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.
Ah, so it's faith AND works.
No, it's Faith, then Works. Think thief on the cross again.
As a Catholic do you believe all your future sins have been forgiven?
As a Catholic do you believe you HAVE eternal life or have conditional life based on performance?
Once a priest, always a priest.
There actually is a whole different debate there.
The person who makes the declaration and is baptized and lives righteously for a time and then falls off the wagon so to speak.... what happens then?
You often hear in these situation others will say “well, they really didn’t mean it”? Who are they to say? How do you know? My walk sometimes is a slightly less than straight path.
That brings up a whole different point... who are they to judge? I know people hide behind “thou shall not judge” in this live and let live world. But civil law based on Mosaic Law is a JUDGEMENT. We had a priest who talked about that from time to time. “Thou shall not judge... do not judge someone’s else’s soul.” OTOH, the actions speak louder than words. What to do, what to do?
This is VERY DIFFERENT from uttering a phrase and then following it with decades of evil.
Know any professing Christians like that?
That is clearly NOT what protestants teach.
He shouldn’t have been a priest.
The person who makes the declaration and is baptized and lives righteously for a time and then falls off the wagon so to speak.... what happens then?
Only God knows his heart. Belief that does not save and a true believer falling into temptation are 2 different things.
Now now.
There ya go agin.
. . . . evidently forgetting that the Vatican’s Alice In Wonderland School of Theology and Reality Mangling
MUST abide by an unrubberized historic account . . .
At that rate, the Cardinal Mad Hatter will be miffed that you don’t think he’s doing his magicsterical rubbery best any more.
/s
WOW Heavy loss.
Condolences to all concerned.
FWIW Chocolate colored Burmese cats are incredibly affectionate and smart . . . and not near as vocal as Siamese.
I don’t think the following is the whole story but there’s plenty of truth in your assertions nevertheless:
Most of the threads, if they run long enough or concern some subject near and dear to the hearts of the posters, end up being insult contests.
Some don’t like to be challenged in their beliefs and take each challenge as an attack, others can’t or won’t defend what they say because they haven’t ever really given their beliefs deep examination and think sarcastic repartee’ is the same thing as defence.
And others are just arrogant, too arrogant to ever admit their views might be mistaken no matter how much stands against their opinion in evidence of experience so they insult or ridicule as if that proves the other person wrong and themselves right.
Mix all that with a generous dose of self righteousness and the one upsmanship game never ends.
INDEED.
Now now.
You should know by now . . .
Papist bigots have
The UNDivine Right of Terminal Snootiness to the max.
Proddys are expected to grovel before their loftiness.
Oh, Dear. We just stumbled onto another STATION of the Stations of the White Hanky. Let me see . . . what number would it be . . .
Ahhh yes.
17. ICON TO THE UNDIVINE RIGHT OF TERMINAL SNOOTINESS TO THE MAX.
How does "love your neighbor" or love your enemies 'apply in ones life? How does one live that out? Is it by mocking and slandering Protestants? Just asking..LOL
“Love your neighbor” applies the same way any other commandment does. We try, we fail, we try again; we try to acquire a “habit of virtue.” I’ve explained my view that the basis of the commandment is that man is made in the image and likeness of God and the more we know and love God, the more readily we recognize that image in our neighbor. Granted, some people make it harder than others. But because we don’t do it perfectly is not an excuse to stop trying.
Not sure specifically what you refer to by “mocking and slandering Protestants,” but if you mean my observation that Calvinists seem to hate humanity, it’s the culmination of reading countless posts of the “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” type (atypical even of Edwards‘ work, or so I was taught) and the apparent unwillingness of Calvinists on this thread to explain how they understand the commandment to love you neighbor: I got one answer of “charitable works” (unspecified, but I assumed, asked and wasn’t answered, on lines of almsgiving). You yourself seemed to say it’s impossible to keep perfectly so we’re not bound by it and anyway the Gospels are properly OT. At least that’s what I got out of it. If I misunderstood you, you might try again.
I guess what I was asking was how to reconcile the commandment (the second greatest) with the doctrine of Total Depravity, because it seems to me they can’t be reconciled.
God is Love, yet He smote His Son on the cross with His wrath. Do catholics understand God is not one dimensional but is a combination of attributes.. God is Holy, righteous, goodness, wisdom, sovereign, infinite , faithful, self sufficient, immutable, justice , wrath , and mercy Omnipresent , and omnipotent etc When we try to limit God to one attribute, we steal His glory from Him.. For he is all in all
I think we have to distinguish between God in Himself and God in relation to His creatures. You omit (I assume an oversight) the Oneness of God, and I think this must refer not only to the fact that there is only one God (albeit Triune) but also the oneness in the sense of “wholeness” or “integrity” of God. God-in-Himself is one, and we are told by Scripture that He is Love, understood by Christians to mean because of the love among the Persons of the Trinity. He is immutable (more later). That He is all-good, all-powerful, all-knowing, all-just and all-merciful -- well, there’s more to say about these, but not directly relevant here.
But I think it’s wrong to include “wrath” as an attribute of God. I don’t see how it can be done without violating His “integrity” and His immutability. It makes it sound as if God has phases, like the moon, the “inconstant moon.” Wrath comes into play at all only in relation to His creatures. Do you see the Trinity as having occasional brawls? Or is this when the Father “pours out His wrath on the Son“? My best understanding is that the “wrath of God” is how those who reject God perceive Him -- God does not deceive; men deceive themselves.
Evil in the world is a mystery, and suffering in the world (pre-eminently in the Crucifixion) remains a mystery, regardless of how much you dislike the word, because we do not and cannot understand or comprehend them here below.
Protestants I know actually have little interest in position in heaven... You haven’t seen the posts screaming, “EVERYONE’S EQUAL IN HEAVEN”? I thought there was at least one on this thread; I know they’ve appeared on others.
His superiors in the Vatican thought he shouldn't be a congressman but evidently were o.k. with his remaining a priest. So I would say they disagree with you.
A recent FR thread on the late priest/congressman/abortion supporter:
The late Jesuit Father Robert Drinan: the priest who absolved pro-abortion politicians
Vivificat! - A Catholic’s Blog of News, Opinion, Commentary, Reflections, and Prayers ^ | 10 September 2008 | TDJ
Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2008 2:54:32 PM by Teófilo
Wow.
Thou shall not take the Lord our God’s Love for Granted.
INDEED:
Christ was carried in a human womb. He received His humanity, warts and all, from His mother.
While Christ was sinless, there is no necessity for His mother to be sinless.
Unless He was the product of two gods mating which reveals just how close Rome is to pagan mythology.
Aren't you the one who just spent post #8935 belittling the use of Latin?
Yes. And we were taught that a sinful unrepentant priest will suffer enternally all the more for it.
"The Early Church Fathers are almost unanimous in the assertion that the birth was painless and had no loss of Mary's virginal integrity during the birth. In other words, her Hymen didn't break. St. Augustine said "Jesus passed through the womb of Mary as a ray of sun passes through glass".... This was confirmed by Pope Paul IV and many others before and after. If Jesus emerged from a sealed tomb, and passed through closed doors, surely he could pass through Mary's womb without breaking her hymen and causing her pain."
-- from the thread Did Mary retain her virginal integrity while giving birth to Jesus?
Forums like FR that provide a soapbox with some rules to restrain those who can't or won't restrain themselves and also a place where such high-minded and noble persons like ourselves (well...maybe a few others) can make spirited arguments and allow that even honest people can have false ideas.
So hopefully we'll all remember that if God can put with fools and knaves for such a long time surely we can for such a short time.
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.