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.
We need to pray for those who hate us, and especially those who hate us and aver that their hatred is really Christian love.
And Christianity had since the Edict in Milan, going on 1700 years in 2012, to write its own victory story, and it did in thousands of versions.
We DO have eyewitness accounts and they have been preserved for thousand of years, but that is where faith comes in when it is in regards to things of God.
No eyewitnesses are named. How would you feel in a count if the prosecution said "there are eyewitness accounts to support our charges but we will name none of the eyewitnesses"? You'd cry foul, and rightfully so. It's just that with faith logic breaks down and violates all principles of reason.
If you can live with that, fine. I have no problem with that. It's your life. But don't offer your beliefs as "proof." Don't quote anonymous scriptures that have been written and rewritten a thousand times as evidence of anything but blind faith.
The fact that any of we may believe something proves absolutely nothing. I am not trying to prove that I am right and you are wrong. I am asking for evidence by those who claim they "know" rather than just believe or hope or wish.
There is almost never a unanimous agreement in scholarship and hardly a single copy of an ancient book exists in its original, so that by itself casts enough doubt to justify taking everything with a grain of salt if we have a single source.
Again, a single source doe snot mean the story is false. It is uncertain or questionable. For example, we have the evidence of the Great Commission as it appears in all surviving copies of Matthew 28:19 (4th century). From that alone we can conclude that Jesus gave his last commandment invoking the Holy Trinity.
Copies of Eusebius' work as Church historian form the latter part of the 3rd century quote the same Great Commission no less than 17 times without the Triniatrian "formula" but only the words "in my name." The book of Acts seems to lend support to Eusebius' version because all instances of baptism are in Jesus' name rather than the Trinitarian "formula."
Not surprisingly, the extant copies of Esuebius' work in the forth century quote the Great Commission five more times, and in all instances include the Triniatrian "formula." What happened? First Nicene Council, establishing Triniartian dogma.
What does this mean? It means that possibly (a) there were two versions of Matthew 28:19, (b) the Triniarian "formula" is a 4th century alteration of the original Matthew 28:19 made to reflect and keep up with doctrinal and dogmatic teachings, (c) all non-trinitarian versions were destroyed, (d) Eusebius was unreliable and sloppy (which is not entirely untrue), etc.
In other words, something is not altogether "kosher" here but we really can't say what. We simply don't know and that's the only intellectually honest position one can take.
You mention Josephus and his reference to John the Baptist, the High Priest Annas, Pontius Pilate, and Jesus called the Messiah. First, no Pharisaical Jew would have referred to Jesus as the Messiah, and Josephus was an observant and devout Jew. So, that version of is work is a Christian forgery. Second, even if he did mention all that, he didn't do it as an eyewitness, but was merely relating what the Christians were saying. This is no different than gathering information from local population sympathetic to a cause. It is biased and unreliable, most commonly a good deal of myth.
The whole concept of Christian "witness" is based on one person saying it he saw the resurrected Jesus and others simply accepting it for one reason or another. But no one has really witnessed it the crucifixion the resurrection. This doesn't mean it didn't happen, or couldn't happen; it merely means we can't know for sure short of simply accepting it on faith, but that does not constitute a proof and cannot be used as such.
The Church was very honest about its scriptural selection. Books that were questionable, books that did not fit the doctrinal patter, were simply classified as "questionable" or outright rejected. But this was no objective or absolute judgment. It was based on preference.
Archaeological evidence is the only thing that can either confirm or deny some biblical claims. So far archeology has not really confirmed much more than geographic locations and some names of individuals, but in most cases the digs reveal a completely different story.
Coming from a shrinking and nearly extinct OPC that is really funny.
This sums it up nicely:
Funny, everything we believe is knowable. It’s called The Bible.
Do you believe everything exactly the same as Lutherans (WHICH Lutherans?), Presbyterians (WHICH Presbyterians?) Baptists (Which Baptists?) and Pentecostals (WHICH Pentecostals?).
I honestly did not know that everything you [all] believe is knowable, because you [all] disagree on the Bible interpretations.
12,845 posted on Monday, October 18, 2010 11:20:00 PM by Judith Anne (Holy Mary, Mother of God, please pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12788 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
My point is that we are quite unlikely to find hard proof as such. We don't have objective reports and archeology is limited in what it has the capacity to prove.
I gave the "current" scholarship on Josephus including what was forged and not - that can change too.
We don't even really know much at all about what the Pharisee, Saducees, etc. taught. We don't know that Qumran was Essene, who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc. etc.
I agree with your conclusion based on "all surviving copies of Matthew 28:19," however this is not hard proof.
This is all assuming some common definition of hard, objective "proof," however considering all possible evidence, I believe that by most definitions, it is not possible for the time period and the type of events we are looking at.
thanks for your reply.
You’ll hear about it in 3 months on a totally unrelated thread.
We don't know he was Pharisaical.
You should share that information with some of your friends.
Too busy being the hall monitor. If these guys hate us so much why do they spend all of their time here? You’d think they were intelligent enough to understand we aren’t swayed by their hateful witness and go away.
You compared the Westminster Presbyterian Church's ("one") Clown Communion to google hits. Category error.
And google hits are not a decent measure of scholarship. The links only prove the occurrence of words - along with sloppy search technique.
Continue to mock those that the Lord has sent to counsel you; by those means you may continue in your darkness.
You and all other blind Catholics follow the adversary, and he guides every word of your posts here.
Does John 6:65 haunt you:
“And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.”
It is impossible to come to Christ on your own. Those that are not called by the Father will seek to save themselves by their own works, rather than by accepting the free gift of salvation from the Lord, and will seek to drag others down to that level.
.
If Protestants read the Bible, and consider Jesus Christ their God, then they ought to stay home, find a dark corner, and pray there in private.
Rome...ignorantly presumes its "alter Christus" can call Christ down from heaven and serve Him up as so much chopped liver on a cracker.
Sorry, there's no "liver" on the "cracker."
Rome looks to the physical world for the truth that is spiritual and is discerned by minds renewed by the Holy Spirit.
I thought the physical world was evidence of God's creative work.
It changes at the quarter hour.
LOLROTF. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
There are also numerous scholarly writings, archaeological finds and museums that increasingly confirm what was written about in the Bible thousands of years ago and before. It is a fascinating subject to study.
Ninety nine percent (that would be 99%) of all biblcal artefacts in Israel's archaeological Institute of Antiquities are now recognized as forgeries.
Is that the best you can do to defend your position? Ping the mods and whine about it?
Notice not in tables of stone (hard heart) BUT the 'fleshly' tables of the heart. Soft not hardened to HIS WORD.
It’s not written on one’s heart until they plant The Word
Good grief,PNS!
KNOWN and READ pertains to outward visible love.
We CAN READ a heart by someones actions ,it's not a literal book reading. People CAN know LOVE and DO LOVE without reading the Bible and there a fundamentalists wacko's who read the Bible don't love at all
That is so funny. Maybe it’s the other way around.
I suppose it must have something to do with which verison of the Bible they bring to "church." Personally, if I were a Protestant (or even pretended to be one) I would go to pastor Melissa Scott's sermons—at least to look at her. :)
since we are constantly seeing you post orders to non-Catholics about how they are to post themselves and how they are to behave on the RF.
Physician, heal thyself.
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.