Fatima, the work of satan?

[JaneFrances]

I’ll start with this Jane, Paul 1st is not saying Christ suffering was insufficient (you should state this when quoting this verse)

myfavoritmartin, why is it necessary that I make your clarification? I didn’t presume that you would think Christ’s suffering was insufficient. And I certainly don’t believe it was insufficient. But you do allude to an interesting point. . .what exactly IS St. Paul saying?

Let’s read his words again:

“Even now I find joy in the suffering I endure for you. In my own flesh I fill up what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ for the sake of his body, the church.” (Col. 1:24) from NAB

or translated differently:

Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church. from NIV

Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church. from KJV

Now without even commenting on the sufficiency of Christ’s sufferings, what can one surmise from this passage of Sacred Scripture?

Answer: that Paul is suffering FOR the Church.

Who comprises the Church?

Answer: Sinners.

For whom did Mary ask the children to sacrifice?

Answer: to “Sacrifice yourselves for sinners”

And for love of Whom are these children told to sacrifice for sinners?

Answer: " and repeat often, especially whenever you make a sacrifice for them: 'O Jesus, it is for love of You. . "

You asked:

that being stated the children viewing hell and suffering for sinners, how do they suffer **FOR **sinners

Answer: First, great question! How does anyone suffer for sinners? I suppose it varies according to each person’s state in life and capacity to endure suffering. How each of the three seers at Fatima suffered can be gleaned from accounts of their lives.

Now, how do children suffer in general? I can only speak of how I have personally suffered in my own life. I can tell you of many times in which I sacrificed a Saturday morning to watch my siblings while my mother was out of the house. Sometimes this act of charity was done joyfully without thought of sacrifice and other times it was costly for me and cause for suffering on my part and I, less often than I should have, offered it up to Christ to be united with His holy Cross. Other times as a small child even, I remember sacrificing small things–a toy, the last piece of cake, having to watch a movie that wasn’t my first choice. These are small sacrifices, to be sure, but I can always remember my sweet mother’s voice reminding me when she saw my heart hardening to “offer it up.” Sometimes I did. This is how a child can suffer.

Your more pointed question is how do children suffer FOR sinners?

Answer: In the very same way as St. Paul. By recognizing any measure of our human suffering and sacrifice as a participation in the suffering of Jesus Christ. For as St. Paul also teaches:

Now if we are children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory. Romans 8:17

This is part of the message of the Blessed Mother at Fatima: that the children would suffer for sinners for the love of Jesus.

 

[JaneFrances]

I would hope its not satanic, i’ve linked it twice… It is the translation by then cardinal Joseph Ratz… well B16 you know him… I’ll go back to page 1 or 2 and find it Jane, okay?

Maybe you misunderstood me. . .My tone was frustrated and I am sorry for that.

I’m not questioning the summary you have provided. Instead, I am concerned that no matter what we offer to prove that the Blessed Mother’s message is not Satanic, you will, no doubt, continue to find things that she ought to have said which she didn’t.

There are, to be sure, a number of things which Mary didn’t say or didn’t say in the way you want her to have said them which may be convincing for YOU. Does the lack of such things make her message Satanic?

This seems to be the crux of your arguement thus far.

Again, I ask, what are your concerns about her message that would lead you question whether it is Satanic? NOT, what did she fail to say. NOT, what could she have said better or more clearly. NOT, what would convince a Protestant, void of Marian devotion, to believe in the apparition. I simply want to know what about her message makes you think it may be “the work of Satan”?

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

myfavoritmartin, why is it necessary that I make your clarification? I didn’t presume that you would think Christ’s suffering was insufficient. And I certainly don’t believe it was insufficient. But you do allude to an interesting point. . .what exactly IS St. Paul saying?

Let’s read his words again:

or translated differently:

Now without even commenting on the sufficiency of Christ’s sufferings, what can one surmise from this passage of Sacred Scripture?

Answer: that Paul is suffering FOR the Church.

Who comprises the Church?

Answer: Sinners.

For whom did Mary ask the children to sacrifice?

Answer: to “Sacrifice yourselves for sinners”

And for love of Whom are these children told to sacrifice for sinners?

Answer: " and repeat often, especially whenever you make a sacrifice for them: 'O Jesus, it is for love of You. . "

You asked:

Answer: First, great question! How does anyone suffer for sinners? I suppose it varies according to each person’s state in life and capacity to endure suffering. How each of the three seers at Fatima suffered can be gleaned from accounts of their lives.

Now, how do children suffer in general? I can only speak of how I have personally suffered in my own life. I can tell you of many times in which I sacrificed a Saturday morning to watch my siblings while my mother was out of the house. Sometimes this act of charity was done joyfully without thought of sacrifice and other times it was a costly for me abd cause for suffering on my part and I, less often than I should have, offered it up to Christ to be united with His holy Cross. Other times as a small child even, I remember sacrificing small things–a toy, the last piece of cake, having to watch a movie that wasn’t my first choice. These are small sacrifices, to be sure, but I can always remember my sweet mother’s voice reminding me when she saw my heart hardening to “offer it up.” Sometimes I did. This is how a child can suffer.

Your more pointed question is how do children suffer FOR sinners?

Answer: In the very same way as St. Paul. By recognizing any measure of our human suffering and sacrifice as a participation in the suffering of Jesus Christ. For as St. Paul also teaches:

This is part of the message of the Blessed Mother at Fatima: that the children would suffer for sinners for the love of Jesus.

I just had to chime in and say what a wonderful post. I believe God views us as His family and we can help our brothers and sisters by uniting our sufferings with His, for love of Him. You really brought that into clarity. Thanks!

 

[Philthy]

1 john 4:2-3
2This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

I ask again does fatima in fact do this?

I dont want to derail the thread, but do all of the NT writings pass this test you have proposed? If not, this “test” will have to be rejected. I’ll search them and get back to you…

 

[Tom317]

myfavoritmartin

You asked if Fatima is the work of satan and you further asked if Fatima passes the testing of spirits. You have now been given conclusive and absolute proof that Fatima cannot be the work of satan because satan would never institute devotions and prayers to our Lord that are to be said by hundreds of millions of Catholics every day (those prayers came as a result of the Fatima appirations). Satan would never divide his own house and his own plan in such a way because that prayer strongly professes Christ–not Mary.

Now, if you have even a remote sense of honor, you will admit that your questions and concerns have been addressed and then you will now choose to cease questioning whether or not Fatima is a work of satan. If you are not willing, then everyone has to wonder what your true agenda is.

 

[estesbob]

Mine has B16’s signature, you should at least have the imprimature nihil obistat don’t you think?

You are aware that a impramatur or nihil obstat does not mean the writings are infallible teaching or doctrine? It merely means that in the opinioin of the person issueing them there is no docitrinal error in the work. By the same token because a web site is on the vatican server does not make it the “official” web site nor does it mean it is infallible. The fact that something Mary said at fatima is not on the Vatican web site means absolutely nothing.

You appear to want to use Church Writings, documents and websites the same way you do Scripture. Pulling out a random quote here and there, puting your own personal interpertation on them and then making profound observations based on “your” view of what is said

 

[JaneFrances]

Food for thought. . .

“Despise not prophecies, but prove all things; hold fast to that which is good.” (1 Thess. 5:20-21)

 

[Philthy]

I dont want to derail the thread, but do all of the NT writings pass this test you have proposed? If not, this “test” will have to be rejected. I’ll search them and get back to you…

On a hunch I looked through James and Jude for a profession that acknowledges “that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God” similar to the fashion Simon is thinking we should be judging the Fatima apparition…it isnt in either one of them. This makes me think this standard is erroneous or has been applied inappropriately.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

On a hunch I looked through James and Jude for a profession that acknowledges “that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God” similar to the fashion Simon is thinking we should be judging the Fatima apparition…it isnt in either one of them. This makes me think this standard is erroneous or has been applied inappropriately.

Phil it is not the fashion I think we should be judging fatima rather How we are told to test spirits by the inerrant Word of God “the Holy Scriptures”.
NOT MY TEST …HIS.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Food for thought. . .

“Despise not prophecies, but prove all things; hold fast to that which is good.” (1 Thess. 5:20-21)

Yes, the point behind this thread…

 

[estesbob]

Phil it is not the fashion I think we should be judging fatima rather How we are told to test spirits by the inerrant Word of God “the Holy Scriptures”.
NOT MY TEST …HIS.

Your interperation-Not HIS. Even if one accepted your personal interperation (and I see no reasn whatsoever one should accept any individauls personal interperation of Scripture)why do you selectively apply this “test”?

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Your interperation-Not HIS. Even if one accepted your personal interperation (and I see no reasn whatsoever one should accept any individauls personal interperation of Scripture)why do you selectively apply this “test”?

Bob,
Can you re-interpret what is meant by test the spirits, or I should say can the church? is their interpretation different than mine?

 

[estesbob]

Bob,
Can you re-interpret what is meant by test the spirits, or I should say can the church? is their interpretation different than mine?

I cant , quite frankly, see where this “test” applies to the Fatima or to be honest I dont see where this test is very useful for anything other than to use it to question anything one doesnt want to beleive.I have never seen any Church Document or teaching that references this “test” so i guess they are very few, at least in my church, that take this “test” as seriously as you do.

I agree with the way Plithy put it:

On a hunch I looked through James and Jude for a profession that acknowledges “that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God” similar to the fashion Simon is thinking we should be judging the Fatima apparition…it isnt in either one of them. This makes me think this standard is erroneous or has been applied inappropriately.

 

[NotWorthy]

I cant , quite frankly, see where this “test” applies to the Fatima or to be honest I dont see where this test is very useful for anything other than to use it to question anything one doesnt want to beleive.I have never seen any Church Document or teaching that references this “test” so i guess they are very few, at least in my church, that take this “test” as seriously as you do.

I promise you, the Church applies this test to all questioned apparations, revelations, etc., etc.

The Church tests the validity of said Apparitions versus all Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. This is one of the reasons She takes so incredibly long to come to a decision.

For instance, if Mary (during one of her appearances at Fatima) had said that by praying to her, we could bypass the need of baptism, these Apparitions wouldn’t have passed the Litmus test and ALL her visitations to Fatima would have been thrown out, even if the rest of her teaching would have been doctrinally sound.

 

[estesbob]

I promise you, the Church applies this test to all questioned apparations, revelations, etc., etc.

The Church tests the validity of said Apparitions versus all Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. This is one of the reasons She takes so incredibly long to come to a decision.

For instance, if Mary (during one of her appearances at Fatima) had said that by praying to her, we could bypass the need of baptism, these Apparitions wouldn’t have passed the Litmus test and ALL her visitations to Fatima would have been thrown out, even if the rest of her teaching would have been doctrinally sound.

Agreed. But they dont limit themselves to one obscure scripture verse. I bleive in Fatima because the Church has investigated it , using the criteria you list, and declared it to be legitimate. If one, however, is shackled by Sola Sciptura they are limited to searching r Scripture to find somethng they “think” bolsters their case all the while ignoring 2,000 years of teachngs and writings of the Church and its fathers.

 

[NotWorthy]

Agreed. But they dont limit themselves to one obscure scripture verse. I bleive in Fatima because the Church has investigated it , using the criteria you list, and declared it to be legitimate. If one, however, is shackled by Sola Sciptura they are limited to searching r Scripture to find somethng they “think” bolsters their case all the while ignoring 2,000 years of teachngs and writings of the Church and its fathers.

Ok, Toe-may-toe, Tuh-mah-toe.

 

[JaneFrances]

Yes, the point behind this thread…

Which seems to have been lost in translation. . .

Your question was “Fatima, the work of satan?”

What are your specific concerns that it may be the work of satan?

We have already dealt with the language of “devotion to the Immaculate Heart.”

We have already dealt with the importance of testing spirits.

What part of the message of the Blessed Mother at Fatima isn’t “holding fast to that which is good?”

It’s just that simple.

 

[Philthy]

Phil it is not the fashion I think we should be judging fatima rather How we are told to test spirits by the inerrant Word of God “the Holy Scriptures”.
NOT MY TEST …HIS.

Unfortunately, however, Scripture is not self revealing and at some point in the history of the Church the question of “is this the spirit of God in the form of Sacred Scripture” came up. This “test” of yours apparently was not used to determine what is Scripture because some of what was determined to be the “spirit of God” in the form of Sacred Scripture does not pass the test. If the test of what is Scripture didnt require this standard, I hardly find it reasonable to assume that we should somehow be applying it now, in the manner you have proposed.

 

[Eireann]

Unfortunately, however, Scripture is not self revealing and at some point in the history of the Church the question of “is this the spirit of God in the form of Sacred Scripture” came up. This “test” of yours apparently was not used to determine what is Scripture because some of what was determined to be the “spirit of God” in the form of Sacred Scripture does not pass the test. If the test of what is Scripture didnt require this standard, I hardly find it reasonable to assume that we should somehow be applying it now, in the manner you have proposed.

Good point Phil.

 

[Eileen_T]

How does the church rationalize the date and location discrepencies? Would a messenger from God err in their message?

What “date and location discrepencies” are you referring to?