, though leopards were considered to be female lions by the ancients. Her worship was originally combined with that of the Bull of Heaven, which is also prominently displayed at atal Hyk
.”http://www.goddess.org/vortices/notes/cybele.html
The Sibyl’s ecstasy
“In the meantime, the Sibyl, with wild hair, breast heaving, and foaming mouth, still attempted to shake from her soul the god who rode her; but he mastered her crazy heart, and when she had submitted, all doors opened, and she delivered the oracle, saying in her response that Aeneas and his Trojans would conquer Lavinium, but that dreadful wars would come upon them; that they should be resisted by a man Turnus, whom she called a new Achilles, and that they should never be rid of the wrath of Hera. Nevertheless, she encouraged him to never give way, and face all evils boldly and by whatever means that luck might allow ‘’.http://homepage.mac.com/cparada/GML/Sibyl6Cumaean.html
Christ never taught apostolic succession, He never told the apostles they could select replacements or pass on any of the gifts that were for the foundation of the church...apostolic succession doctrine is made of whole cloth..
2) Papal Infallibility is not a carte blanche and has only been exercised twice. To present it as anything else is completely disingenuous.
That is twice more than the Scriptures permit
4) The Church does recognize the Letters of Paul as both inspired and infallible, but not your interpretations of them. The interpretation is valid ONLY when it supports and affirms the Gospels. Any other interpretation is false, heretical and possibly blasphemous.
How interesting that the Roman church teaches Paul is inspired, but only the parts we like that support our doctrine..
Are they the exact words or the words the Spirit brought to the mind of the writer ?
This song just proves the pagan roots that grew in Rome
Mysticism, Geek mythology.. interest a song about the teachings of a goddess mention Mary...
Amen
Sigh!
Why don’t you do your homework on Early Christianity and how the Phrygian cults(cybele etc..) were condemned rather than trying to draw comparisons as if your unlocking something new.
Saint Hippolytus condemned these in the early 3rd century
Refutation of All Heresies (Hippolytus)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050105.htm
Cardinal Newman, esteemed to sainthood in the Catholic Church, said famously in his “Essay” that much of what is widely accepted as Christian doctrine is in fact borrowed from paganism and recognized as imperfect divine revelation.
Suurree! Hateful, cutting, sarcasm.
It's when you go overboard like this that your side loses all credibility and looks like granny Clampett confronted with a pool table. The argument starts to take on the elements of a caricature that can't possibly be serious.
When one resorts to (and I couldn't make this up if I tried) "The Church of The Most High Goddess" to back up a case against the use of the word sibyl in a 13th century sequence... well even the blind could see that someone is reaching.
It's a metaphor, it's not rocket science. David stands for Israel, the sibyl stands for the gentiles. It raises the allusion that at the time of the Incarnation all the world was waiting for a savior, the pagans accepted Augustus as that savior and the Jews rejected Christ. It's called being evocative. Of course it also points out directly that everyone, Jew and Greek, knew how things were going to end.
You're really going to have to do better than running around in a spastic panic over the use of the word sibyl in a hymn. It's like walking into someone's house and having a nervous breakdown upon seeing a Christmas tree.
Meanwhile your idea of God contains four wills apparently but somehow the word "sibyl" is a problem. Persons act according to their nature, there is only one Divine nature possessed totally by each Person of the Blessed Trinity. "Will" (Volition) flows from nature, therefore there is ONE Divine Will, not three. So too does intellect, therefore there is only one Divine intellect.
If anyone does not confess properly and truly in accord with the holy Fathers that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are a Trinity in unity, and a unity in Trinity, that is, one God in three subsistences, consubstantial and of equal glory, one and the same Godhead, nature, substance, virtue, power, kingdom, authority, will, operation of the three, uncreated, without beginning, incomprehensible, immutable, creator and protector of all things, let him be condemned. (Lateran Council of 649, canon 1)It's not like this is new...
Three years ago someone right here on freep posted this from Frank Sheed's Map of Life:
The Three Persons--the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost--each possess the one Divine nature: they do not share it: they each possess it in its totality. It is important to grasp exactly what this means. Men, we say, have one nature, in the sense that they all are human and human nature is one thing. But though Brown and I are of one nature, I cannot think with Brown's mind nor love with Brown's will. I must think with my own mind and love with my own will. So that, although in a general sense human nature is one, in the concrete each man has his own nature and acts in it. With the Three Persons of the Trinity this is not so. There is but one Divine nature, one Divine mind, one Divine will. The three Persons each use the one mind to know with, the one will to love with. For there is but the one absolute Divine nature. Thus there are not three Gods, but one God. The Christian revelation cannot allow the faintest derogation from pure monotheism. The three Persons, then, are not separate. But they are distinct. The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Ghost is God. But the Father is not the Son, nor the Son the Holy Ghost, nor the Holy Ghost the Father.Go nuts on that whole sibyl thing though since that's so much more important than having a totally heretical understanding of the God Whom one professes to worship.
1. I don't have anything pagan.
2. The Pope is not pagan.
3. I didn't realize that you had graduated from the Uri Geller school of advanced spoon bending, with a minor in Amazing Kreskin mind reading. Congratulations.
Reading these guys is dangerous to one’s gut - I keep wrenching it during uncontrollable laughter at their posts.
It might come as a shock to stfassisi and MarkBsnr that they are classed as "Protestants".
stfassisi has disowned the "totally depraved" claim as "sarcasm". I don't know whether MarkBsnr has gotten the message yet.
Just as a Catholic who believes in Baptismal regeneration had better behave like a regenerated creature... and frankly, Protestants should hold us to it.
Protestants hold no sway over Catholics, nor should they. Police your own.
You've been around for some time now and I am surprised at your apparent naive belief that you know what individual Catholics believe.
Same Catechism? Yes!
Same knowledge, understanding, and practice of Catholic Teaching? Absolutely not!
They are not even the same words as originally written, which is of human interpretation as to the inspiration, not dictation, from God.
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.