Skip to comments.Intended Catholic Dictatorship
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.]
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 “Holy Mother” to which I was referring is the Church. Didn’t make that quite clear I suppose.
I realize your religion would like us to believe the notion that your catechism trumps God's words in the scriptures but as a Christian, I have no choice but to believe what God says...
Obviously the omnipresence of God is a mystery to you guys which you have never solved...Let's see what Jesus says about it...
Joh 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
Joh 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
The indwelling of the Holy Spirit in all believers is clearly another mystery to you guys...I can only assume you guys and your religion are part of the 'world' spoken of in this verse...
Joh 14:18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
Joh 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
So here it is...Jesus says he's leaving...And he left...He sent the Holy Spirit, the Comforter in his place...
And then Jesus says, I will not leave you comfortless, I will come to you...But Jesus says he's leaving and sending the Comforter in his place...
Jesus IS the Holy Spirt and Comforter...There's God's omnipresence...
And where does Jesus/the Holy Spirit show up??? In a cracker??? Of course not...
Joh 14:20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
There it is...Jesus is in the Father and we are in Jesus, in the Father...Jesus is also in us...And he's not in our stomachs...
Even if Jesus did show up in a cracker, it would be useless to put him in our stomachs...
We have no need to eat Jesus...Jesus is already in us, no matter where we are...Sorry that you don't know that...
"Ecclesial Community" not church.
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITHJust so we're all on the same page.
RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH
Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of Church with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?
According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called Churches in the proper sense.
 Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 22.3.
 Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dominus Iesus, 17.2: AAS 92 [2000-II] 758.
Boatbums, does this qualify? :)
I realize the Church speaks of separated brethren, but I think that we need to be very careful about what that means. Denial of the Divinity of Christ, denial of the Holy Trinity and denial that the Apostle Paul's epistles are Scripture are not simple misunderstandings, they are blatant heresies.
No, its a secret Vatican archive satellite photo of an unnamed internet UFOlogist.
that the Vatican offical paper has anything to do with the Vatican;
I wrote an article just over a year ago for the "Vatican offical paper." Yep, I was published in L'Osservatore Romano, English Edition, July 15, 2009.
Do you think I speak for the Pope?
I assure you, L'Osservatore Romano does NOT "speak" for the Pope. If I can get published in L'Osservatore Romano, then anyone can. And everyone does not speak for the Pope. I just called them up (literally) and presented an idea to them for an article. I sent them a CV, an outline of the article, and they gave me the go ahead.
Likewise, some astronomer who plays with telescopes at the Vatican observatory does not speak for the Pope either.
Frankly, most Vatican bureacrats are liberal heretics, and in no way whatsoever speak for or represent the thinking of the Pope.
Give it a rest, would you?
Through immigration, legal and otherwise, and immigration only. Of course, this represents a loss in the "sending" country.
To be fair, Mainline Protestant Protestant Churches are also experiencing declining numbers.
This is what the Church believed all along (or at least form the beginning of the 2nd century), and not something it made up 16 centuries later. There was no opposition to that belief as far as I know, so whether it is true or not is irrelevant. It is what the Church believed and still believes, base don tradition and the Church says so.
What I don't understand is why do Protestants believe it since they reject traditions of men and especially the Catholic Church?
The Greek word is to stammer, babble repeatedly. There is a lot of that in all churches.
Really? All churches will say the same prayer countless times as a routine practice? I am not aware of that being a practice in any of the Protestant churches I have attended in my life.
He is not defending me. Mark is simply stating the fact. Are you suggesting he shouldfor the sake of Christain solidarityknowingly promote untruth?
No. It's very clear: call someone a fool and hellfire is awaiting you. Yet, the word is used all over the Bible, Old testament and New.
Praying in public "To be seen of men" is speaking to motive in the act and not an admonition against praying where others may see or hear you
Certainly. That's why he says you should pray in the storage room, with the door closed, where no one can see you. Which part is in dispute? There is no reason whatsoever one has to pray in public to be seen of men, none.
This is the other point I am trying to make....posting volumes of information from other authors literature leads to dissecting every word not to mention the source and author themselves. Thus the topic, which might otherwise prove interesting for all gets lost in all the unnecessary details. It becomes a match for those who desire to showcase their intellect and or their personal library, which is simply ego building for those who need to feel significant but might very well have no opinion of their own.
So no, I will not define Hinduism or any other religion to those who are likely very much in the know of what these are enough to form their own opinion of the differences in these religions.
If it were a simple belief in an eternal supernatural being, who is good, merciful, etc., and who has revealed himself to mankind spiritually some 2,000 years ago, then obviously historical accuracy would be a moot point; the faith in him would not depend on factual historical accuracy but on pure belief in the existence of such a supernatural being independent of time, or tradition.
Ah, and what is the truth? The vast majority of the Protestant pantheon believes in the Catholic Canon, minus the Luther withdrawal, with no questions asked. How would you investigate the truth? Will you call the Holy Spirit down and put Him on the witness stand? Aside from a handful of nutjobs and flakes who post on FR, some on this very thread, is there anyone that claims that they can do that?
Mark you are so kind. It is not so much the faith itself as I do not deny God (for that would be another form of faith) but simply admit that I do not know what God is. Boatbums, you will never see my posts casting doubt as to the existence of God. Most of my posts have to do with factual issues concerning the Bible, the history and other tangible subjects, where evidence casts doubts on some aspects of what people traditionally believe based on them.
Yes, we understand that your religion is of your own making and your god is what you create. We get it and while there are many ex Catholics who succumb to the urge to create their own god, there are that many more who accept and worship God. We are Moses, spiritually attached to God, and the children of the Reformation are Aaron, making the golden calf to satisfy their own whims and immediate desires. We get that. And we appreciate that you have illuminated the distinction.
Appreciate the kudos. What a twit...
Why am I not surprised?
Beats me. Because it does not tend to be prevalent, I suppose.
As Christians, we should learn to laugh more.
Agreed. The problem is that many who purport to be Christians are laughable, rather than funny...
The KJV calls it a closet. Whatever he meant by it he specifically said "close the door". He calls on the disciples (and believers) to pray in private. He is saying there is no reason whatsoever to pray in public, and if you think about it it makes perfect sense, because otherwise people may think you are doing it for hypocritical reasons, and probably are.
Jesus message is loud and clear as a bell: Instead of making a spectacle of one's worship, do it in private. So why are Christians making a public spectacle with their prayers on TV and at sporting events, and every other occasion? Is that not hypocritical? Is that not contrary to what their own God told them not to do?
The results will be that, little by little, as the obstacles to perfect ecclesiastical communion are overcome, all Christians will be gathered, in a common celebration of the Eucharist, into the unity of the one and only Church, which Christ bestowed on his Church from the beginning.This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time. - Second Vatican Council. Second Vatican Council, "Decree on Ecumenism," no. 4. (Emphasis mine)
There is no room in Biblical Christianity for unity or compromise, or cooperation with Rome as long as she believes and practices continuing sacrifice, Maryolatry, false gospel of works for salvation, and her continuing "to regard the Scriptures, taken together with sacred Tradition, as the supreme rule of her faith." Second Vatican Council, "Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation," no. 21.
Hinduism? That speaks for itself. False gospels, another Jesus, and deceiving spirits, and doctrines of men, are the real problem for the Christian churches.
i have been meaning to ask you the very same question, bb. mark admits that the Gospels were written anonymously and that they were assigned authorship by the Church according to tradition (legendary belief) towards the end of the second century. Until then, no one quotes from the Gospels and says "according to Matthew, etc."
Mark accepts that his Church believes they were written by the authors whose names we are familiar with. And you accept them based on what, since you reject the authority or the tradition of the Church?
When you say "investigate the truth," what truth are investigating? That no witnesses were ever named, and that even the authors who wrote about the unnamed witnesses are not named except according to the legend and tradition believed by the Church you reject?
Oh, that is terrible. I would no sooner believe that the good Dr. E. would speak disparagingly of the Church than I would believe that the Democrat National Committee should be confined to bed rest and a heavy and round the clock dose of tranquilizer.
Many of the anti-Catholics on here CLAIM adherence to beliefs as confessed in the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, e.g. the profess to believe in the Holy Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus Christ. Now, the Church has long acknowledged that a great many Protestants are in agreement with the Church on these points.
However, there are those on these threads who openly deny the Holy Trinity and the eternal Divinity of Christ. Why is it that the anti-Catholics ignore the heresy of other anti-Catholics? Do they simply view the non-Trinitarian anti-Catholics as useful idiots? Are they concerned at all about the salvation of the the non-Trinitarian anti-Catholics or do they simply want all of anti-Catholic support they can get?
The more I see of these threads, the more I become convinced that many of the anti-Catholic participants ARE NOT CHRISTIANS at all in spite of their protestations to the contrary. Their "religion" is anti-Catholicism and to that end they will embrace anyone else who hates the Church as much as they do.
I heard her paranoia has reached such lows that she cancelled her cell phone service and burned her phone once she heard there were Rome-ing Charges
Kosta is perhaps the most informative and truthful poster on FR that I have ever seen. And, for what it's worth, I believe that his soul is in less jeopardy than most Christians, including mine. Kosta is honest, as opposed to many of the posters on the RF.
Correct, so why are so many repetitions in prayers? Beats me. It's just one of so many things one finds in the Bible that is ignored. Or maybe some people think the verses apply only to the hypocrites and of course no Christian sect will consider itself hypocritical, so it must not apply to them!
The Bible give Christians one prayer and one prayer only. And they are directed ("pray thus") to pray in a closet with the doors shut, away from everyone. Yet Christians engage in public prayer, group prayers, and invent their own prayers.
If Christian worship is not an example of the most blatant violation of Jesus' words I don't know what is!
You forgot 'elderly' since these people are sterotypical white Protestants who have at the maximum 2 children 5 years apart and who don't even reproduce themselves overall. I'm waiting for the fire sale on abandoned OPC buildings. There are going to be a bunch of them shortly.
By your own admission, you don't know. How would you know truth when you saw it?
I didn't change the subject. Worship includes praise but also prayers as well. Jesus gave you one prayer to pray, not hundreds, and he tells you to pray in a closet with its doors shut, in private. He specifically says do not pray like the hypocrites, in public and in places of worship (synagogues). So, why do Protestants go to church if they do everything according to the Bible? Where does Jesus say worship should include group prayer on a Sunday?
I will object to that. Iscool will not and would not wander the aisles of Wal Mart. Now, the Dollar General is another thing...
Oh, Mark, better get that kevlar helmet and flack jacket, quick! Incoming. We can't let the facts get in the way of tradition (of Calvinists)...
In English: we will make up our own rules, even if they are not in the Bible, as long as they are not the same as those awful traditions of Catholics.
Speaking for God yet again? I'm surprised that you and Jedediah don't have a room on the same floor with the same cocktail.
If you believe your statement then it must be said I doubt very much that Christ is laughing....if they are lost only the enemy of God would be laughing.
Through immigration, legal and otherwise, and immigration only. Of course, this represents a loss in the "sending" country.
To be fair, Mainline Protestant Protestant Churches are also experiencing declining numbers.
Then we might define the arena as exclusively the US alone. In the US arena, the percentage of Catholics of the total population has been stable for some time now at just shy of 25%, as opposed to any claims of anything else. Fair?
No, we don’t worship whatever God we create and we don’t make up a religion. Since we recognize the integrity and veracity of Scripture, we worship the God of Scripture, as presented in Scripture.
Do you not understand that Christianity is not about religion but a relationship? It’s not about being enslaved to a laundry list of do’s and don’t’s trying to earn God’s favor and approval and forgivenness, hoping against hope that in the end we’ll have been found not wanting. It’s about being forgiven in Christ through the new birth, being born again, as Jesus said we must be.
God’s forgiveness makes us children of God, period. Will we sin? Yes. He knows that. Does that condemn us to hell for sinning as the Catholic church teaches? No. We’re His children. We don’t become not His children just because we didn’t happen to ask forgiveness for something we forgot we did or didn’t have time to ask for before we die.
The Catholic religion keeps people constantly on edge. You never know whether you make it or not until it’s too late to do anything about it. It’s enslaving and that’s NOT what Christ came to do. He came to set us free.
The bondage which the Catholic church puts on people is due to their inaccurate portrayal of God as a intolerant, unforgiving taskmaster who is ready to zap someone for the least little transgression, not that of a loving Father who remembers that we are dust and has compassion for those who fear Him.
If the people are not kept in bondage by an inaccurate portrayal of God, then there’s no way to control them.
We answer to God alone. We go to the Father in prayer as directed by Jesus. We don’t forsake the assembling of ourselves together but do not do it out of obligation or compulsion in fear but gratitude and thanksgiving in love for what He has done for us.
Agreed. All of them appear to think that they are speaking for God.
“”Church Slavonic (which is an exact rendition of Greek specifically created for liturgical and theological use) and Syriac, were also widely used languages in Christendom.””
Here is some good information on how this comes together from UPENN-Robert Kraft..
In Search of Jewish Greek Scriptures:
Exposing the Obvious? by Robert A. Kraft
Abstract: Jesus and his earliest followers apparently were Semitic speaking Jews living in Roman Palestine, but their messages quickly spread into the Greek speaking worlds in which Jews had been quite active for centuries. The Greek sources left to us by the early Christian authors, compilers, and copyists include Jewish writings and traditions of various sorts, especially those that later became “canonized.” Greek speaking Jews tend to disappear from our preserved sources in the second century CE, leaving the impression that the gradually dominating Semitic Judaism of the Rabbis has displaced most other Jewish representatives. This paper will challenge that simplistic assessment by drawing together evidence from and about Jewish scriptures in Greek throughout the Greco-Roman period.
More good reading...
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONCEPT Of “ORTHODOXY”
IN EARLY CHRISTIANITY By Robert Kraft
A few excerpts..
By the year 400 of the common era, there had developed what can be called “classical Christian orthodoxy.” This type of Christianity became mainstream Christianity in both the eastern and the western world prior to the time of the Protestant Reformation. It not only defined its beliefs in terms of standard creeds, such as the so-called “Apostles’ Creed” and the so-called “Nicene Creed,” but it judged the conduct of its adherents in terms of certain prescribed rules and practices for worship and for private life. It not only appealed to a standard collection of religious writings as authoritative, but it also acknowledged the presence of institutional authority in the leaders of the church, an authority believed to have been passed down from generation to generation in a line of spiritual transmission that could be traced back to Jesus Christ himself. It not only actively sought to bring non-Christians into the fold, but it also actively fought to exclude so-called “heretics” and to prohibit such “heretics,” insofar as that was possible, from providing competition for so-called “orthodoxy.”
“modern Protestant Christianity has not been known for its attention to the details of early church history beyond the so-called NT period, despite the real relevance of such a broader awareness”
Whether God choses me to accept the free gift of salvation without works, or whether I chose to accept the free gift of salvation without works, guess what...
Maybe God chose me and I don't know it...Maybe they chose God instead of the other way around...Either way, we're all adopted as the children of God...
But you're still out of the loop...
- Don't want to confess your sins to a priest? Come to our new church, we don't believe in that either.
- Don't think that how you treat others should matter? Neither do we.
From here it really wasn't that far a leap to:
- Don't want to wait for marriage to have sex? Come to our new church, we don't care.
- You say you're a homosexual? That's okay, we don't care at our church.
- You say you would rather go to a church with a priestess? Come on, we've even got a lesbian and a transvestite.
I’m not so certain the Catholic church will hold the “title” so to speak, of what this One world religion will look like. But it surely will be a part of, also the LDS. They will appeal to whereever large sums of money can be generated because it won’t be about religion as most will be led to believe. It will be, behind the front of religion, about money and power.
The worlds populace is ripe to be mislead...this is being fed daily via the media...”Let’s all get along”...”We’ve got to Love everybody”....But this love and unity which is being promoted has nothing whatsoever to do with the Love of God. It is a clear counterfeit and we know who counterfeits everything God is.
What is happening is identical to when man built the tower of Babel. It is self serving and an afront to Gods purposes for the human race he designed for nationhood, not internationalism.