There’s a difference between not having faith in an apparition and not believing it to be authentic rejecting the Churchs approval. As the OP states “I do not believe it was a miracle or an apparition.” That is different to saying I don’t have faith in that Church recognised event.
CCC 66-67
The Church basically says public revelation has got everything we need to believe contained in it.
I see this as splitting hairs. Guy doesn’t believe in it, he’s allowed not to believe in it. He doesn’t have to have a particular reason for not believing in it. He can just reject it. This is allowed.
Amen, brother! Thank you SO MUCH for this! I will say that since I go to a Tridentine liturgy (FSSP) only church, the “hang out with non trads” part would be difficult (at least during mass
). But you are 100% correct; when the topic comes up (and yeah…it comes up a LOT) I do tend to “remain silent” or insert my personal devotions (i.e. Guadalupe) into the topic and see where it goes. Honestly, the biggest issue is exactly what you say; in only forums with the “if you don’t like it, don’t comment!” attitude. We are absolutely inter mentis there. Peace, and thank you abundantly for your comment, Frater.For my part, I’m not a traditionalist and I’m not devoted to Fatima. My push back comes only from the implication that the Church got it wrong about Fatima.Paxinterrahominibus:
Amen, brother! Thank you SO MUCH for this! I will say that since I go to a Tridentine liturgy (FSSP) only church, the “hang out with non trads” part would be difficult (at least during mass
I can honestly tell from MILES away that you are asking these questions with a very pure and sincere heart, and I really appreciate them. I think a bit of clarity here is needed on what you mean by “authenticity”. I’m going to give you a source from one of my favorite people walking on the planet, Our Blessed Pope Benedict XVI in “Verbum Domini”; “Church recognition of a private revelation, in essence, is just the church’s way of saying the message is not contrary to the faith or morality, it is licit to make the message public”. I do NOT question the church’s examination of said message and stating it does not run contrary to church teaching. On this we can agree. But note: as “Cardinal Ratzinger” and former Prefect to the Doctrine of the faith, he wrote: “A careful reading of the text of the so-called third “secret” of Fatima, published here in its entirety long after the fact and by decision of the Holy Father, will probably prove disappointing or surprising after all the speculation it has stirred”. Note his use of "so-called third “secret”. Pope Benedict is a theological genius of our age and ALWAYS chose his words very carefully.
Hey, sorry…I responded to your previous comment without seeing the subsequent one. I hope my clarification to your response came across; rejection of ANY so-called “apparition” does in no way mean the “church got it wrong”. This is codified in the catechism #67 " “Throughout the ages, there have been so-called ‘private’ revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.”"
You know, that’s an interesting concept I hadn’t considered. I’m not American by birth, but I do spend about 1/2 my time in the US now…and yes, it’s mostly Americans who tend towards this (and Filipinos actually). In California, most Latin Americans tend towards Our Lady of Guadalupe, and I did pick up on the fact that many White American Catholics don’t really participate there. I don’t think there’s any racism at play per se, just that maybe they don’t identify with the story since it occurred in Mexico (and that in itself can seem like the “other” to a conservative American).
Well, it’s just a correlation I’ve noticed amongst the rad trads I’m around. It might be different for others. It’s an interesting aspect to think about though.
The Miracle of the Sun was Oct. 13, 1917. The “strange light” over Europe and some parts of the U.S. was in Jan. 1938. At that time, most people called it an aurora borealis. However, +Sister Lucia said it was not an aurora borealis.
Yes I would imagine that most children would have learned about Fatima as part of the earliest school religious education because of Our Lady’s urgent call for dedication to the Rosary for the good of the world. Most practicing Catholic families would have some little book about Fatima in their bookshelves as well.
Wow!!! I literally have NEVER heard of this group before (I had to google it). Is it even allowed? I came to THIS site under the assumption that anything we talk about is in complete communion with the Vatican and legitimate Catholic church (i.e. no seedies). But that site is not only mendacious, it is damaging. Anyone who refers to the tacky wooden statues that you can find at ANY tourist stand in Amazonia state in Brazil as “Pachamama” (an INCAN “goddess” from the Andes of Peru/Bolivia…which has nothing to do with the Amazon) is automatically suspect as a “wacko” IMHO.
) dumped me when I trusted him enough to voice my doubts about such things. Since then I remained silent with my doubts and objections for more than a year, tried to convince myself that they were right and to adopt devotions that I didnt trust and didnt connect with, and the situation became so unbearable for me that I finally had to go. It was suffocating and led me to a very bad spiritual crisis. I am now at university with a very mixed group of friends (traditional and non traditional) and I feel that i can breathe and think clearly.Wow…I unknowingly was taken to an SSPX chapel once in my childhood (before it became illicit) by a relative and that one experience was enough to keep me away forever. Regarding Fatima and your “unofficial doctrinal points”, I was once called a heretic for the exact reason you stated by someone who presented himself as a “Traditional Catholic” but who was in fact an SSPXer. He said (and I’m quoting), “Believing in the gospel and love of Christ for your own benefit without exercising the compassion and charity for the salvation of your neighbor is for naught; you stain yourself with the mortal sin of omission and practice heresy by not acknowledging the redemptive power of the rosary in God’s plan for salvation!” Seriously…I was like, “whhhhhaaaaaaa?” I actually copied that from the email he sent me 2 years back…one fo the last. And seriously…I LOVE Pope Pius XII (Santo Subito!!!) I get the idea of “redemptive theology” he describes in Mystici Corporis Christi. But at the end of the day, I’m responsible for my OWN salvation; if someone wants to pray on my behalf, then God bless them and keep 'em coming. But I could no more COUNT on someone interceding/praying for me than I could presume God’s mercy…a big no-no (as in THE big no-no’s against the Holy Spirit). So, when I asked him to please cite any Church doctor, father or Papal Encyclical that states praying the rosary is mandatory for salvation and that NOT praying for someone is a sin of omission, he responded, “Your reply is typical of anyone tied to the “new” church Our Lady of Fatima warned us about” (once again, copy/pasted). . . .