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.
The quote was from: "Calvin to the Foreigners’ Church in London," 1552-10-27, in George Cornelius Gorham, Gleanings of a few scattered ears, during the period of Reformation in England and of the times immediately succeeding : A.D. 1533 to A.D. 1588 (London: Bell and Daldy, 1857), p. 285
WHY do you think Calvin refers to her a the Virgin Mary if he does not believe she remained one?
First of all, Calvin just told you he doesn't have an answer to that question.
But even still, Protestants call her "the virgin Mary" to denote the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. No contradiction there.
Finally, NOWHERE here does he reject the term Mother of God, he calls it "bad practice ordinarily," that IS NOT a rejection.
lol. How many "bad practices" do you tell your children to perform?
"Bad practice" is something we are NOT to perform.
Calvin says he DOES NOT KNOW and that NOBODY CAN and a great many Calvinists interpret this to mean that Calvin rejected the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Mother.
I've never read a Calvinist who said Calvin firmly believed Mary had other children. Calvinists call themselves that because they know what Calvin wrote. As you've correctly stated, Calvin did not come down either way on Mary's perpetual virginity, probably because Mary's theoretical perpetual virginity doesn't matter in the slightest to anything.
Calvin warned against the Mariology Rome practices and encourage to this day. For those with ears to hear...
"The conjecture which some have drawn from these words, that she had formed a vow of perpetual virginity, is unfounded and altogether absurd. She would, in that case, have committed treachery by allowing herself to be united to a husband, and would have poured contempt on the holy covenant of marriage; which could not have been done without mockery of God. Although the Papists have exercised barbarous tyranny on this subject, yet they have never proceeded so far as to allow the wife to form a vow of continence at her own pleasure. Besides, it is an idle and unfounded supposition that a monastic life existed among the Jews." - Calvin, Commentary on Luke 1:34
Ok...
Not a happy "co-redeemer." Not a happy "co-mediator."
Just "happy."
It's really pretty sad that some RC apologists find the notion of Mary being simply "happy" to give birth to the Christ child as if somehow that demeans her (queenly ) status in the universe.
Rome elevates men at the expense of God. Flee from it.
Interesting comparison, thanks.
Then why did you write "happy and blessed…"?
Oh what pretzels we weave:
And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that arthighly favouredvery happy, the Lord is with thee:blessedsimply happy art thou among women.
Define happy. Does it mean what it has come to mean in 21st century American English, does it mean pursuing that which satisfies your needs as it meant in 18th century colonial and British English, does it mean a sense of belonging and pride as it was used by Shakespeare in the St. Crispin's Day speech in Henry V or does it mean something completely different is 16th century French and German as used by Calvin?
To which you responded:
First of all, Calvin just told you he doesn't have an answer to that question.
That's why I asked what YOU thought.
But even still, Protestants call her "the virgin Mary" to denote the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. No contradiction there.
I seldom if ever see non-Lutheran/Anglican Protestants do this. Why do you think this is? Also, why say it? Is there some group of Christians that denies the Virgin Birth?
I wrote:
Finally, NOWHERE here does he reject the term Mother of God, he calls it "bad practice ordinarily," that IS NOT a rejection.
To which you responded:
How many "bad practices" do you tell your children to perform?
"Bad practice" is something we are NOT to perform.
Fascinating, you have a dictionary that defines "ordinarily" as an absolute?
I've never read a Calvinist who said Calvin firmly believed Mary had other children. Calvinists call themselves that because they know what Calvin wrote. As you've correctly stated, Calvin did not come down either way on Mary's perpetual virginity, probably because Mary's theoretical perpetual virginity doesn't matter in the slightest to anything.
Well then why don't you answer the other questions I asked:
So, does this mean that YOU don't know either? Because if you DO claim to know, do you have some Scripture that Calvin was unaware of?
It does not mean she is anything more than a happy, fortunate, favored and simple Jewish girl.
Flee from the idolatry Rome has woven around her. It's paganism and it steals from the Creator and gives to the creature.
She was blessed. The word "blessed" refers to an action of God, not to Mary's inherent disposition.
Rome's reading comprehension has never been anything to brag about.
Its amazing that some slice the baloney so thin we can see right through it.
So how is yours? How does the action by God of blessing anyone not leave them blessed, but merely "happy"?
No, no, no. Must. Follow. Calvin:
"Simply happy."
No, I think a pagan god would be one who capriciously picks some humans to torture eternally for his pleasure. And one who "smotes His Son on the cross with His wrath."
Now, we're talking pagan gods..
The more you think that term defames Mary, the funnier it gets.
Mary was happy to be favored by God to carry the Christ child to term.
(((gasp))) What idolatry!
lol.
Have you been blessed by God?
Are you a co-redeemer?
Are you a co-mediator?
Are you a queen of anything?
Of course, Calvin was ignorant of the Essenes.
I am sure she was, but that wasn;t what Scripture says. Perhaps you are following the Calvinist Tradition as part of the revealed Word.
Not defames, closer to distorts. It's a problem some Protestants have with Mary that leads to problems with the Incarnation that leads to problems with the Holy Trinity.
It's quite well illustrated on this thread.
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.