Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope Recalls Fatima Consecration
CWNews.com ^ | 3/24/2004

Posted on 03/24/2004 8:26:57 AM PST by CatherineSiena

Vatican, Mar. 24 (CWNews.com) - At his weekly public audience on March 24, Pope John Paul II (bio - news) recalled that 20 years ago, he consecrated "all of humanity" to the Virgin Mary, thus fulfilling "our Lady's plea at Fatima."

The Holy Father began his remarks by reminding his audience that Thursday, March 25, is the feast of the Annunciation, "which allows us to contemplate the Incarnation of the Eternal Word, made man in Mary's womb." He added that Mary's "fiat" echoes the obedience of Jesus to the divine plan, "to which we must add our 'Yes.'"

The Pope said that at three different times during his pontificate, he has made consecrations to the Virgin Mary. On December 8, 1978-- just weeks after his election-- he consecrated the Church and the world to the Immaculate Conception. In June 1979 he renewed that consecration during a visit to the shrine of the Black Madonna in Poland. Then on March 25, 1984, he made the consecration which, he said, fulfilled the terms of the Virgin's plea at Fatima.

The Pope said:

Twenty years have gone by since that day when, in spiritual union with all the bishops of the world, I entrusted all of mankind to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, in response to Our Lady's plea in Fatima.

Today's world remains too full of "hatred, violence, terrorism, and war," the Pope said. He asked for prayer for all the innocent people who suffer from violence as "so much blood continued to be shed." He appealed to the Virgin Mary's aid to help turn men's hearts and minds, to end the violence.

Although his voice was halting, the Pope read the entirety of his remarks, in Italian. When he had finished his formal delivery, he offered greetings to the 14,000 people assembled in St. Peter's Square for the audience, speaking to them in French, English, German, Spanish, and Polish. He remained in the Square for nearly an hour, giving his blessing to young couples and to the sick, and posing for pictures with pilgrim groups.


TOPICS: Catholic
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-138 next last

1 posted on 03/24/2004 8:26:57 AM PST by CatherineSiena
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CatherineSiena
Uh-oh. The Grunerites will be coming out of the woodwork for this thread. ;-)
2 posted on 03/24/2004 8:38:21 AM PST by Pyro7480 (Minister for the Conversion of Hardened Sinners,Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineSiena
"Twenty years have gone by since that day when, in spiritual union with all the bishops of the world, I entrusted all of mankind to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, in response to Our Lady's plea in Fatima."

And this means.....?

3 posted on 03/24/2004 8:58:26 AM PST by HarleyD (READ Your Bible-STUDY to show yourself approved)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineSiena
Who really cares about this Fatima stuff? Does anybody really believe that story with the phenomenon in the sky and little kids that saw the Blessed Mother? Let's use a little common sense here.
4 posted on 03/24/2004 9:22:47 AM PST by sydney smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineSiena
From a previous post...


The more I study the the supposed appearances of Mary the more I am becoming convinced that the purpose of them is slowly and by stages to lead people away from a focus o­n God and Christ at to a "safe harbor" in Mary. Let me give you an example from Fatima...


"...Do you suffer a great deal? Don’t be discouraged. I will never forsake you. My Immaculate Heart will be your refuge and the road that will conduct you to God."

...

"To prevent this, I come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of reparation o­n the First Saturdays. If they listen to my requests, Russia will be converted and there will be peace. If not, she will scatter her errors throughout the world, provoking wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; many nations will be annihilated.

Jesus wishes to make use of you to have me acknowledged and loved. He wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart."

“Here you see hell, where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart... Pray, pray a great deal and make sacrifices for sinners. So many souls go to hell because there is no o­ne to pray and sacrifice for them.”


These appearances are about Mary and her roll in redemtion. Granted, God and Christ are present in the above - but the Father and Son are supposedly telling people They want them to be devoted to Mary. Some are even calling this the Marian age - which, to my mind, goes squarely against scripture when it says,

"God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in his Son"  Heb.1 ASV

5 posted on 03/24/2004 9:45:19 AM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineSiena
At his weekly public audience on March 24, Pope John Paul II (bio - news) recalled that 20 years ago, he consecrated "all of humanity" to the Virgin Mary, thus fulfilling "our Lady's plea at Fatima."

----

7Q: Didn’t the Pope succeed in performing the consecration of Russia in 1984?

A: No. As Sister Lucy herself declared in a September 1985 interview, the attempted consecration of March 25, 1984, did not satisfy Our Lady’s requests because “there was no participation of the bishops and there was no mention of Russia.” In consecrating the world in general on that date without mentioning Russia, the Holy Father himself acknowledged in the presence of tens of thousands of witnesses, both during and after the ceremony, that the people of Russia were still “awaiting our consecration and confiding.” The next day these statements were reported in the Pope’s own newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, and the Italian Bishops’ publication, L’Avvenire.

http://www.fatima.org/faqconse.html

---

So, why is Rome trying to rewrite the Fatima request? I have gone out of my way NOT to criticize the Pope too much on this site. I have tried to give the benefit of the doubt to all the inconsistencies and illogical behaviors coming out of Rome. This is the last straw.

6 posted on 03/24/2004 10:13:04 AM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
There's a good article that I read about the contradictory statements Sister Lucia has made concerning this consecration. I wonder if she has been co-opted.
7 posted on 03/24/2004 10:14:43 AM PST by Pyro7480 (Minister for the Conversion of Hardened Sinners,Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
The last time Sister Lucia spoke unrestricted in public was in 1985. The alleged interviews around 1990 and subsequent spin by Cardinal Sodano is highly suspect.
8 posted on 03/24/2004 10:20:23 AM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
So, why is Rome trying to rewrite the Fatima request? I have gone out of my way NOT to criticize the Pope too much on this site. I have tried to give the benefit of the doubt to all the inconsistencies and illogical behaviors coming out of Rome. This is the last straw.

This is the last straw?

Didn't take much, I guess.

The Gruenerites have gotten to you, too.

9 posted on 03/24/2004 10:34:07 AM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
No, sinkspur. I'm merely honest and willing to take an objective look at the facts. Something is very rotten in Rome.
10 posted on 03/24/2004 11:28:47 AM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
Something is very rotten in Rome.

The Pope said he made the consecration. Fr. Gruener says he didn't (Gruener's got this "Fatima ministry" he has to protect).

I know who I'm going to believe.

11 posted on 03/24/2004 11:30:45 AM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I should add, I don't like church authorities lying to me. The Pope has been caught in a huge lie and despite his inclinations otherwise, a huge disrespect to the Blessed Virgin by twisting her words.
12 posted on 03/24/2004 11:31:35 AM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
The Pope also said in 1984 that he had NOT made the consecration. Those were his own words in front of thousands of people and printed in several secular newspapers. This has nothing to do with Father Gruner, he has simply become a convenient scapegoat for pointing out the truth.
13 posted on 03/24/2004 11:33:53 AM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
The Pope has been caught in a huge lie and despite his inclinations otherwise, a huge disrespect to the Blessed Virgin by twisting her words.

LOL!! So say the Grunerites. If you want to believe a guy who's got a ministry to shill for, as opposed to the Vicar of Christ, go right ahead.

Oh, the shill has been suspended a divinis by the Vatican, BTW.

14 posted on 03/24/2004 11:35:12 AM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
This whole debate is silly! If you doubt the Pope's bona fides vis-a-vis the Blessed Virgin, then you have a major perception problem.
15 posted on 03/24/2004 11:37:08 AM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
In consecrating the world in general on that date without mentioning Russia, the Holy Father himself acknowledged in the presence of tens of thousands of witnesses, both during and after the ceremony, that the people of Russia were still “awaiting our consecration and confiding.” The next day these statements were reported in the Pope’s own newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, and the Italian Bishops’ publication, L’Avvenire.
16 posted on 03/24/2004 11:38:56 AM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
If you are not willing to be honest then you are the one with a perception problem.
17 posted on 03/24/2004 11:39:55 AM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
In consecrating the world in general on that date without mentioning Russia, the Holy Father himself acknowledged in the presence of tens of thousands of witnesses, both during and after the ceremony, that the people of Russia were still “awaiting our consecration and confiding.”

You don't see the utter ridiculousness in this statement? So, in the view of the Gruenerites, unless Russia is mentioned by name, Russia is not consecrated?

Gruener himself is a bit unhinged, so the stuff that comes out of his "ministry" is going to be unhinged too.

Kinda like the assertion that Sister Lucy is being held hostage by the mean ole Vatican.

But, believe this nutbag if you wish.

18 posted on 03/24/2004 11:43:08 AM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Just because the statement seems ridiculous to you, do you deny that it was printed in the Vatican newspaper?
19 posted on 03/24/2004 11:46:42 AM PST by Pyro7480 (Minister for the Conversion of Hardened Sinners,Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Just because the statement seems ridiculous to you, do you deny that it was printed in the Vatican newspaper?

No. But, the "statement" is the summary of the Gruenerite position. Sister Lucy and JPII now both say that Russia was consecrated. That ought to be the end of it.

But, when you've got money to raise and a personal cult to foster, it won't be.

20 posted on 03/24/2004 11:58:40 AM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Sister Lucy and JPII now both say that Russia was consecrated.

Did they make those statements after saying it didn't happen? Hence, the dilemna.

21 posted on 03/24/2004 12:00:00 PM PST by Pyro7480 (Minister for the Conversion of Hardened Sinners,Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
The Pope never said it didn't happen. The statement said it "implicitly" didn't happen.
22 posted on 03/24/2004 12:01:20 PM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
So, in the view of the Gruenerites, unless Russia is mentioned by name, Russia is not consecrated?

That's the view of the Blessed Mother.

23 posted on 03/24/2004 12:03:30 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Sinkspur, do you actually believe in this nonsense, that 3 little kids actually had a visitation from the Virgin Mary, etc.? I'm kind of surprised that you could actually subscribe to such fantasy.
24 posted on 03/24/2004 12:43:35 PM PST by sydney smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
Bear in mind that even Fatima and Lourdes are no more than "private revelations" and that no Marian apparition is a required belief of Catholics. The Church regards some reported apparitions as permissible to be believed and some as not to be believed. None are required to be believed.

Few Protestants believe any of those apparitions and many see conflict with Scripture. Yet again, Catholics and Protestants disagree over Mary. I am not trying to change your mind but I do hope that you will note that no Catholic is required to believe in any of the apparitions of Mary.

That many of us DO believe in one or more approved apparitions (those which MAY be believed) is another question.

25 posted on 03/24/2004 12:53:57 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
I'm not disagreeing, but aren't we de facto required to believe the visions of Catherine Laboure "I am the Immaculate Conception"?
26 posted on 03/24/2004 12:56:28 PM PST by old and tired (Go Toomey! Send Specter back to the Highlands!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; Canticle_of_Deborah
I have always supposed that the pope did what he could do and that, particularly in our day and age, it would be a tad diffiocult for the pope to literally compel every bishop in the world to join in consecrating Russi to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

One great thing about the Roman Catholic Church AND the SSPX schism AND even the Gruener phenomenon of ecclesiastical disobedience is that all three allow thee and me to agree once in a while.

Gruener would do well to keep his priestly vow of obedience by, well, obeying (for a life-altering change) his diocesan ordinary whom he has spurned for about 20 years while acting impermissibly as a free agent priest answering to no one but himself. Now he has to settle for such as Ferraro and Woods as his apologists.

27 posted on 03/24/2004 1:05:06 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
Neo-Catholicism: Obedience is greater than the Faith.

Real Catholicism: Obedience is the servant of the Faith.

I'll opt for the latter, thanks.
28 posted on 03/24/2004 1:10:21 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: old and tired
We believe that Mary was conceived without the burden of original sin because that is a formal dogma defined by Pius IX, which followed not only the apparitions at Lourdes but also many centuries of universality, antiquity and consensus among Catholics. Pius IX formalized what was already widely believed.

Although I do believe in the apparitions at Lourdes and at Fatima and at LaSalette and many others, we, as Catholics. are not required to believe that Mary has ever appeared at any of those places or that she has ever delivered any messages or that she delivered the reported messages.

Thus, we may de facto be required to believe certain dogmas but that requirement itself is not the product of a required belief in any apparition.

29 posted on 03/24/2004 1:10:30 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
Ciao! Hasta la Vista! Au Revoir! Goodbye! May you someday return to Catholicism. Catholics will keep you in their prayers.
30 posted on 03/24/2004 1:11:41 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
"Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the AntiChrist." --Our Lady of LaSalette

Yep, that blind obedience will be real helpful in the days to come. Great job!

31 posted on 03/24/2004 1:18:30 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
Thank you for clearing that up for me.
32 posted on 03/24/2004 1:28:30 PM PST by old and tired (Go Toomey! Send Specter back to the Highlands!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
It should be noted that the vision at Lourdes came AFTER Pius IX declared the "Immaculate Conception" a dogma of the Faith
33 posted on 03/24/2004 1:49:37 PM PST by Bellarmine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
***I am not trying to change your mind but I do hope that you will note that no Catholic is required to believe in any of the apparitions of Mary.***

I fully understand and appreciate what you are saying.

My concern is that these events are, by nature, supernatural events. They must therefore be subject to the highest scrutiny. Paul warned us of supernatural messengers when he said...

"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed."

And this is the heart of my concern. The Gospel is that we can come to God through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ alone.

This apparition is telling people that now God wants them to come another way - through her! She (or it!) says...

"My Immaculate Heart will be your refuge and the road that will conduct you to God."



But Jesus said HE was the way! And that no one could come to the Father except through him.

"I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."



To me this sounds like a different gospel and if it is then whatever or whoever is delivering it is accursed according to Paul. He did warn us that...

"Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light."

I know that the Church does not officially sanction or require belief in this. But the fact that unofficially is is accepted and promoted is chilling.


34 posted on 03/24/2004 2:27:53 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah; Francisco; Jacinta; Land of the Irish; autopsy; Maximilian; ultima ratio; ...
"Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the AntiChrist." --Our Lady of LaSalette

CUM EX APOSTOLATUS OFFICIO, APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION OF HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL IV, 15TH FEBUARY 1559, (ROMAN BULLARIUM VOL. IV. SEC. I, PP. 354-357)

...We are bound to be diligently watchful after the manner of a vigilant Shepherd and to ensure most carefully that certain people who consider the study of the truth beneath them should be driven out of the sheepfold of Christ and no longer continue to disseminate error from positions of authority...

1.In assessing Our duty and the situation now prevailing, We have been weighed upon by the thought that a matter of this kind [i.e. error in respect of the Faith] is so grave and so dangerous that the Roman Pontiff,who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fulness of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith.

...and We have been concerned also lest it may befall Us to see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by the prophet Daniel, in the holy place...

6. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:-]

that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:

(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;

(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation;

(iii) it shall not be held as partially legitimate in any way;

(iv) to any so promoted to be Bishops, or Archbishops, or Patriarchs, or Primates or elevated as Cardinals, or as Roman Pontiff, no authority shall have been granted, nor shall it be considered to have been so granted either in the spiritual or the temporal domain;

(v) each and all of their words, deeds, actions and enactments, howsoever made, and anything whatsoever to which these may give rise, shall be without force and shall grant no stability whatsoever nor any right to anyone;

(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power, without any exception in respect of those to which they may have been promoted or elevated before they deviated from the Faith, became heretics, incurred schism, or provoked or committed any or all of these.

35 posted on 03/24/2004 3:41:12 PM PST by Viva Christo Rey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Viva Christo Rey; Canticle_of_Deborah; Land of the Irish; autopsy; ultima ratio; Maximilian; ...
Pope Paul IV, 1559: "...and We have been concerned also lest it may befall Us to see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by the prophet Daniel, in the holy place."

Such as:

Roncalli, aka "John 23rd"

Montini, aka "Paul 6th"

Wojtyla, aka "JP2"


36 posted on 03/24/2004 3:58:31 PM PST by Viva Christo Rey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Viva Christo Rey; ninenot; GirlShortstop; saradippity; Siobhan; american colleen; B-Chan; ...
I missed the part where Paul IV was soliciting the opinions of excommunicates (Marcel Lefebvre and the Econe Four) and schismatics (the adherents of SSPX) as to the orthodoxy of popes and the part where an alleged deviation from the alleged terms of private revelation might be relevant. If you too are an adherent of SSPX, so long, see ya later, bye. If you are a sedevacantist, likewise.

Are you arguing that the See of Peter is vacant pursuant to 6 (vi) or otherwise)? If so, say so and specify your reasons for being a sedevacantist. Also, since the Counterreformation document cited refers only to matters arising PRIOR to one's elevation to the papacy, the date when you are alleging that JP II fell into heresy. Otherwise, please state your obedience to the pontiff because disobedience is not justified otherwise by the document cited.

The words alleged to have been communicated by Mary at LaSalette are nonetheless PRIVATE REVELATION and do not require belief. Do you claim otherwise? If you do, please specify what authoritative Church document commands doctrinal assent to private revelation.

In any event, who decides? Who executes the decision? Will there be a schismatic sort of Swiss guard charging the papal palace with halberds to remove the allegedly offending pontiff? Will bishop Fellay issue an SSPX fatwa and the pope scurry from the Vatican upon his command? Will it be a committee of SSPX's excommunicated bishops and schismatic priests theoretically under their non-existent authority? Perhaps a committee of Chris Ferraro, Tom Woods and Tom Drolesky and similarly sober scholars in love with their own opinions? The Remnant editorial board? The Angelus editorial board? Fr. Gruner?

Items 2 through 5 of Paul IV's document seem absent but he referenced "certain people who consider the study of the truth beneath them (and) should be driven out of the sheepfold of Christ and no longer continue to disseminate error from positions of authority..." Did he identify the "certain people?" What else has been edited out lest we consider the content?

Why is the language in the introductory paragraph of 6 bracketed which talks of the document remaining valid in perpetuity? Did Paul IV say so or not?

It sometimes seems like some of you guys would like to turn the papacy into a sort of ongoing Young Republican credentials fight of some sort wherein every schismatic or excommunicated Tom , Dock or Harriet can weigh in at any time with bloviation questioning the Catholicism of the pope based upon Tom or Dick or Harriet's OPIOS, OPIOT or OPIOF. This is a prescription for Heinz's 5700 varieties of Protestantism (each and every sect claiming to have the "right" understanding of Scripture or whatever as opposed to all the others), for religious anarchy posing as Roman Catholicism without warrant, or the same old same old of those thrown out of the game questioning the credentials of the umpire. In any event, there is no reason Catholics who are in communion with the Holy See to give such a satanic stew of arguments and prescriptions the time of day.

With the dissenters or without, the Roman Catholic Church will prevail to the end as promised by Jesus Christ.

37 posted on 03/24/2004 4:30:18 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Viva Christo Rey; ninenot; GirlShortstop
With the suggestion that John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II were not valid popes, you are making Marcel Lefebvre look sane, rational and Catholic, relatively speaking, which is not an easy task.

Since every cardinal-elector, now living, has been appointed by one of these three popes whose credentials you seem to challenge, how will you reconstitute the papacy? Vox populi? Acclamation by the people of Rome (who regularly elect atheist and communist mayors?)??? Some other method? Please specify to enlighten the poor benighted followers of Pope John Paul II.

Also, let's hear the specifics of any heresies which you attribute to John XXIII, Paul VI or JP II PRIOR to their respective papacies. Otherwise, may we conclude that your idea of "the abomination of desolation" is a pope or three who steadfastly refuse to cater to your tastes in rubrics, style, governance or whatever? Is there a significance to the photo of JP II???? Are those rabbis in the picture? Do you find that relevant?

38 posted on 03/24/2004 4:39:30 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
If I failed to ping you to the last two posts, my apologies.
39 posted on 03/24/2004 4:40:28 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Bellarmine
Thank you for the correction which underlines the point even more.

It is not for nothing that you have well chosen that screen name.

Thanks again and may God bless you and yours.

40 posted on 03/24/2004 4:48:45 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
If you want to believe a guy who's got a ministry to shill for, as opposed to the Vicar of Christ...

Who also has a ministry to shill for, of course.

41 posted on 03/24/2004 5:04:44 PM PST by John Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
Peter, it might help your deliberations if I informed you that the following statement:

"...Do you suffer a great deal? Don’t be discouraged. I will never forsake you. My Immaculate Heart will be your refuge and the road that will conduct you to God."

is taken almost verbatim from the Cult of Isis.

42 posted on 03/24/2004 5:06:02 PM PST by John Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: John Locke
***"...Do you suffer a great deal? Don’t be discouraged. I will never forsake you. My Immaculate Heart will be your refuge and the road that will conduct you to God." - is taken almost verbatim from the Cult of Isis.***



Man! Where did you find that???

If that is true it throw a whole different light in this subject! This may be the same demonic spirit that was behind Isis worship is masquerading as Mary?



For some of the others in this discussion... doesn't just the possibility that this could be true frighten you and give you pause?



43 posted on 03/24/2004 5:17:22 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus; John Locke
When you slander the Mother of Our Lord Jesus Christ, are you fighting for His Glory, or for the "glory" of "the ruler of this world?" Who's really under the influence of demons?
44 posted on 03/24/2004 5:26:45 PM PST by Pyro7480 (Minister for the Conversion of Hardened Sinners,Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk; Canticle_of_Deborah
It does no good to "bade farewell" to a sister of yours in Christ, when she holds a position different from yours. We are all called to "acts of mercy, words of mercy, and prayers of mercy." If you cannot act mercifully, or use merciful words, pray for her! If you think she is in error, pray for her! Do not use your words to tear down. Use them to build up, "all to the glory of God." God is the only judge of hearts. Maybe when you're in the state of prayer, God will let you realize what good you need to do.
45 posted on 03/24/2004 5:32:34 PM PST by Pyro7480 (Minister for the Conversion of Hardened Sinners,Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
So why won't he do it?
46 posted on 03/24/2004 5:36:51 PM PST by netmilsmom (God Bless Madison Lyn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; John Locke
***When you slander the Mother of Our Lord Jesus Christ, are you fighting for His Glory, or for the "glory" of "the ruler of this world?" Who's really under the influence of demons?***


But is it TRUE? Did this apparition really quote Isis?

If the apparition did, why would Mary need to quote the demon goddess Isis???

I would never slander the blessed mother of Jesus, the handmaiden of the Lord! I am questioning whether this apparition is really her. If it is not and if it is an impersonation - shouldn't we fight it???



St John himself warned us...

"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world."
47 posted on 03/24/2004 5:39:44 PM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah

"Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the AntiChrist." --Our Lady of LaSalette

Yep, that blind obedience will be real helpful in the days to come. Great job!

That quote from Melanie Calvat (not Our Lady!) is heretical, since it claims that the Apostolic See can err. The so-called "Secret" was in fact placed on the Index of Forbidden Books.

1. That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the Church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ's authority, in the Church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time [45].
6. All the venerable Fathers and holy orthodox doctors venerated and followed their [i.e., the successors of Peter] apostolic doctrine; they knew full well that this See of St. Peter always remained unstained by all error, according to the divine promise which Our Savior made to the chief of His disciples when He said, 'I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail, and you, having turned, strengthen your brothers.' (Pastor Aeternus)

48 posted on 03/24/2004 5:41:37 PM PST by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
Isis isn't "real" in the sense that she said something, like Jesus actually said something. Either a pagan made the words up, or a demon said the original words of Isis. That is why only a few apparitions of Mary are actually approved by the Church. These include Guadalupe, Lourdes, Fatima, and Akita. These to not advocate anything contrary to Church teaching.
49 posted on 03/24/2004 5:47:37 PM PST by Pyro7480 (Minister for the Conversion of Hardened Sinners,Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
That is the million dollar question. Pope Pius XII performed a consecration of Russia but all the bishops of the world did not participate (I don't know why). His partial consecration is believed to have obtained graces which ended WWII.

One of many rumors about Pope John Paul I is that he was preparing to do the consecration before he was, um, removed from this world. Sister Lucy herself met with him privately when he visited Fatima as the Archbishop of Venice. She must have known he would be the next Pope.


50 posted on 03/24/2004 5:51:45 PM PST by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-138 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson