Don't be a
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.
Good job putting things in perspective.
If O REG wants to get into an in depth look at Calvin's ridiculous doctrine of total depravity than he ought to start a thread on it.
It's been discussed here many times, at nausea
The formula may have been settled on in the Nicene Councils, but it was kinda sorta understood going all the way back to the Apostles. The first real leader of the Catholic Church was Jesus, not Constantine. He was not a leader - he merely relaxed the persecutions of Christians and tried to keep order in his Empire.
Understand it any way you wish. Even though many Catholics have told me what I believe, I have said it all with "In any event, I accept Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."
Hmm. Then to you the Father is greater than the Son because the Father has been able to give the authority. No Trinitarian nonsense for this Unitarian, right?
I think no more of Paul than any of the New Testament personages. He was; however, unique in that he was chosen specifically by Jesus to preach to the Gentiles.
For a preacher to the Gentiles, he sure spent a lot of time preaching to / antagonizing the Jews.
Paul was the big "I" but he was careful to distinguish when he was speaking for Jesus and not the big "I".
He did maintain both arrogance and inferiority complex through his missions, I'll give you that.
I am surprised that the Catholics on this forum don't have a more positive outlook toward Paul. After all, he did relegate women to second class status in keeping with the official position of the Catholic Church.
You misunderstand us. We reverence Paul. We most certainly do not worship a Paulian demiurge, elevated to god status by heretics. And we do not elevate Paul above Jesus whatsoever.
You are as depraved as you wanna be. I see Calvinists here that certainly seem totally depraved. Is adopting Calvinism a step on the road to total depravity. It would seem so.
Major: She's a fine woman, Mrs Fawlty.
Basil: No, no, I wouldn't say that.
Major: No, nor would I.
Then you agree that it impossible for any person to know what "Catholics Believe".
The Faith is laid out. Catholics believe the Faith. To the point that they disbelieve, then they are departing from the Faith.
I just have a feeling that's the direction we're headed with this. I realize most of the references will be totally lost on most Americans and the accent is practically unintelligible, but oh well.
Newman's statements are well known among most Catholics and I'm surprised if you do not but if you choose you can find Newman's “Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine” online and locate “8. Application of the Third Note: its Assimilative Power”, pg. 355, wherein he states,
“Confiding then in the power of Christianity to resist the infection of evil, and to transmute the very instruments {372} and appendages of demon-worship to an evangelical use, and feeling also that these usages had originally come from primitive revelations and from the instinct of nature, though they had been corrupted; and that they must invent what they needed, if they did not use what they found; and that they were moreover possessed of the very archetypes, of which paganism attempted the shadows; the rulers of the Church from early times were prepared, should the occasion arise, to adopt, or imitate, or sanction the existing rites and customs of the populace, as well as the philosophy of the educated class.”
This frank conclusion he makes because he sees it not as failure of the Catholic Church in word or deed but as virtue and strength.
You will notice in the last sentence of the above quote from Newman he doesn't speak of simply using the same terms as paganism uses but of adoption, imitation, sanction, of customs and rites of the populace as well as the “philosophy of the educated class”.
Now what do you suppose those philosophies, rites and customs were?
“The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holy days and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church.”
“Sanctified” or made holy. Too bad the Christians of Ephesus didn't know that when they burned their expensive books on magic. (Acts 19:18-20)
The example set by St. Gregory in an age of persecution was impetuously followed when a time of peace succeeded. In the course of the fourth century two movements or developments spread over the face of Christendom, with a rapidity characteristic of the Church; the one ascetic, the other ritual or ceremonial. We are told in various ways by Eusebius [Note 16], that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar to most of us. The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison [Note 17], are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church. {374}
Newman Reader - Development of Christian Doctrine - Chapter 8
Too bad you don’t have a clue about what he meant. Any comment on the pagan “dying god” who rises again?
Don't be a
LOLOL.
Thanks for the truth, Reggie. Rome is losing its grip on all of Europe. One in 8 is a practicing Roman Catholic in Portugal! That's astounding. If, after ridding themselves of error, men pass through disbelief on their way to a better understanding of God and faith, then so be it.
“Too bad you don’t have a clue about what he meant.”
Then I’m sure you will explain, yes?
“Any comment on the pagan “dying god” who rises again?”
You’ll have to be more specific, any references/sources would be helpful.
The conflict between Catholic and Calvinist dogma with respect to the teachings of Paul is not in Catholics selectively choosing some of the Scripture and ignoring others, it is in the context in which we interpret Scripture.
Paul was given a very clear and simple mission; to spread the Word of God to the Gentiles. His mission was to teach, it was not to revise, redact, modify, extend or add new revelation. Catholics interpret everything Paul writes in the context of supporting the Synoptic Gospels. For Catholics the words spoken directly from Christ these Gospels can stand alone, Paul's letters cannot.
I am not going to try to tell you what to believe. Its just that if you choose to follow a Paulian theology you will find some very fundamental areas where it is incompatible with Christianity.
I was going to, but it would be like trying to explain a sphere to a Flatland-er.
Maybe another time. For now, suffice it to say that Calvinism has a strong anti-human streak (which they shouldn't object to, since they pride themselves on it). Probably why they see no point to the commandment to "Love thy Neighbor as thyself," which is of course "like to" the greatest commandment and flows from it.
Gk Chesterton sums it perfectly
"Protestants are Catholics gone wrong; that is what is really meant by saying they are Christians. Sometimes they have gone very wrong; but not often have they have gone right ahead with their own particular wrong. Thus a Calvinist is a Catholic obsessed with the Catholic idea of the sovereignty of God. But when he makes it mean that God wishes particular people to be damned,we may say with all restraint that he has become a rather morbid Catholic"-GK Chestrton
Papal pronouncements have only been declared infallible twice, and one of those was retroactive. You claiming otherwise doesn't make it so. Deal with it.
Big talk, now prove it.
Hint: what religious symbols and gods covered the Arch of Constantine? Were there any Christian symbols?
Why did the coinage of his empire carry pagan gods on for many years during his rule and he never coined a Christian coin.
Why did Constantine dedicate the new city of Constantinople wearing the robes of Apollo?
Good luck.
The Golden Bough is by far the most famous source. IIRC, there's some in Jessie Weston's From Ritual to Romance. Among the "dying gods," Baldr, Osiris, Dionysius and Adonis spring to mind. If you have access to C.S. Lewis's God in the Dock, the essay "Myth Became Fact" goes into the issue.
GK was a great writer and a great Christian. But who is he writing about here? The hyper Calvinist, the 5-point Calvinist, the 4-point Calvinist or the bodily function Calvinist?
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.