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.
Thanks so much for this post. I really enjoyed it!
“The spirituality of the catacombs is the same as that of the primitive Church” Beautiful words.
What do Catholics believe Jesus died for on the cross.. ?
Actually a catholic said it here
Hilariously, the Baltimore Catechism is rejected by a lot of trads because it's "overly Protestant" (infected with Americanism apparently)
So what it taught was NOT REALLY Catholic doctrine?
So please tell us why Jesus died on the cross ? What was the purpose of the cross??
Jesus + anything else?
BTW No Protestant I know would call this "protestant doctrine"
Apparently whole generations of Catholics learned official, approved false doctrine in their Catholic schools.. How could that happen if the Holy Spirit leads the church ? maybe he left huh?
It is Church teaching that Jesus is our Savior, that His sacrifice is was saved us and is what granted us salvation.
It is Church teaching that man cannot save himself (or herself), that Jesus’ sacrifice is what saved us, that God alone can save us, without Him we can do nothing.
Thanks to all the CAtholics who have posted on this thread and provided so much good for me to ponder—I can’t go through the whole list of you but all of you are special.
I’m bowing out of this thread. I think it’s on life support now. It reminds me of that famous line from “Princess Bride”: “It’s down to you and down to me”.
I will be taking a vacation from the forum for a while.
May God bless us all and keep us ever in the palm of His hand.
The greatest of these is Love.
Thx Thx.
Outstanding post,dear friend!
For example, in Matthew 22:16 we read ου γαρ βλεπεις εις προσωπον ανθρωπων (for thou dost not regard the person of men). That thought is repeated by Str. Paul several times using προσωποληψια (respect for persons).
another example, εκ πολλων προσωπων το εις ημας χαρισμα (from many persons that is for us a gift, (2 Co1. 1:11, that is in proximity of 2 Cor 2:10 in question).
In Gal 2:6, προσωπον θεος ανθρωπου ου λαμβανει (God accepteth not the person of man).
From the dictionary, you get nothing for this word either way. You have to think of the meaning. Note that parousia he did not use (making my case again?).
thanks, this thread has been a revelation
too funny by a mile and then some
I think she's on late at night here, I'll watch. In all fairness to the usual wailers I am giving them the opportunity to enlighten us before I visit different *anti-Catholic, evil, satanic, new age* websites and find out more about this huge movement in the Catholic church. Approved by the popes
yep
there's millions of Catholics doing it, on and off the reservation
lollol
Notwithstanding this appears to me as one of the occasions where Paul is being the big I, you certainly don't believe the "imitators" of Paul are acting in the person of Paul or as an 'alter' Paul do you?
This is compatible with the absolution given by St Paul in the person of Christ in 2 Corinthians 2:10 and, of course, it it exactly how Christ authorized His Apostles to forgive sin, in His person:
2 Corinthians 2:10 Any one whom you forgive, I also forgive. What I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for your sake in the presence of Christ,
Paul was writing to Timothy, once again as the big I. However, carried to it's logical conclusion, it suggests a "chain of command" absolution.
Throughout the Gospels “face” is most often used both literally and figuratively, not “person” or “presence”.
In Matt. 22:16 what is Jesus saying in “regard the person of men”?
“Hebraistically, the appearance one presents by his wealth or poverty, his rank or low condition; outward circumstances, external condition; so used in expressions which denote TO REGARD THE PERSON in one’s judgment and treatment of men”. Thayer’s Lexicon #4383. (caps mine)
“Prosopon”, “person” speaks to the external appearance of the individual, circumstances, an idea contained within the literal “face”, like the mask worn by actors.
It is this same sense in Gal. 2:6 as Paul says those who seemed (outward appearance and circumstance, literally, “face”) to be something is of no concern to God as he pays no attention to “the person, or face”.
At 2 Cor. 1:11 ‘face” or “persons”? Perhaps a toss up.
“Note that parousia he did not use (making my case again?).”
Not at all as “parousia” is of a somewhat different meaning, rather like saying someone showed up “in person” as compared with saying, “a person showed up”.
(I had a case of ‘fat fingers’ and spelled it “parAousia’.)
I think taking away the cudgel that they beat you with has spoiled all their fun
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.