A Blueprint for a Monarchy in America [How Two Catholic Monarchists view the rest of us Americans]

Catholics and Nazism

The dark area onthe first map show the 1933 Nazi vote in Germany, the sencond show the distribution of Catholics in the 1932 census, it clearly shows Catholics didn't vote for Hitler.

(Zenit.org).- Catholics resisted Nazism during the dictatorship of Adolf Hitler in Germany, and if they didn't do it in a more decisive way, it was because of "a certain inferiority complex."

This is the thesis put forth by Austrian historian Martin Kugler during a conference titled "Sophie Scholl: Catholic Resistance to Nazism." The talk formed part of the 3rd International Film and Family Show, held in Tuesday in Barcelona and organized by CinemaNet.

The event focused on the 2005 German film "Sophie Scholl: The Last Days," which recounts the true story of Scholl, a 21-year-old member of the anti-Nazi, non-violent student group the White Rose.

Kugler is the founder of Europe4Christ.net, a multi-confessional and socio-political movement to fight moral relativism.

The Austrian historian explained that this "Catholic inferiority complex" and "fear" are analogous to the situation of Catholics today.

On the other hand, Kugler explained that Pius XII "loved the German people" and never approved of the Nazi regime.

The historian pointed out that "in 40 out of 44 speeches of Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli -- the future Pius XII -- as nuncio in Germany, there were criticisms of totalitarianism and racism."

"And if it was not more decisive when he was Pope it was because of his concern to not cause a greater persecution of Catholics, given the fact that there had been experiences of this kind," affirmed Kugler.

In light of this, "to say that he was anti-Semitic and in favor of Hitler is ridiculous," he affirmed, saying that the Holy See's diplomacy saved at least 700,000 Jews from the Holocaust during the Second World War.

I do not know of any Catholic Monarchists on this forum

Any idea of what happened to B-Chan?

This may be the first time I’ve said this to you, but thanks for posting that.

For some reason, I think I remember a thread where people were speculating whether B-Chan sold his freeper id, because there seemed to be a dramatic change in his posts and because people were willing to pay for the profiles of long-time freepers.

Samuel F.B. Morse, is that you?

From Samuel Morse Demonstrates First Telegraph: Morse Also Achieved Fame As Painter and Politician

"In the 1830s, he [Morse] expressed his anti-Catholic prejudices in a series of newspaper articles under the pen name Brutus. He accused the monarchies of Europe of enlisting the aid of the Catholic Church to subvert American democracy by sending Catholic immigrants to take over the American West....Morse's articles, which were republished in 1835 as a book, Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States....In his book, Morse wrote: 'Surely American Protestants, freemen, have discernment enough to discover beneath them the cloven foot of this subtle foreign heresy. They will see that Popery is now, what it has ever been, a system of the darkest political intrigue and despotism, cloaking itself to avoid attack under the sacred name of religion. They will be deeply impressed with the truth, that Popery is a political as well as a religious system; that in this respect it differs totally from all other sects, from all other forms of religion in the country.

And to think, several years ago, I was handed a photocopied version of Morse's book outside Union Station in Washington, DC.

Is a 2008 thread about a blogger called “Nick” acceptable on this forum?

We have material posted to the Religion Forum which is thousands of years old written at the hand of people with a single name, so no I don't object to a 3 year old article written by Nick.

As a fan of Roman History this seems to be a handy description of most of the officials in the later Roman Empire in the late fourth century AD, with enough changes as to be not useful as an accurate account of the Imperial Constitution of that period.

That's what I thought: the 'depth' merely comes from reading Roman history.

But the idea that a Roman Catholic monarchy would ever come to America is really, really, outtathere. Given how American really is, any "Church Established by Law" would almost certainly be evangelical Protestant. That's the faith [broadly speaking] that set down roots in the United States.

There's only one semi-realistic scenario for American becoming Catholic I've encountered: Walter Miller's A Canticle For Leibowitz. The Catholic Church saves the remnants of civilization after a full-scale nuclear war, just as it did during the Dark Ages. No other scenario makes sense.

My apology. I remembered the Poland part, not what preceded it.

"There's only one semi-realistic scenario for American becoming Catholic..."

The only way those like Gamecock and Alex Murphy would ever become Catholic is if the Ordinate approved lateral transfers and they could become Pope.

Alex, I know I'm one of the premier anti-Catholics on this forum (and I very much agreed with your assessment of Verdugo on the thread in which I lamented his banning), but I seriously hope you don't consider a Catholic monarchy to be an actual possibility. How could anyone possibly fear such a thing? It makes about as much sense as the Seventh Day Adventists and their perpetual fears of a "national sunday law."

Furthermore, although I certainly believe Catholicism is mistaken, I'm not sure that a Catholic monarchy wouldn't be an improvement over the current situation (provided they didn't force their evolutionism and higher criticism on the rest of us!). I'm sure there are far worse situations than being a religious minority in a country officially committed to another religion. All our human governments are temporary things anyway, pending the arrival of Mashiach and the establishment of the Kingdom of G-d on earth.

And yes, I'm still very much a Noachide who believes all non-Jews are bound individually and collectively by the Noachide Laws.

With all the terrible things going on right now, a Catholic monarchy is the last thing I'm worried about.

Joking aside, there has to be a real advantage to jump from the good old religion to a new one. What - I mean this seriously - does the Vatican offer Americans that it and only it can supply?

"What - I mean this seriously - does the Vatican offer Americans that it and only it can supply?"

Salvation.

A Canticle for Leibowitz is a classic of post WWII science fiction.

I seriously hope you don't consider a Catholic monarchy to be an actual possibility. How could anyone possibly fear such a thing?....With all the terrible things going on right now, a Catholic monarchy is the last thing I'm worried about.

Nah. Don't believe the press you read about me - I'm not worried about it one bit, nor believe it to be a possibility. But I do think the Catholic preference for monarchy and feudalism might just explain the predilection for voting in Democrats.

I do think the Catholic preference for monarchy and feudalism might just explain the predilection for voting in Democrats.

How does egalitarian secularist socialism square with monarchist Catholicism?

How about this one...

In post #58 of this thread the source wasn’t devulged...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2712883/posts?q=1&;page=51

A quick search revealed the source as a homosexual anonyomous blogger who wrote his rampant hatefilled screed in 2007. The poster obviously felt it was fitting to regurgiate on the FR Religous Forum.

Should I have reported this...? And if I had would it have been acceptable?

John Paul’s Blood to be Split Between Italy, Poland
Beliefnet ^ | April 26, 2011 | FRANCIS X. ROCCA
Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:15:55 AM by Alex Murphy
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2711850/posts.

Blood of Pope John Paul to be venerated at beatification
Global Post ^ | 4/26/2011
Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:58:52 AM by Alex Murphy
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2711872/posts

Here are two posts on the same topic within 48 minutes. The latter was a lot more loaded with leftie talking points (they’re a radical leftie org) so one might suspect that this was the reason, i.e., if the poster thought there was more information to add why not post it on the thread he just posted less than an hour before...

B-Chan also admitted that he had long struggled with clinical depression, so that could explain some of his behavior.

Nuke, Nuts, and the Navy: or, My Struggle

I do think the Catholic preference for monarchy and feudalism might just explain the predilection for voting in Democrats.

How does egalitarian secularist socialism square with monarchist Catholicism?

Actually, there is a point in what Alex says. The United States lacks a European-style right wing ideology (vertical, hierarchical, organic collectivism). Since our version of a right wing is essentially Alexander Hamilton (The Money Power!!!), early Catholics latched onto the Democrat party as the closest they could come to a European right wing party (which was pretty much what certain aristocratic planters were) and many are still addicted. But then, this seems to be the way the Democrat party works (see the "redeemer"/jim crow era South).

Verdugo was banned?

I must have missed that.