Has there ever been a Christian secret (or discrete) society dedicated to fight the many revolutionary movements and ideologies that have sprung up since the French Revolution in the East or West?
It seems like every Christian religious society is dedicated to entryism of Judeo-Masonic, Marxist, homosexual etc. elements INTO the Church as opposed to the Church trying to influence society...
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
>Has there ever been a Christian secret (or discrete) society dedicated to fight the many revolutionary movements and ideologies that have sprung up since the French Revolution in the East or West?
There was the occasional political party in places like Germany and Italy however for the most part it has been unnecessary as for the past 1600 years they have been the establishment and hence not forced into secrecy.
In modern times though there has be a decently successful push by evangelicals to gain control of the lower tiers of the Republican party but thats about it.
>It seems like every Christian religious society is dedicated to entryism of Judeo-Masonic, Marxist, homosexual etc. elements INTO the Church.
Im guessing you are a Catholic here so in general its not entryism at all but creating bodies controlled by the church to contain those people who might be lured by other groups.
>Church trying to influence society...
They have gotten so addicted to Cesare doing the dirty work that they have lost the ability and will to do this and now that the State is no longer willing to play ball they are in a rough position.
>They have gotten so addicted to Cesare doing the dirty work that they have lost the ability and will to do this and now that the State is no longer willing to play ball they are in a rough position.
So true.
There's been plenty of Christian societies trying to make global changes. The Catholic church has had a ton of different bodies, and it itself was a society.
The fact is you don't need to make your society secret if you are on the defense. If you wanted to defend what people perceive as normal why would you go out of your way to make your society harder to find? You'd just lose power that way.
A society only needs to be secret if it is doing something the ruling powers would not approve of. The point of the secret is that they can't stop you if they can't find you or figure out what you are doing.
>Judeo-Masonic, Marxist, homosexua
You mean like what the Catholic has become LOL
>Has there ever been a Christian secret (or discrete) society dedicated to fight the many revolutionary movements and ideologies that have sprung up since the French Revolution in the East or West?
Freemasonry.
Freemasonry is anti-Christian and in fact behind the French Revolution.
But that's a lie spread by Jews to weaken bastions of Christianity. Are you a Jew?
Are you a troll? Yes.
Confirmed Jew hating on white Christian groups.
Are you butthurt that most of the rituals mock Jews?
...
Oh fuck meant for
Yes, but everyone was a freemason before the French revolution. Even catholic bishops, even fucking Joseph de Maistre.
I know a few catholic freemasons...
I'm pretty sure Veeky Forums is an atheist conspiracy to convert me to communism through the utter retardation on display
Order of the Dragon wasn't secret by any means, bro. Just had to kill enough heretics and have family.
Of course. They're the second largest group of members, after generic Protestant.
>Freemasonry is incompatible with the Catholic faith. Freemasonry teaches a naturalistic religion that espouses indifferentism, the position that a person can be equally pleasing to God while remaining in any religion.
>The Church has imposed the penalty of excommunication on Catholics who become Freemasons. The penalty of excommunication for joining the Masonic Lodge was explicit in the 1917 code of canon law (canon 2335), and it is implicit in the 1983 code (canon 1374).
Let's get this started:
""""""""Catholic"""""""" Freemason
Where is paedophilia/indulgences/brothel ownership permitted in the rule book for Catholics? Because those seems like bigger problems for the Vatican.
>HEY GUYS, HAS THERE EVER BEEN A SECRET SOCIETY FORMED FROM THE REGION'S MAJOR RELIGION DEDICATED TO FIGHT THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENTS AND MY FANTASY SCENARIO OF THE REVOLUTION USHERING IN SOME SORT OF ATHEIST CRUSADE :DDDDDDD
Yes, op. Yes there was. It was this super-secret cabal called the European Monarchy, which was secretly supported by their respective clergies. They met secretly in the Congress of Vienna in the aftermath of the Napoleonic wars and secretly made a pact that they'd assist each other in wars versus rebellious elements, in addition to limiting the damage of international wars versus each other. This was secretly known as the Concert of Powers, and in 1848, secretly assisted each other versus the many revolutions that took place. The Hungarians, for example, was secretly put down by an alliance of Austrians and Russians.
Reported this post out of fucking spite.
Considering none of those relate to theological heresy, I wouldn't imagine them being as much of a priority.
Neither does Freemasonry, really. But how is an indulgence not theological heresy, and why wouldn't paedophilia be a priority?
If you count Protestants then the KKK
>Let's get this started:
""""""""Catholic"""""""" Freemason
The church has a tradition of being missinformed about Masons and being willing to believe almost anything that will slander them see
en.wikipedia.org
To say it espouses indifferntism would be like saying that a person who says grace before sharing a meal with a Muslim and Jew creates a new religion when they use a neutral term for God that can be applied to each of their creeds.
Its just a fraternity/ civic virtue club a few groups have used its these features to their advantage for political purposes when fighiting a politically active Church but its not doctrinal.
Company of the Holy Sacrament is one.
en.wikipedia.org
You can also count the Freemasons.
Some Masonic lodges back in the 18th were exclusively made up by clergymen.
Clergymen during those times were notorious for being libertines, specifically the high-ranking clergy, they even became revolutionaries. One great example is Talleyrand who was an atheist and also used to be a bishop before the revolution.
I would guess that indulgences, because they're tied with the Pope (who is declared infallible), don't contradict theological doctrine.
And some Popes like Benedict actively tried to destroy the pedomania in the Church, while others simply looked the other way.
>I would guess that indulgences, because they're tied with the Pope (who is declared infallible), don't contradict theological doctrine.
They've come out before and after saying how bad they are, though.
And Papal Infallibility is something which has to be invoked. It's their way of weaseling out after screwing up.
I think you might be into something...