Anne Catherine Emmerich vs protestantization

  • Thread starter Thread starter quantum_star22
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

quantum_star22

Guest
Here’s what the visionary had to say:

"I saw many pastors cherishing dangerous ideas against the Church. . . . They built a large, singular, extravagant church which was to embrace all creeds with equal rights: Evangelicals, Catholics, and all denominations, a true communion of the unholy with one shepherd and one flock. There was to be a Pope, a salaried Pope, without possessions. All was made ready, many things finished; but, in place of an altar, were only abomination and desolation. Such was the new church to be, and it was for it that he had set fire to the old one; but God designed otherwise."

Life and Revelations of [Ven.] Anne Catherine Emmerich, Vol. 2
 
I do not know what this has to do with traditional Catholicism, but I do not know how one can say Catholics are “the unholy.” I prefer the perspective of our First Pope, and part of divine revelation:
But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.
 
I do not know what this has to do with traditional Catholicism, but I do not know how one can say Catholics are “the unholy.” I prefer the perspective of our First Pope, and part of divine revelation:
I think the Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich is referring to self-described catholics who inter-commune with protestants at which point they are NO LONGER CATHOLIC; they have lost their catholic identity in the pursuit of ecumenism.
 
"Then I saw that everything that pertained to Protestantism was gradually gaining the upper hand, and the Catholic religion fell into complete decadence. Most priests were lured by the glittering but false knowledge of young school-teachers, and they all contributed to the work of destruction."-Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich(“The Life of Anne Catherine Emmerich” – Carl E. Schmoeger)
 
So again, what do any of these writings have to do with traditional spirituality? I do not mean to be obtuse, but I do not understand the point. Is it anti-ecumenism? Is the point to reject following what our Popes have been teaching on ecumenism?
 
Here’s what the visionary had to say:

"I saw many pastors cherishing dangerous ideas against the Church. . . . They built a large, singular, extravagant church which was to embrace all creeds with equal rights: Evangelicals, Catholics, and all denominations, a true communion of the unholy with one shepherd and one flock. There was to be a Pope, a salaried Pope, without possessions. All was made ready, many things finished; but, in place of an altar, were only abomination and desolation. Such was the new church to be, and it was for it that he had set fire to the old one; but God designed otherwise."

Life and Revelations of [Ven.] Anne Catherine Emmerich, Vol. 2
Hi Quantum star, thank you for the post. I will add Anne Catherine Emmerick to my reading list.

One question - In the last sentence who do you think the ‘he’ is referring to?

Would it be the salaried pope, or was the salaried pope only supposed to ‘have been’ but never actually was?
 
Could this have any connection to St.Peter’s prediction?

False Prophets and Their Punishment
2But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive opinions. They will even deny the Master who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2Even so, many will follow their licentious ways, and because of these teachers[a] the way of truth will be maligned.
 
I do not know what this has to do with traditional Catholicism, but I do not know how one can say Catholics are “the unholy.” I prefer the perspective of our First Pope, and part of divine revelation:
It’s pretty clear, if no one wants to say it. This is how many traditionalists, or at least the OP, view Pope Francis. He made was in a video a bit ago with other religious leaders emphasizing the things they have in common and the importance of love. This has made very many traditionalists who believe all Protestants, even the ones they may like such as C.S. Lewis, are without a doubt all going to hell, to say nothing of Jews and Buddhists. So of course they are going to invoke whatever Blessed or Saints words that correspond to the situation. In fact, everyone saying “I don’t get what the point of this is”—mental reservation aside, of course you know what the meaning of this post is. It couldn’t be more transparent.

But just wait about 20-30 years when Francis is very likely canonized himself. I think all this will come to a head then.
 
I will wait and see if the OP slips off, or addresses the purpose. Posting nothing but quotes is hardly conversational or polite though.
 
Hi Quantum star, thank you for the post. I will add Anne Catherine Emmerick to my reading list.

One question - In the last sentence who do you think the ‘he’ is referring to?

Would it be the salaried pope, or was the salaried pope only supposed to ‘have been’ but never actually was?
Hi Abucs, I’m glad you have added her to your reading list. I think her prophecies resonate because of some very strange trends we see today. For instance, the question “do you have a personal relationship with Jesus” has made it’s way into the Catholic Church. It used to be a protestant slogan which they used to undermine the authority of Holy Mother Church. Nowadays, however, it’s getting traction in catholic circles(thanks in part to “charismatic catholics”). It has always been understood by Holy Mother Church that being a member and receiving the sacraments is to be in communion with Jesus.
 
Hi Abucs, I’m glad you have added her to your reading list. I think her prophecies resonate because of some very strange trends we see today. For instance, the question “do you have a personal relationship with Jesus” has made it’s way into the Catholic Church. It used to be a protestant slogan which they used to undermine the authority of Holy Mother Church. Nowadays, however, it’s getting traction in catholic circles(thanks in part to “charismatic catholics”). It has always been understood by Holy Mother Church that being a member and receiving the sacraments is to be in communion with Jesus.
I like her writings also, but remember hers is a private revelation seen by the lens of one individual. It may or may not be true. Some of her writings are questionable. For example, she claims that Mary had a much older sister, also named Mary (Cleopas?) that I haven’t ever heard of even in Catholic traditions. She also seems to believe that Mary’s parents were somewhat wealthy. it makes for interesting reading, but I’ll rely on Catholic tradition, the Bible, and yes the various Popes writings. Remember we aren’t bound to believe in private revelations, although I do believe in others such as Lourdes and Fatima.
 
Just an idle curiosity, but I wonder, for the people who read her writing: how much time to they spend reading her writing, and how much time do they spend reading the Bible - either in the form of a study, or to use as a prayer prompt. Just curious…🤷

And not to make too fine a point of it, but a significant portion of which she writes could be applied to just about any of the past 1950 years or so…
 
Hi Abucs, I’m glad you have added her to your reading list. I think her prophecies resonate because of some very strange trends we see today. For instance, the question “do you have a personal relationship with Jesus” has made it’s way into the Catholic Church. It used to be a protestant slogan which they used to undermine the authority of Holy Mother Church. Nowadays, however, it’s getting traction in catholic circles(thanks in part to “charismatic catholics”). It has always been understood by Holy Mother Church that being a member and receiving the sacraments is to be in communion with Jesus.
ummm, Catholics do have a relationship with Jesus and it is personal. This is taught in the Scriptures and in the history of the Church. Just because the Protestants believe it doesn’t mean it’s wrong. There is nothing wrong with Charismatic Catholics. Three Popes have approved of the Charismatic movement and maybe more but that’s just the number I heard. Charismatic spirituality doesn’t suit some people and that’s ok but it is not ok to impose our own spirituality on them. This sounds less like traditionalism and more like a morbid fundamentalism to me.
 
It’s pretty clear, if no one wants to say it. This is how many traditionalists, or at least the OP, view Pope Francis. He made was in a video a bit ago with other religious leaders emphasizing the things they have in common and the importance of love. This has made very many traditionalists who believe all Protestants, even the ones they may like such as C.S. Lewis, are without a doubt all going to hell, to say nothing of Jews and Buddhists. So of course they are going to invoke whatever Blessed or Saints words that correspond to the situation. In fact, everyone saying “I don’t get what the point of this is”—mental reservation aside, of course you know what the meaning of this post is. It couldn’t be more transparent.

But just wait about 20-30 years when Francis is very likely canonized himself. I think all this will come to a head then.
Please don’t associate traditionalists with the OP’s viewpoint. There is a difference between fundamentalists and traditionalists. Fundamentalist Catholics can’t properly be called traditionalists because they only respect the authority of the Pope when he teaches something they like to hear. When he doesn’t, then obedience goes out the window. I saw the video of Pope Francis with the religious leaders and doctrinally, it doesn’t break with tradition. There was no claim that all religions lead to God (pluralism). Its purpose was to promote interfaith dialogue in the face of a history of religious wars. We can all work toward the common earthly good, which is what St. Augustine taught. Fundamentalists react as though Pope Francis was preaching universalism/all religions are equal. He is not. They should read his marvelous, “joy of the Gospel”
 
Please don’t associate traditionalists with the OP’s viewpoint. There is a difference between fundamentalists and traditionalists. Fundamentalist Catholics can’t properly be called traditionalists because they only respect the authority of the Pope when he teaches something they like to hear. When he doesn’t, then obedience goes out the window. I saw the video of Pope Francis with the religious leaders and doctrinally, it doesn’t break with tradition. There was no claim that all religions lead to God (pluralism). Its purpose was to promote interfaith dialogue in the face of a history of religious wars. We can all work toward the common earthly good, which is what St. Augustine taught. Fundamentalists react as though Pope Francis was preaching universalism/all religions are equal. He is not. They should read his marvelous, “joy of the Gospel”
Please don’t associate traditionalists with the OP’s viewpoint. There is a difference between fundamentalists and traditionalists. Fundamentalist Catholics can’t properly be called traditionalists because they only respect the authority of the Pope when he teaches something they like to hear. When he doesn’t, then obedience goes out the window. I saw the video of Pope Francis with the religious leaders and doctrinally, it doesn’t break with tradition. There was no claim that all religions lead to God (pluralism). Its purpose was to promote interfaith dialogue in the face of a history of religious wars. We can all work toward the common earthly good, which is what St. Augustine taught. Fundamentalists react as though Pope Francis was preaching universalism/all religions are equal. He is not. They should read his marvelous, “joy of the Gospel”
Please don’t associate traditionalists with the OP’s viewpoint. There is a difference between fundamentalists and traditionalists. Fundamentalist Catholics can’t properly be called traditionalists because they only respect the authority of the Pope when he teaches something they like to hear. When he doesn’t, then obedience goes out the window.
  1. The thread has to do with people going around parishes asking people “do you have a personal relationship with Jesus”. It does not have to do with Pope Francis. There is reason to be concerned about random lay people going around and doing this.
Nor may the priests ever forget that they are forbidden by ancient canons to undertake ministry and to assume the tasks of teaching and preaching “without the permission of their bishop to whom the people have been entrusted; an accounting for the souls of the people will be demanded from the bishop.” Finally let them understand that all those who struggle against this established order disturb the position of the Church”-Pope Gregory XVI Mirari Vos

If priests have to have permission, how much more do lay people need???
  1. Since you brought up the odedience issue, here’s Canon 749 and 750 from the 1983 Code of Canon Law:
"Can. 749 §1. By virtue of his office, the Supreme Pontiff possesses infallibility in teaching when as the supreme pastor and teacher of all the Christian faithful, who strengthens his brothers and sisters in the faith, he proclaims by definitive act that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held.

§2. The college of bishops also possesses infallibility in teaching when the bishops gathered together in an ecumenical council exercise the magisterium as teachers and judges of faith and morals who declare for the universal Church that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held definitively; or when dispersed throughout the world but preserving the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter and teaching authentically together with the Roman Pontiff matters of faith or morals, they agree that a particular proposition is to be held definitively.

§3. No doctrine is understood as defined infallibly unless this is manifestly evident.

Can. 750 §1. A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.

§2. Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firm-ly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church."

So, the assent of the faithful is required to those things laid out by the Roman Pontiff, Pope Francis in this case, when he*** definitively*** reveals a doctrine to be upheld by all Christians.
 
]
  1. The thread has to do with people going around parishes asking people “do you have a personal relationship with Jesus”. It does not have to do with Pope Francis. There is reason to be concerned about random lay people going around and doing this. Please cite some authority concerning this; your citations to Canon law are not on point.
babochka;13589492 said:
Nor may the priests ever forget that they are forbidden by ancient canons to undertake ministry and to assume the tasks of teaching and preaching “without the permission of their bishop to whom the people have been entrusted; an accounting for the souls of the people will be demanded from the bishop.” Finally let them understand that all those who struggle against this established order disturb the position of the Church
”-Pope Gregory XVI Mirari Vos

If priests have to have permission, how much more do lay people need???as people who are asking a question concerning someone’s relationship with Christ, none. That is not within the definition of preaching and teaching.
 
  1. The thread has to do with people going around parishes asking people “do you have a personal relationship with Jesus”. It does not have to do with Pope Francis. There is reason to be concerned about random lay people going around and doing this.
I am sorry you are so concerned. Why are you not equally concerned about those going around posting the writings of Anne Catherine Emmerich without permission of the bishop, or did your bishop grant you permission?

I am not worried about this at all. I am sorry you are. The idea that the laity cannot preach, exhort, or evangelize is patently untrue. From the Code of Canon Law:
Can. 225 §1. Since, like all the Christian faithful, lay persons are designated by God for the apostolate through baptism and confirmation, they are bound by the general obligation and possess the right as individuals, or joined in associations, to work so that the divine message of salvation is made known and accepted by all persons everywhere in the world. This obligation is even more compelling in those circumstances in which only through them can people hear the gospel and know Christ.
§2. According to each one’s own condition, they are also bound by a particular duty to imbue and perfect the order of temporal affairs with the spirit of the gospel and thus to give witness to Christ, especially in carrying out these same affairs and in exercising secular functions.
What a past post said about old canon is not relevant and is meaningless in light of the above directive.
 
ummm, Catholics do have a relationship with Jesus and it is personal. This is taught in the Scriptures and in the history of the Church.
I have always preferred to define such statements, instead of simple denial. One thing that can open understanding is to define the terms first. What does “personal relationship” mean? Does not the Holy Mass, the reception of the Sacrament contain a vertical element between the person and God? I think no one here believes that going to Mass is all about being together in community. So even the most traditional Catholic believes in our personal relationship with Jesus, perhaps even better than most.

Another protestant approach we here is what is called the “sinner’s prayer” where one is sorry for their sin, professes faith and asks for Jesus to come into their heart. Catholics do all of these things at every Mass. It just takes an hour instead of two minutes. We acknowledge our sin and ask forgiveness in the Rite of Contrition. We speak together the Profession of Faith. Then we end by saying we are unworthy, ask to be healed, and take Jesus, wholly, into us, physically and spiritually, not just spiritually. Heck, we are better Protestants that Protestants.

But the point is that they do have an understanding of truth that can be used to examine what we as Catholics also do.
 
As to ecumenism, if I were to look to the opinion of a saint (or venerable), I would rather look to the more authoritative teaching of St. John Paul, than the writings of Clemens Brentano.
 
As to ecumenism, if I were to look to the opinion of a saint (or venerable), I would rather look to the more authoritative teaching of St. John Paul, than the writings of Clemens Brentano.
Who is Clemens Brentano and what does he have to do with ecumenism?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top