brotherfrancis75
Reputation: 173
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 229
|
We seem to be agreed that the patriarchal theory of authority is the right one. But, as should be expected, the devil is in the details.
If we follow the historic Catholic understanding of the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul on every June 29th as our "Second Easter," then our politics together with our temporal civilization generally should be oriented to the Divine Revelation about Eternal Rome as the New Jerusalem that is contained within that most holy feastday. Our Catholic politics is the historic politics of Catholic Rome, the New Jerusalem of the New Israel who are, specifically, us.
Sts. Peter and Paul, according to our religion, received the Divine Revelation that Rome is the temporal vehicle of the New Testament and Church of Christ on earth, the Mystical Body of God. Therefore when Catholic Rome has taught us that our Roman Emperors have received their election through their popular acclimation by the ROMAN CATHOLIC people immediately before their elevation to the Imperial dignity, we are as Roman Catholics most seriously obligated to accept this political wisdom as from the very Voice of God. Our Holy Roman Emperors are the divinely ordained Vice-regents of God Almighty on earth.
To disrespect this truth is to disrespect the DIVINE REVELATION of our Second Easter that is the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul.
In addition to the elective monarchies of our Roman Emperors and Roman Popes, we also have the political inheritance from the divine revelation of Sts. Peter and Paul of our national hereditary monarchies and aristocracies, our smaller aristocratic Roman Republics (like Venice, the Dutch Republic and the Old American Republic) and, last but by no means least, our great tradition of ROMAN dictatorship that has always been invoked by the Roman Catholics in times of greatest emergency and danger.
None of this accords with the views of Jacques Maritain nor of his sly partisans like Dr. James J. Walsh who covered over their Marxist sympathies with a great deal of pseudo-conservative verbiage. But when the time came they were eager to fight to the death alongside their beloved "Dear Uncle Joe" Stalin in order to massacre and crush the innocent Catholics of Europe and South America. In the U.S. the battle lines were drawn between the magnificently loyal Cardinal O'Connor of Boston and that disloyal and disgusting male prostitute who went by the undeserved label Cardinal Spellman of New York. (Jew York more like!)
Since I'm so foolish as to enter this political minefield I had better also attempt to address some of the views of our out-of-control anti-German Francophiles. If we TRULY love Catholic France, then we should have grave doubts concerning the claims of "Louis XX" to the throne of Catholic France. In particular, he has freely chosen to chain his star to the fortunes of that Hungarian Jew and Christ-killer Nicholas Sarkozy and to Sarkozy's brainless Italian whore, "what's her name." "Louis XX" also suffers from decidedly unsavory Spanish family connections, as the troubled grandson of Francisco Franco and cousin of Juan Carlos, the horrifying reigning King of Spain (who is the Number One champion on earth of the Spanish Socialist/Gay Marriage Party, just for starters...), along with all the misery such family relationships must entail. Poor "Louis XX" has been reduced to marrying a commoner daughter of rich Venezuelan bankers and living in New York (Jew York!) in his ignoble pursuit of the "Almighty Dollar."
Whereas H.R.H. Henri d'Orleans, the Comte de Paris and Duc de France, and his sons ACT like proper French Catholic aristocrats and royals with proper noble anti-capitalist politics that are at the furthest remove from the heretical Neo-Liberal Market Bolshevism and blood-drenched anti-Catholic militarism of "Louis XX" and his Novus Ordo and Jew confreres.
If our Francophile bloggers truly love France, they should JOIN TOGETHER with us to form the Catholic armies and militias to put H.R.H. Henri d'Orleans ON THE THRONE of France where His Majesty so rightly belongs! They should GET REAL, support the Camelots du Roi and practice some MILITARY DISCIPLINE to restore the true legitimist Bourbons to their rightful place as hereditary rulers of our most Catholic Royaume de France.
France already has a Roman Catholic King of the Royal House of Bourbon. The true Roman Catholic politics would be to FIGHT for him.
|
|
| Posted Jul 30, 2012, 12:11 am |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
PereJoseph
Reputation: 1293
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 967
|
| Kephapaulos said: | | What would be the correct theory then if not the popular consent or patriarchal theories? |
Saint Robert Bellarmine also holds to the popular consent theory, which, as far as I understand it, was enunciated by Leo XIII as being when those who have a vote simply select their leader, understanding that God then gives him true sovereign authority that needs to be obeyed conscientiously. Personally, I think that this is very inferior to the patriarchal theory, which accords most perfectly from almost every standpoint -- natural law, common sense, trust in Divine Providence, reducing ambition, eliminating the role of the money-power in the exercise and succession of the civil authority, etc.
Saint Thomas and Pius VI agree that monarchy is the best of all governments. History is also a poignant and rather one-sided witness to this truth as well. While I do not begrudge such states as the Most Serene Republic of Venice and their means of selecting their Doges their right to exist -- as per the teaching of Leo XIII -- I respectfully remain a champion of monarchy's status as the most perfect of governments and the one in closest conformity to both the natural order and the supernatural one.
Every country and people have their own constitution, however, which is written upon their hearts through many generations of common custom and struggle. In small places, this sometimes means republican customs and privileges, whereas in larger countries that form of government seems untenable and monarchy is the only acceptable form. In any case, even if we do look at the countries where popular consent has been the custom, we see that the voters and the candidates are always the patriarchs of the most eminent and established families (at least where true peace is kept). Thus, even within the popular consent theory, the patriarchal theory shines through. As in most things, it seems like the Catholic Truth is something of a combination of both. But it seems that the Church has favoured and nourished true patriarchy wherever it can be found, whereas it has accepted popular consent with only after making reservations for patriarchy -- that is to say, nature -- to temper the madness that is unisex, egalitarian democracy.
|
.........................
"One learns more in the woods than in books. The trees and the rocks will teach you things you will not hear elsewhere." -- Saint Bernard de Clairvaux
"Courage, Père Joseph ! We have taken Brisach !" -- Cardinal Richelieu to Père Joseph when the latter was on his deathbed.
|
| Posted Jul 31, 2012, 6:33 am |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
PereJoseph
Reputation: 1293
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 967
|
| brotherfrancis75 said: | | Since I'm so foolish as to enter this political minefield I had better also attempt to address some of the views of our out-of-control anti-German Francophiles. If we TRULY love Catholic France, then we should have grave doubts concerning the claims of "Louis XX" to the throne of Catholic France. |
If we truly love Catholic France, we should respect the fundamental laws of the Kingdom, which supersede any treaty stipulations on the question of the succession. No, assuming that the line of Louis XVII did not continue and that Louis XX is a true Bourbon and not, as it is said, a descendant of the less illustrious house of Puíg y Molto by way of Isabella the Whore, he is the King of France, no matter what his behaviour or political opinions. Fortunately, there is good reason to doubt that the line of Louis XVII failed and that Louis-Alphonse is a true Bourbon through patrilineal descent.
| Quote: | | In particular, he has freely chosen to chain his star to the fortunes of that Hungarian Jew and Christ-killer Nicholas Sarkozy and to Sarkozy's brainless Italian whore, "what's her name." "Louis XX" also suffers from decidedly unsavory Spanish family connections, as the troubled grandson of Francisco Franco... |
First and foremost, all of that is irrelevant from the standpoint of legitimate succession. Secondly, what's wrong with being the grandson of General Franco ? Sure, he was not the best leader, particularly in the way he dealt with the Carlists, but how is being the grandson of el Caudillo "unsavory" ?
| Quote: | | ...and cousin of Juan Carlos, the horrifying reigning King of Spain (who is the Number One champion on earth of the Spanish Socialist/Gay Marriage Party, just for starters...), along with all the misery such family relationships must entail. |
Once again, completely irrelevant. Besides, Juan Carlos and Luís Alfonso are on rather bad terms. What truly matters is whether or not either one of them are true Bourbon dynastics and whether or not Luís is indeed the Eldest of the Capetiens, in which case he is indisputably the King of France and nothing can change it. As for Juan Carlos, the Carlist succession is a different matter, but suffice it to say I do not believe he is the King of Spain.
| Quote: | | Poor "Louis XX" has been reduced to marrying a commoner daughter of rich Venezuelan bankers and living in New York (Jew York!) in his ignoble pursuit of the "Almighty Dollar." |
Irrelevant. In French law, the King can marry a commoner, noblewoman, princess, queen, or any woman, and His Most Christian Majesty's sons are still fully royal. Besides, marrying the pretty daughters of incredibly wealthy men with few years ahead of them and no sons to inherit their estate is an old royal French skill that, according to the King's station and the Roman Catechism, is not to be blamed. When Maria Margarita's father dies, Luís will be a force to be reckoned with who will bring a lot of attention to the cause of Bourbon legitimacy and the French Crown. I personally do not believe that he is the heir to the Throne of the Lilies, but he can still be of service to it, perhaps even in spite of himself.
| Quote: | | Whereas H.R.H. Henri d'Orleans, the Comte de Paris and Duc de France, and his sons ACT like proper French Catholic aristocrats and royals with proper noble anti-capitalist politics that are at the furthest remove from the heretical Neo-Liberal Market Bolshevism and blood-drenched anti-Catholic militarism of "Louis XX" and his Novus Ordo and Jew confreres. |
Oh, please. You should really consider cutting it out. Henri d'Orléans, the pretended "Duc de France," is the Grand Master of the Grand Orient of France in Paris. He is just like his wicked forefathers -- a Freemason, an agent of the devil, and a cutthroat pursuant of the rightful throne of his elder cousins.
| Quote: | | If our Francophile bloggers truly love France, they should JOIN TOGETHER with us to form the Catholic armies and militias to put H.R.H. Henri d'Orleans ON THE THRONE of France where His Majesty so rightly belongs! |
That man rightly belongs far away from France unless he is locked up. He is neither the heir to the throne, nor worthy of our respect, nor "His Majesty." His Highness, the Duc d'Orléans, is the head of the Lodge of the Grand Orient of France and his ancestor Philippe was the crucial swing vote in favour of the murder of his own cousion, Louis XVI. His legal case for being King is worthless, and he disinherited his son from the succession -- illegally -- because of mental defects. He clearly does not respect the fundamental laws of France except insofar as he could be their beneficiary. Catholics should have little to do with him.
| Quote: | | They should GET REAL, support the Camelots du Roi and practice some MILITARY DISCIPLINE to restore the true legitimist Bourbons to their rightful place as hereditary rulers of our most Catholic Royaume de France. |
I agree about practicing military discipline, assuming one's duty of state permits it, but the King will be restored by the inscrutable design of Providence at the predestined moment, after France is punished again for her crimes, not through the efforts of newspaper boys in the streets of Paris and Marseille. The prophecies and the history of the Church pretty clearly indicate this. Besides, you rhetoric is empty. Do you actually have any concrete plans for the restoration of the Eldest Son of the Church to His Majesty's throne, or are you counting on others having one ? And what if he annexes large portions of Germany after a Catholic France is attacked by other European countries, and civil war spills into Spain and Italy ? Would you be happy if the borders of France extended to the Weser River ? For some reason, I doubt it ! 
| Quote: | | France already has a Roman Catholic King of the Royal House of Bourbon. The true Roman Catholic politics would be to FIGHT for him. |
Certainly, but it is not Henri d'Orléans and the true King of France is not helped by Henri's malign influences.
|
.........................
"One learns more in the woods than in books. The trees and the rocks will teach you things you will not hear elsewhere." -- Saint Bernard de Clairvaux
"Courage, Père Joseph ! We have taken Brisach !" -- Cardinal Richelieu to Père Joseph when the latter was on his deathbed.
|
| Posted Jul 31, 2012, 7:07 am |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
