ok, is this a better depiction?
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.
. . . which sounds as if you don't bother to read Catholic post -- you maintain the opinion you started with.
Where as the accord which we non-Catholics hold to is Christ, His death, Burial and Ressurection,and Coming King.
Not that I've seen in these posts. What I see from the non-Catholics on this thread is the relegation of the "role" of Christ to that of a mere functionary whose whole role is to "Save ME." We learned too that, if one of us were the only fallen creature, Christ would have come to save us -- but we don't stop there.
We may differ on secondary issues but Christ and His word are our authority and the ultimate authority.
"Secondary" issues like the nature of God? the nature of Christ's divinity? the import (if any) of Christ's own words? the nature of man? If you seem to agree on these, it's only because many of you seem to agree that none of these are important . . . compared to "ME". Many of you do agree that you "believe in faith", but it sounds like the way a moony teenager might be "in love with love." Granted, this is not true of all the non-Catholics -- just the loudest.
I you really take Christ's word as your ultimate authority, it puts you definitely in the minority of non-Catholics on this thread.
This is what the threads have revealed to me...regardless of the church denomination.
This what the threads have revealed to me.
From what's been said on this thread, apparently they have to go to church so they can bring their Bibles and do their best to catch the preacher out in an error. Not sure what they mean by that -- do their preachers typically misquote? or are they scrabbling around for a counter-proof text?
Score card ? You think because the Roman Catholic Church has had a long history that she is God’s “Church” ?
The “Church” the ekklesia is not a building , it’s not a denomination . Ekklesia are the people who are called out .
Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Gal 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
This is how you can see who is part of the Ekklesia , by these fruits .You get more and more of these fruits as you grow and leave the world behind. Ever hear the expression to come out of Babylon ? (We are actually told to do just that Rev 18:4-5)
It isn’t about leaving a city or a building , it’s about coming out of the world.The fruits of the Spirit are not worldly they are God’s fruits. No building or group of buildings can give you these things.
If you want to put you faith in a group of people that is your choice , but people can’t save you and neither can tradition.
Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
It doesn’t come from a building or an institution just because that institution has been around a long time. Islam has been around a long time and you certainly can’t say that it bears the fruits of the Holy Spirit.
Rom 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
That’s how you become part of the Ekklesia and then the Holy Spirit starts cleaning you up personally , not the building or institution you’re sitting in.
Rom 10:2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.
Rom 10:3 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
It isn’t about walking into any “Church” and establishing your own righteousness, it’s about coming out of the world and submitting yourself to the righteousness of God.
I had to come back out here and respond to this without hitting "back" because it's been keeping me awake.
This may horrify my co-religionists (although I think not) and thrill the separated brethren, but for most of my waking moments I am one 15 minute internal debate away from joining you. The only thing of my own that keeps me is the assent of my intellect to the active direction of my will... something I gather most of the Protestants around here don't even believe exists. Whenever I focus on people around me the length of that potential debate drops to 10 minutes, whenever I focus on myself it drops to 5.
My own self knowledge (such as it is) in that area is at the root of my occasional questions to Protestants about what good their "Jesus" is. If their idea of Christ is worth believing surely there will be some evidence, something that will lead an outsider to want whatever it is that they have, some reason to believe that the recovered addict hasn't exchanged one drug for another, that the "good" person is made good by God and isn't just following God because that's what good people do.
I "know" from my Catholic faith, as much as I know anything, that when I get out of the way I am not "myself" and those rare glimpses into a different life keep me going in the hope the frequency will increase until as the Apostle says "it is not I who live but Christ"... it's funny, I just googled that to check the reference and hit on this from an Orthodox priest:
“I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.” This is the image, the icon, of what we’re to be as Orthodox Christians. And maybe we aren’t there yet, I’m not, very few people are. Getting there, by God’s grace, is the working out of our salvation. But that’s a work we have to actively pursuing each and every day of our lives. And if we’re not, I hate to say it, but if we’re not constantly striving to actualize the image of Christ in us, if we’re not struggling to live our baptisms, then what are we doing? Fr. Tom Hopko says our life is a farce, it’s a waste, even worse it’s blasphemous, to proclaim ourselves to be Christians and to not shed blood daily to live like Christ.Protestantism, well Calvinism at any rate, seems to repudiate that whole line of thinking. It's probably due to confusion over the nature of time vs. eternity... I know they can't believe it but I do get the sense that Protestants see eternity as "a really long time". What I don't know is if that's because they put "succession" into eternity or take it out of time.
And so they start machine gunning Scripture around without realizing (or caring) that I accept the Scriptures because of the authority of the Church and the only way they're going to convince me of the authority of their interpretations is to convince me of their authority to propose Scripture... or more sensibly as the Catholic Encyclopedia puts it: "Someone must bring it within reach and no matter what be done the believer cannot believe in the Bible nor find in it the object of his faith until he has previously made an act of faith in the intermediary authorities between the word of God and his reading."
Meh, I rambled again.
| "This Church is Holy, the One Church, the True Church, the Catholic Church, fighting as she does against all heresies. She can fight, but she cannot be beaten. All heresies are expelled from her, like the useless loppings pruned from a vine. She remains fixed in her root, in her vine, in her love. The gates of hell shall not conquer her." Sermon to Catechumens, on the Creed, 6,14, 395 A.D. |
| In the course of the second half of the first century, however, a consistent terminology for these Church offices was becoming fixed. The letters of St. Ignatius of Antioch make clear that leadership in the Christian community, in all the Churches, is exercised by an order of "bishops, presbyters, and deacons" (To the Trallians 3:2; To Polycarp 6:1). Of these designations, bishop comes from the Greek episkopos, meaning "overseer"; presbyter from the Greek presbyteros, "elder"; and deacon from the Greek diakonos, "servant" or "minister". Thus, from that time on, these were the offices in what was already an institutional, hierarchical Church (this is not to imply that the Church was ever anything but institutional and hierarchical, only that the evidence for these characteristics had become unmistakably clear by this time). By the way, the term priest (Greek: hierus) does not seem to have been used at first for the Christian presbyter; the nonuse of this particular term in the earliest years of the Church was due to the need to distinguish the Christian priesthood of the new dispensation from the Jewish Temple priests, who were still functioning up to the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Romans in the year 70 A.D. After that time, the use of the word priest for those ordained in Christ began to be more and more common. St. Ignatius of Antioch did not know of any such thing as a "Church" that was merely an assemblage of like-minded people who believed themselves to have been moved by the Spirit. The early Christians were moved by the Spirit to join the Church, the established visible, institutional, sacerdotal, and hierarchical Church-the only kind St. Ignatius of Antioch would ever have recognized as the Church. And it was for this visible, institutional, sacerdotal, and hierarchical Church--an entity purveying both the word and sacraments of Jesus--that this early bishop was willing to give himself up to be torn apart by wild beasts in the arena. He wrote to St. Polycarp words that were also meant for the latter's flock in Smyrna: "Pay attention to the bishop so that God will pay attention to you. I give my life as a sacrifice (poor as it is) for those who are obedient to the bishop, the presbyters, and the deacons" (6:1). To the Trallians he wrote: "You cannot have a Church without these" (3:2). St. Ignatius certainly did not fail to recognize that, in one of today's popular but imprecise formulations, "the people are the Church." His letters were intended to teach, admonish, exhort, and encourage none other than "the people". But he also understood that each one of "the people" entered the Church through a sacred rite of baptism, and thereafter belonged to a group in which the bishop, in certain respects and for certain purposes, resembled, on the one hand, the father of a family and, on the other, a monarch--more than some democratically elected leaders. |
VERY WELL PUT.imho.
Thx.
INDEED.
Though I’m not sure it’s really love they spread around.
Maybe it is.
At least for some.
It’s just that . . . some . . . purported “devotion, adoration” . . . seems somehow . . . almost a different category.
Does an alcoholic love his alcohol? Some do. Many don’t.
Is a fixation love? Is an obsession love?
It’s a puzzle.
What does it mean to love The Lord God with all our being and others as ourselves?
How does one do that with a plethera of love objects?
It is easy for me to love all the students in each class. So I think I have some idea.
But what if I was obsessed with half the students say on the right side? Wouldn’t that have some implications for my affections toward the students on the left side?
And is being obsessed with a purported love object really about adoring the love object or is it about some sort of dysfunctional desperate need on my part?
Certainly we all desperately NEED GOD more than we need breath, air, food, water.
He died that we might be FRIENDS.
Let’s say that 2 identical twin teen brothers out of a 12 member extremely loving family of parents and 10 kids were all who were left out of say a plane crash. They had the ‘special twin language’ etc. They were all each other had left.
I can imagine two different states . . . one intense, unusually intensely loving yet not obsessive.
The other desperately super needy obsessive.
Which would be MORE LOVING in the Godly sense?
I don’t really have definitive answers. I’m just chewing on this.
And I think that somewhere in such . . . a range of dynamics . . . there are implications for idolatry—for all of us of all labels.
I could ramble on but I think I’ll leave it there for now.
I’m interested in other thoughts on such issues.
UNMITIGATED NONSENSE.
I’m persistently blessed by the diversity of our referent congregations
while we have grown, imho, into an amazing amount of respect and affection for one another—some almost startlingly so because of the differences WITH the great affection.
BECAUSE we put God first yet one another highly in His service and love.
They also post things and two posts later deny they said it, or blame someone else
—
That repeated phenomenon has been rather startlingly amazing over the years.
What IS WITH that???
And, face it, those six verses are far superior to the 251 Gospel verses that were read in Catholic Masses in September, alone, now aren't they? After all, Catholics should not be allowed to read from the Scriptures, now should they? They simply aren't good enough. Pearls before swine or something like that...
/sarc
NOPE. Not remotely my reality.
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
You know... after reading post after post of the vile sewage that spews forth from your keyboard I am confirmed in the knowledge that of all the sin filled creatures who have ever slouched across this earth there is none more deserving of the eternal fires of the devils' hell than me. There's no blasphemy, no matter how bitter in appearance or putrid in the mind, that I can witness in horror that makes me one iota more worthy of salvation than anyone else. No obscenity vomited out of the mouth of another that can draw out of my mouth the words of the pharisee: "God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are".
Almost, almost but not am I convinced of total depravity. Almost am I convinced that Baptism does not regenerate. Almost am I convinced that there is no God. But for the One, Holy, Apostolic and Catholic Church... but for the Holy Mother who leads me to Jesus Christ and bids me kneel at the foot of His Holy and life giving Cross singing "I saw water flowing from the right side of the temple, alleluia; and all they to whom that water came were saved, and they shall say, alleluia, alleluia!"
And then she drags me stumbling to the Tomb
Rejoice, heavenly powers! Sing, choirs of angels!
Exult, all creation around God's throne!
Jesus Christ, our King, is risen!
Sound the trumpet of salvation!
Rejoice, O earth, in shining splendor,
radiant in the brightness of your King!
Christ has conquered! Glory fills you!
Darkness vanishes for ever!
Rejoice, O Mother Church! Exult in glory!
The risen Savior shines upon you!
Let this place resound with joy,
echoing the mighty song of all God's people!
And we're supposed to trade that in for a second hand Genevan yugo death trap? Good grief no!
For that: Praised be Jesus Christ, now and forever!
| God’s purpose has been as Christ said that He would protect His Church, which is what He has done —> your group if it belongs to the WCC is a part of the One world false religion, denying Christ’s One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church |
Well, I can think of a time or two when I posted something like "no, we can't say that because...", might have even been in this thread. On the whole though I don't see much in the way of doctrinal screwups from FR Catholics, if you know of any that haven't been addressed by all means let me know.
You mentioned the earlier mega thread and pointed out that it was at that point mostly non-Catholic... well that was sort of my point even if I didn't express it well. If there's a Catholic in range who looks a good target everyone else will call a truce. I don't say that as "oh, boohoo us poor Catholics, everyone's picking on us" but rather "what the heck is going on here?" Is explicit belief in the Holy Trinity a major doctrine? Is baptismal regeneration a major doctrine? Is eternal security a major doctrine? Is total depravity a major doctrine, etc, etc. If those things aren't major then how in the world does celibacy for latin rite priests (which isn't even a doctrine) or purgatory or whatever, ever even raise so much as an eyebrow?
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.