Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: A symbolism question/ cmmonet for the monarchists on the forum  (Read 1036 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sedetrad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1585
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
A symbolism question/ cmmonet for the monarchists on the forum
« on: December 15, 2009, 03:49:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Dear forum,

    Symbolism of all types has always fascinated me. The symbol of the Holy Roman Empire was the double headed crowned eagle. The symbol of America is the single headed uncrowned or bald eagle. When I compare the two, the american version strikes me as sinister. The HRE eagle seems to symbolize the two heads of the Church and State and it is crowned whereas the american eagle seems to just represent the state without the Church and is uncrowned. I am curious to see the forums members interpretations.

    Andy


    Offline St Jude Thaddeus

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 857
    • Reputation: +185/-24
    • Gender: Male
    A symbolism question/ cmmonet for the monarchists on the forum
    « Reply #1 on: December 15, 2009, 10:14:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Good subject for compare/contrast, Andy! Folks in the Age of Faith had an appreciation for the idea of kingship; our society is built on the false notions of "freedom and liberty," "every man for himself," and "I did it my way." The lone eagle, soaring through the air, going wherever it wants, when it wants, at the speed it wants, symbolizes the "independent" American, free of all earthly ties (and heavenly ones too.)

    More than anything else, the modern world suffers from a crisis of authority. Politicians, business leaders, clergymen, and even military leaders refuse to take responsibility for their actions. Fathers have been emasculated, and the single mom is often away at work (or busy trying to find another man) and so now we have one, or maybe two, generations raised by the TV set.

    Separation of Church and state is another problem. The double eagle symbolizes their unity; the lone eagle their separateness.

    I'm sure someone else here will be happy to do an even more in-depth analysis.

    St. Jude, who, disregarding the threats of the impious, courageously preached the doctrine of Christ,
    pray for us.


    Offline littlerose

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 351
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    A symbolism question/ cmmonet for the monarchists on the forum
    « Reply #2 on: December 17, 2009, 06:38:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I believe it was Jefferson who objected to the Bald Eagle, because it is as much a scavenger as a hunter and it will snatch a fish out of another eagle's claws. He wanted the wild turkey or, if it must be an eagle, the Golden Eagle to be the symbol.

    The wild turkey is a very intelligent bird, unlike domestic turkeys, and the wild turkey watches after its flock. If you have ever had the opportunity to see a Tom assert himself in the wild, with all the flock around him, as I have, you would appreciate this as the better symbol...

    But maybe the Bald Eagle was chosen because it is a more honest symbol for this country and they subconsciously knew that...  *sigh*

    Offline Catholic Samurai

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2821
    • Reputation: +744/-14
    • Gender: Male
    A symbolism question/ cmmonet for the monarchists on the forum
    « Reply #3 on: December 18, 2009, 05:54:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: littlerose
    I believe it was Jefferson who objected to the Bald Eagle, because it is as much a scavenger as a hunter and it will snatch a fish out of another eagle's claws. He wanted the wild turkey or, if it must be an eagle, the Golden Eagle to be the symbol.

    The wild turkey is a very intelligent bird, unlike domestic turkeys, and the wild turkey watches after its flock. If you have ever had the opportunity to see a Tom assert himself in the wild, with all the flock around him, as I have, you would appreciate this as the better symbol...

    But maybe the Bald Eagle was chosen because it is a more honest symbol for this country and they subconsciously knew that...  *sigh*


    Actually it was Benjamin Franklin who wanted the turkey as the national symbol. But then I dont know if there was anyone else in Congress who agreed and supported his choice.

    There is much more to the symbolic choice of an eagle than just it's natural instincts. It really depends on the people's culture. For the Romans it represented their chief god Jupiter/Zeus, for the Aztecs it stood for the guidance of their pagan gods... for the Freemasons it represents something, but I dont know what yet. The masonic symbols I have come across quite often have eagles and bald eagles on them. In Christendom it was sometimes used to represented the Divine Nature of Christ and was often used in the nobility's heraldry. You see, as I said, it depends on the culture. The same symbol means different things to different people. But the eagle isnt the only symbol that expresses the neo-pagan roots of the nation, the architecture, monuments, and art displayed throughout the capital is all of pagan deities and luciferian/gnostic philosophy.

    Something I always wondered when I was little, was why we had a "Godess of Liberty/Reason" (the same one from the French Revolution) as a national monument when we should have had a statue of Our Lady or at least Our Lord. We were a Christian nation after all... right mommy?
    "Louvada Siesa O' Sanctisimo Sacramento!"~warcry of the Amakusa/Shimabara rebels

    "We must risk something for God!"~Hernan Cortes


    TEJANO AND PROUD!

    Offline Catholic Samurai

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2821
    • Reputation: +744/-14
    • Gender: Male
    A symbolism question/ cmmonet for the monarchists on the forum
    « Reply #4 on: December 18, 2009, 06:21:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Actually now that I think about it... the first animal that was unofficially used to represent the United states was the snake with "coincidental" slogan "Dont tread on me!" attached. Which I find funny since the North, South, and Central America all had this worship of the serpent which almost all other pagan people had. This cult almost disappeared with the coming of the Catholics and the conquest of 2/3rds of North America and Central and South America for Our Lord and Our Lady. It's funny how in 1776 Our Lady was already reigning as Queen of the Americas with the title (in Nahuatl) "She who crushes the stone serpent" while at the same time arises an anti-catholic people in the Northeast with a defiant serpent for their banner who say's "Dont tread on me!" and who not too later sow the seeds of revolution which dethrone her as Queen of the Americas.
    "Louvada Siesa O' Sanctisimo Sacramento!"~warcry of the Amakusa/Shimabara rebels

    "We must risk something for God!"~Hernan Cortes


    TEJANO AND PROUD!


    Offline Raoul76

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4803
    • Reputation: +2007/-6
    • Gender: Male
    A symbolism question/ cmmonet for the monarchists on the forum
    « Reply #5 on: December 18, 2009, 06:57:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I never thought about that, Catholic Samurai, but you're absolutely right.  "Don't tread on me" and a snake... WOW!  That is literally a defiant boast in the face of the Virgin Mary, since there is enmity between the seed of the woman -- Christ -- and the seed of the serpent.  The serpent was saying to the Virgin, "It's my time now," and the serpent was right.  He has done and he has prospered to an extent that is unbelievable.

    As people who read this site probably know, I have a deep loathing for this country, and even before becoming Catholic could feel the evil under the once-shiny surface, which is now coming apart at the seams.  It took all of my intestinal fortitude to attend Mass at the patriotic CMRI because of stuff like this:



    When I see that flag, it's like seeing a hammer and sickle.  There is nothing positive about it for me.

    The truth about this country, obviously, is hidden from the sedevacantist pulpits, when it should be screamed to the skies.
    That in itself should make people wonder -- that, along with all the heresies...

    I'm telling you, America is Mystery Babylon.  Why "Mystery"?  Well, think of the first Babylon.  The Jєωs, the chosen people, were in exile, in mourning, yearning to go back home, Super Flumina Babylonis and all of that.  

    Now, look at how everything is reversed as if in a dark mirror.  The Jєωs, once the chosen people, now the children of the devil, preside over a new Babylon, Mystery Babylon.  The new chosen people, the Catholics, however, far from lamenting their exile under an even more viciously nasty, subtle and terrible overlord than Nebuchadnezzar ever was, WORSHIP this Satanic creation, wave the flag around, and act like it's the greatest country that has ever been.  

    In so doing they claim to serve God while actually serving the devil whose aims are carried out through America, the strongarm of the Jєωs, now about to be discarded since we've served our purpose.  For proof, Americans worshipped Cardinal Gibbons who not only approved of separation of Church and state for our country, but wanted to make it a rule for the whole world, proposing very early what we now know as the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr or universal American system.  It is no coincidence -- nothing is -- that this man also promoted the heretical Baltimore Catechism, taught by our pals at SSPX and CMRI!!!  O GLORIOUS DAY!

    What is the Mystery of this new Babylon?  The Mystery is that almost no one spoke about this Babylon as Babylon.  It is a mystery in the sense that its true nature was hushed up, kept silent, held under wraps.  Very few cared to peek behind the curtain and see who was really running the show.  The Catholics that should have lived here mournfully, singing the psalm Super Flumina Americanis -- I don't know much Latin yet, sorry -- would often take the side of this Jєωιѕн abomination over a Catholic country like Spain.  Of course, there were good Catholics here, who knew what was going on, or so I like to think.  But they were not the majority nor in the ascendant.

    The 20th century was the worst because of the Cold War, as openly communist Russia gave prideful Americans even more of an excuse to close their eyes to their own reality.  Fatima seems to have played into this; that's one of the reasons why I suspect it.  There are better reasons to suspect Fatima, though, besides the almost endless contradictions in the story.  How about the "angel" who gave the children the Eucharist?  Last night I was reading St. Thomas and he explicitly says this can never be done.  Angels cannot serve as priests.  

    But Fatima is for another thread.
    Readers: Please IGNORE all my postings here. I was a recent convert and fell into errors, even heresy for which hopefully my ignorance excuses. These include rejecting the "rhythm method," rejecting the idea of "implicit faith," and being brieflfy quasi-Jansenist. I also posted occasions of sins and links to occasions of sin, not understanding the concept much at the time, so do not follow my links.