Fatima...third secret?

[John_19_59]

The message of Fatima wether you want to hear it or not concerns a crisis of faith in complete accordance with the Gospels. The dogma of faith will be preserved in Portugal but not elsewhere. Cardinal Ratzinger himself said this in 1984 but by 1985 he had it deleted from a reprint of the article he made the statement in.

The Gospels have Jesus wondering if he will find faith when he returns (either in the next 5 seconds or in a million years time - stay awake).

Also Our Lord said “For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect” (Matt. 24:24).

The elect can be deceived! So how are we to know if the elect are deceived, if the elect start preaching a different Gospel to the one we previously heard - that’s how.

Who said this in regard to Vatican II?

“The fact is Hans Urs Von Balthasar pointed out early in 1952, that… She [the Church] must relinquish many of the things that have hitherto spelled security for Her and that She has taken for granted. She must demolish longstanding bastions and trust soley to the shield of faith”.

Go on, guess!

Who at Vatican II in the document Lumen Gentium changed the infallible proclamation of Pius XII that “The Church of Christ **is **the Catholic Church” to the more ambigious “The Church of Christ **subsists in **the Catholic Church” which can be interpreted as “is” (and the reason it scraped into the document) but is now peddled as “not entirely contained”. Which “expert” at Vatican II made that change at the suggestion of a Protestant minister?

Go on, guess gain!

The process was repeated again and again at the Council.

The Church via the Council and it’s interpretation has moved from infallible teaching to deliberate ambiguity to error.

And that is the game that was played by the modernists at Vatican II, no errors were defined but ambiguity was deliberately introduced - as admitted by Vatican II experts turned heretics like Edward Schillebeeckx.
We see the fruits of the Council all around us - the Church is in a crisis. The faithful are confused, indifferent and leaving in droves.
Generally nobody thinks being a Catholic is anymore important than being anything else so long as you are “good”. The Church sees no reason to convert people, no reason to “make disciples of all the nations”.

Our Lady came to warn us, the warning would “become clearer after 1960”.

Work it out.

Our Lady of Fatima pray for us. Immaculate Heart of Mary come to our aid.

Holy Michael defend us in the day of battle and protect us from the snares and wickedness of the Devil.

---

PS. The answer to the above questions by the way is “Cardinal Ratzinger”.

 

[John_19_59]

It appears someone’s faith is based on a twisted contorted interpretation of Fatima…and not based on the deposit of faith passed onto the Church by Christ and His apostles.

The deposit of faith has been “demolished” - ask Cardinal Ratzinger.

The infallible teaching of previous Popes has been changed - ask Cardinal Ratzinger about “subsists in” and also about his “counter syllabus” Gaudium et spes.

How do we know when the elect are deceived? When they preach a different Gospel to that which already received.

Hans Kung has been receiving similar treatment from Rome as Fr. Gruner has - despite the fact he is a personal acquaintance of Ratzinger’s.

Not true. The Vatican (Sodano I think) have been talking about “the German Theologian” and his “beautiful writings” as recently as 1999.

Where does our Church declare false religions as "the great religions?

Who said “Father, grant that your Son’s disciples, purified in memory and acknowledging their failings, may be one, that the world may believe. May dialogue between the followers of the great religions expand, and may all people discover the joy of being your children.”?

Who said “In this whole effort, religious leaders have a weighty responsibility. The various Christian confessions, as well as the world´s great religions, need to work together to eliminate the social and cultural causes of terrorism. They can do this by teaching the greatness and dignity of the human person, and by spreading a clearer sense of the oneness of the human family. This is a specific area of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue and cooperation, a pressing service which* religion** can offer to world peace”*

Where you ask? John Paul is always talking about the world’s “great religions”.

“Religion” can not offer world peace. Only Jesus Christ can, only the Church of Christ can which is the Catholic Church as infallibly declared by various Popes down the ages.

Yes…modernists have misinterpretated VII.
That is not a problem with VII - that is a problem with modernists.

The modernists who now run the Church? Cardinals Ratzinger and Sodano are modernists and are the two people with the real power at the Vatican since the reforms of the curia in 1967. Pope John Paul has his hands tied.

Where John Paul stands in all this is anyones guess, a lot of his speeches are humanist. He has referred to the greatness of man and the Rosary as a means of “man being revealed to himself” (!!!)
He does say some strange things, and as I said before the events at Assisi were a scandal.

Oh. Now it is the Modernists, lurking in the corridors of the Vatican.

How can you say they are not? Anyway they no longer “lurk”, they’ve got the keys to the place.

 

[Lorarose]

The deposit of faith has been “demolished” - ask Cardinal Ratzinger.

Why do I get the sneaky suspicion something Ratzinger said has been taken out of context?
Can you provide the full statement with a link?

Not true. The Vatican (Sodano I think) have been talking about “the German Theologian” and his “beautiful writings” as recently as 1999.

You are misinformed about Hans Kung.

Who said “Father, grant that your Son’s disciples, purified in memory and acknowledging their failings, may be one, that the world may believe. May dialogue between the followers of the great religions expand, and may all people discover the joy of being your children.”?

Who said “In this whole effort, religious leaders have a weighty responsibility. The various Christian confessions, as well as the world´s great religions, need to work together to eliminate the social and cultural causes of terrorism. They can do this by teaching the greatness and dignity of the human person, and by spreading a clearer sense of the oneness of the human family. This is a specific area of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue and cooperation, a pressing service which religion can offer to world peace”

Oh I get it…so in your world, any other religion besides the catholic faith is a “false” religion.
That’s fine - you’re entitled to your opinion.
I thought you were accusing the church of officially, infallibly declaring “false” religions to be the “greatest” religions (what you claimed earlier was much more serious than the statements you provided)

Instead - what the pope has done is offer his opinion which runs contrary to yours.
He did not declare them the “greatest” religions.
I have read much of what the pope believes about other faiths.
He recognizes when another faith SHARES similar truths.
He takes this as a sign that unity may be possible someday if we work on the COMMON GROUND we share.
He also has stated that where our faiths differ - it is the catholic faith that has received the fullness of truth.
His words indicate love and humility. He desires unity and he invites all christians to return to the one true church.
He simply doesn’t believe - as you do - that the best approach is to declare the rest of the world heretics and retreat into his fortress at the vatican. What a surefire way to discourage people from examining the catholic faith for themselves.

The modernists who now run the Church? Cardinals Ratzinger and Sodano are modernists and are the two people with the real power at the Vatican since the reforms of the curia in 1967. Pope John Paul has his hands tied.

That’s funny you would put Ratzinger in the modernist category.
I know many “progressive” catholics who cannot stand him because they claim he is ultraconservative and a hindrance to the Church.
Pope John Paul II does not have his hands tied.
Are you a Vatican insider? Are you observing who is doing what?
If you are not - then I would suggest you don’t have a clue as to what is going on in the vatican.

Where John Paul stands in all this is anyones guess, a lot of his speeches are humanist. He has referred to the greatness of man and the Rosary as a means of “man being revealed to himself” (!!!)
He does say some strange things, and as I said before the events at Assisi were a scandal.

What is wrong with man being revealed to himself?
We don’t fully understand ourselves because we are in a state of sin.
We weren’t created that way. When we learn more about how we were created - the true nature of how it was “in the beginning” - then yes - man can be revealed to himself.
What I am sensing here is that there is a group of catholics who carry a great deal of suspicion and doubt.
When they carry this baggage around they look for things to confirm their preconceived ideas. They aren’t willing to give our pope even the slightest benefit of the doubt.
Pope John Paul II can present something so beautiful as the Theology of the Body - and these folks will declare it “humanist” because he talks too much about man?..huh?

It is clear no one will change your opinion here. That’s fine - you have only confirmed what I have already observed from other pope bashers and Gruner devotees.

I will continue to search the VII documents for the terrrible things I am being assured are there - I suspect that, as usual, I will find people have twisted interpretation or taken statements out of context.
I will continue to support our wonderful pope and to read his writings.
I have to say - I find his words to be incredibly insightful, beautiful, and inspiring.

 

[John_19_59]

Why do I get the sneaky suspicion something Ratzinger said has been taken out of context?
Can you provide the full statement with a link?

Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in 1987 (in the second edition of his Principles of Catholic Theology) that the “demolition of bastions” in the Church is “a long-overdue task.” The Church, he declared, “must relinquish many of the things that have hitherto spelled security for her and that she has taken for granted. She must demolish longstanding bastions and trust solely the shield of faith.” Now it seems that with the bastions all but demolished, even the shield of faith is about to clatter to the ground.

You are misinformed about Hans Kung.

I am not, Cardinal Sodano was praising him in a sermon at the Lateran Basicilica in 1999. “Beautiful” was how he described his writing about the Christian mysteries.

Oh I get it…so in your world, any other religion besides the catholic faith is a “false” religion.
That’s fine - you’re entitled to your opinion.

No that is not my opinion - it is the infallibly defined dogmatic teaching if the Catholic Church as proclaimed at the First vatican Council and since by every Pope up until John XXIII elected in 1958.
(Hey - much clearer after 1960… the third secret…)

I thought you were accusing the church of officially, infallibly declaring “false” religions to be the “greatest” religions (what you claimed earlier was much more serious than the statements you provided)

I never said “greatest”, I said great. They have been given undue credibilty when they should have none. Who was is who prayed “May St John the Baptist protect Islam”? The Pope - yes the Pope!!

Islam is a lie, or do you really believe Gabriel appeared to Mohammed and dictated God’s word that denied the Divinty of Christ and his salvation? It’s either a lie or it’s not. Which one?

Instead* -* what the pope has done is offer his opinion which runs contrary to yours.
He did not declare them the “greatest” religions.
I have read much of what the pope believes about other faiths.
He recognizes when another faith SHARES similar truths.
He takes this as a sign that unity may be possible someday

Unity? How? Are we supposed to unite with Islam, Buddism? Hinduism? It’s impossible, they are irreconcilable. The only unity will come is when the World recognises that the Catholic Church is the one true religion and converts to it.

if we work on the COMMON GROUND we share.

Why? We should be converting them as Our Lord asked us to. That is our mission “go and make disciples of all the nations”.

He also has stated that where our faiths differ - it is the catholic faith that has received the fullness of truth.
His words indicate love and humility. He desires unity and he invites all christians to return to the one true church.

No he doesn’t invite them to convert - that was the whole point of the second vatican council and its ecumenism! He is confirming them in their error by not insisting on the need to become Catholic.

*He simply doesn’t believe - as you do - that the best approach is to declare the rest of the world heretics and retreat into his fortress at the vatican. What a surefire way to discourage people from examining the catholic faith for themselves.

---

We are telling other religions that they are OK, carry on. Not what Our Lord asked us to do. Who said anything about retreating!

That’s funny you would put Ratzinger in the modernist category.
I know many “progressive” catholics who cannot stand him because they claim he is ultraconservative and a hindrance to the Church.

He is a wolf in sheeps clothing. If you examine his liberal actions at V2 where as an “expert” he assisted in the drawing up of the Vatican documents you will see. “Subsists” is his (at the request of a Protestant)! “Subsists” means non-catholics don’t need to become Catholics.

*Pope John Paul II does not have his hands tied.
Are you a Vatican insider? Are you observing who is doing what?
If you are not - then I would suggest you don’t have a clue as to what is going on in the vatican.

---

Since the 1967 reform the Pope does not run the Vatican, the Secretary of State does (Cardinal Sodano at the moment). It’s like the Queen and the Prime Minister.

 

[John_19_59]

What is wrong with man being revealed to himself?

Its an example of the humanist things Pope John Paul tends to say. When we pray - especially the Rosary, God reveals himself to us - surely.

I will continue to search the VII documents for the terrrible things I am being assured are there - I suspect that, as usual, I will find people have twisted interpretation or taken statements out of context.

May I suggest you read up about the Arian Heresy that rocked the early Church. Who was “excommunicated”, who was doing the excommunication and who was eventually vindicated!

Because the Church and Pope teaches something doesn’t mean it’s the truth. The only certain truth in the Church is infallibly defined Catholic dogma. If someone teaches something that contradicts it - or even attempts a “deeper understanding” of it then they are in error. That is not my opinion, that is the infallible teaching of the Church at the first Vatican council.

The Church since V2, (and because of its ambiguity) has been teaching error.

Like I said before, at V2 and afterwards the modernists moved from infallibilty to deliberate ambiguity, to error.

I have to say - I find his words to be incredibly insightful, beautiful, and inspiring.

What? Even the bit where he wants St John the Baptist to protect Islam?

I admire John Paul in many ways (he blessed my marriage), and I believe his intentions have be good (there are others in the Vatican who are more suspect). But that doesn’t mean its right when Catholic dogma is contradicted.

Pray for him.

 

[Xav]

Father Gruner was suspended for what reason?

Most pedophile priests weren’t suspended, why not?

Makes you wonder.

 

[Xav]

Catholics in schism are Catholics in error but they are still Catholics. They are still in the body of Christ even though they erroneously reject the authority of the Pope. That’s why the Pope works hard to bring them back in communion with the church. I believe we need to not look at them as “they” because they are our brothers and sisters. The Blessed Mother still loves them and many of them are doing very good works.

How many of us have a family member that is living in sin against the church. They are still our loving family member.
The next time we look at a schismatic, (I include myself in this), let’s not point the finger and think “stay away from them lest we be contaminated”, let’s offer a sincere prayer or rosary for them that the church may be truly one.

 

[John_19_59]

“Why?” A good question. It seems the worse crime in the Vatican is not to tow the party line about Fatima (much worse then being a child abuser), and Father Gruner in his Fatima Apostolate has rightly questioned the Vaticans actions about it all. The Vatican “attempted” interpretation of the Third Secret is ridiculous and perhaps even blasphemous (anyone can have an immaculate heart?).

Father Gruner found three Bisops willing to incardinate him and allow him to carry on his apostolate. But these were blocked.
His suspension, by who and what for is questionable.

 

[John_19_59]

• “stay away from them lest we be contaminated”,*

I don’t think anyone is suggesting this.

But it’s an act of charity and our mission to tell sinners the truth.

 

[MrS]

John 19 59

You are doing very well with your posts. I don’t expect you will “convert” those with opposing views. Most have excused themselves from really thinking through the facts by using total submission as an excuse. That itself is wrong if Canon Law has any purpose at all.

What does your forum name represent? Just curious.

No doubt we all love JPII. But he is shielded from much, and perhaps that is God’s plan to light the fire under people like yourself to bring out the facts.

Keep up the effort you are making. I trust it will get at least one reader to investigate more and pray for the truth to be revealed.

Then it is up to God’s will to open the eyes and ears of others.

 

[John_19_59]

MrS,

John 1959 - my name and year of birth!

Thanks for the support.

You are right - total submission is no excuse.

 

[Lorarose]

The deposit of faith has been “demolished” - ask Cardinal Ratzinger.

This is what you first said.
Then you posted this…

Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in 1987 (in the second edition of his Principles of Catholic Theology) that the “demolition of bastions” in the Church is “a long-overdue task.” The Church, he declared, “must relinquish many of the things that have hitherto spelled security for her and that she has taken for granted. She must demolish longstanding bastions and trust solely the shield of faith.” Now it seems that with the bastions all but demolished, even the shield of faith is about to clatter to the ground.

Which is much different. But even this new quote is all chopped up with your personal editorializing at the end to “interpret” it for me.
Do you have a page number you could refer me to in Ratzinger’s book, so I can read it in context?

Regarding Hans Kung - his error has been recognized and he has been disciplined.
This does not mean, however, that ALL of Kung’s writings were lacking in beauty or truth.
Much like Fr. Gruner - he refuses to recognize his error.

it is the infallibly defined dogmatic teaching if the Catholic Church as proclaimed at the First vatican Council and since by every Pope up until John XXIII elected in 1958.

And exactly what statements in VII are in direct conflict with exactly which statements from VI?

I never said “greatest”, I said great. They have been given undue credibilty when they should have none. Who was is who prayed “May St John the Baptist protect Islam”? The Pope - yes the Pope!!

Islam is a lie, or do you really believe Gabriel appeared to Mohammed and dictated God’s word that denied the Divinty of Christ and his salvation? It’s either a lie or it’s not. Which one?

There is an example in the NT where St. Paul appeals to the beliefs of the pagan greeks (their unknown god) in order to teach them about the true God. He recognized a kernel of truth in their beleifs - even though paganism is in error.
This is similar to the Pope’s approach.
I think this article says the rest better than I can…
bringyou.to/apologetics/p36.htm

No he doesn’t invite them to convert - that was the whole point of the second vatican council and its ecumenism! He is confirming them in their error by not insisting on the need to become Catholic.

That is the “whole” point of VII? is it? Wow - I haven’t come across that at all.
Do you think it is possible you exaggerate just a tad?

He is a wolf in sheeps clothing. If you examine his liberal actions at V2 where as an “expert” he assisted in the drawing up of the Vatican documents you will see. “Subsists” is his (at the request of a Protestant)! “Subsists” means non-catholics don’t need to become Catholics.

So…your opposition to VII comes down to one word does it?
Is there anything else you can point to besides “subsist”?

Since the 1967 reform the Pope does not run the Vatican, the Secretary of State does (Cardinal Sodano at the moment). It’s like the Queen and the Prime Minister.

Really? I did not know that!
Could you provide documentation please?

 

[garfield]

I don’t see a problem with the pope or anyone else praying for Islam to be protected. It needs protecting from those extremists who would abuse an essentially peaceful and tolerant religion by preaching fundamentalism and terror.
The ‘Islamic’ terrorist has about as much to do with islam as the real IRA’s Omagh bombers had to do with catholicism!!

 

[John_19_59]

Garfield,

I suggest you actually read something about the history of the Islamic religion, who founded it, why he did, and what he did. It is not a religion of peace. The Islamic terrorists practice Islam in its purest form and would have been instantly recognised by Mohammed because he too was a terrorist - but maybe you only want the sugar-coated version of Islam.

 

[John_19_59]

Lorarose - what can I say? You carry on believing what you want, all I know is that Vatican II and its “spirit” is in opposition to infallible Catholic teaching and even scripture. The authority of Vatican II is even ambiguious - was it dogmatic or not?

Anyway…

St John said in his first epistle…

*15 **Do not love the world or the things of the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. **16 **For all that is in the world, sensual lust, enticement for the eyes, and a pretentious life, is not from the Father but is from the world. **17 **Yet the world and its enticement are passing away. But whoever does the will of God remains forever. **18 **Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that the antichrist was coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. Thus we know this is the last hour. **19 **They went out from us, but they were not really of our number; if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number. **20 **But you have the anointing that comes from the holy one, and you all have knowledge. **21 **I write to you not because you do not know the truth but because you do, and because every lie is alien to the truth. **22 **Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist. **23 **No one who denies the Son has the Father, but whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well. **24 **Let what you heard from the beginning remain in you. If what you heard from the beginning remains in you, then you will remain in the Son and in the Father. **25 **And this is the promise that he made us: eternal life. **26 **I write you these things about those who would deceive you. **27 *As for you, the anointing that you received from him remains in you, so that you do not need anyone to teach you. But his anointing teaches you about everything and is true and not false; just as it taught you, remain in him.

Vatican II embraced the world, entered into “dialogue” with it.
It embraced the hereteics and schismatics who went from us and are not part of our number else they would have remained with us.

It embraced the deniers of Jesus Christ like the Jews, Muslims, Buddists and Hindus who are the anti-christ. It bent over backwards in pursuit of “the civilisation of love”, a “fraternity of all mankind” (a masonic ideal if there ever was one).

The only way it could do this was by the reduction of previous Catholic teaching, the razing of the bastions of catholic faith as mentioned by Cardinal Ratzinger and his mentor Hans Von Balthasar.

The Church of God IS the Catholic Church - that is infallibly taught, it doesn’t just merely subsist in it (at least not in the way it has been interpreted since VII).

Finally in John II we read…

*7 Many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh; such is the deceitful one and the antichrist. *
*8 **Look to yourselves that you do not lose what we worked for but may receive a full recompense. *
*9 **Anyone who is so “progressive” as not to remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God; whoever remains in the teaching has the Father and the Son. ****10 ******If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him in your house or even greet him; ******11 ****for whoever greets him shares in his evil works. *

The deceivers are all about us and we are in useless “dialogue” with them, greeting them and sharing in their evil works.

That is not our mission.

Creating an earthly “civilisation of love” is also not our mission.

Christ came to bring a sword, the “civilisation of love” is utopian (masonic) nonsense.

Lord have mercy on us. Our Lady of Fatima Pray for us.

St John the Baptist protect the Catholic Church.

 

[Marie]

WARNING! Followers of Gruner may be in Schism

In recent years Fr. Gruner has also aligned himself increasingly with ultra-traditionalists in the Church who, forgetting the doctrine of papal primacy clearly enunciated at Vatican I, oppose the acts and decrees of Vatican II and the recent pontiffs in a number of matters, taking to themselves the judgment of the sufficiency of papal acts and the interpretation of Sacred Tradition and the Papal Magisterium, contrary to both canon law and Catholic theology. This practice of private interpretation has led them to a public campaign of resistance to the Holy Father spelled out in another Gruner journal The Catholic (sic) Family News, under the title “We resist you to your face.” The “you” is Pope John Paul II. All Catholics should resist this impious campaign to its face! [Note: This campaign is also a formal part of the editorial policy of another ultra-traditionalist newspaper The Remnant.]

Thus it is that today Fr. Gruner, who previously simply pushed his opinion on Fatima as he was free to do, is now engaged in a schismatic campaign of resistance to the Pope. Catholics who follow his lead of material disobedience to the Pope could find themselves in formal schism from the Church and excommunicated. This is because in the human will it is not very far from whining and complaining about what you don’t like about the Church and this pontificate to formally (that is, with full moral culpability) breaking communion with Peter, especially when you have taken the first step of material resistance to papal authority.

 

[John_19_59]

I am not a follower of Father Gruner, but I have read what he says and he makes some interesting points. I also believe “Resist you to your face” was not actually his work.

As regards resisting the Pope I think you need to read a little Church history - in particular who was right and who was wrong in the Arian heresy.

 

[Marie]

John_19_59:

I am not a follower of Father Gruner, but I have read what he says and he makes some interesting points. I also believe “Resist you to your face” was not actually his work.

As regards resisting the Pope I think you need to read a little Church history - in particular who was right and who was wrong in the Arian heresy.

Not to be disrespectful John…but I think you need to stop trying to be your own Pope.

 

[springbreeze]

WARNING! Followers of Gruner may be in Schism

In recent years Fr. Gruner has also aligned himself increasingly with ultra-traditionalists in the Church who, forgetting the doctrine of papal primacy clearly enunciated at Vatican I, oppose the acts and decrees of Vatican II and the recent pontiffs in a number of matters, taking to themselves the judgment of the sufficiency of papal acts and the interpretation of Sacred Tradition and the Papal Magisterium, contrary to both canon law and Catholic theology. This practice of private interpretation has led them to a public campaign of resistance to the Holy Father spelled out in another Gruner journal The Catholic (sic) Family News, under the title “We resist you to your face.” The “you” is Pope John Paul II. All Catholics should resist this impious campaign to its face! [Note: This campaign is also a formal part of the editorial policy of another ultra-traditionalist newspaper The Remnant.]

Thus it is that today Fr. Gruner, who previously simply pushed his opinion on Fatima as he was free to do, is now engaged in a schismatic campaign of resistance to the Pope. Catholics who follow his lead of material disobedience to the Pope could find themselves in formal schism from the Church and excommunicated. This is because in the human will it is not very far from whining and complaining about what you don’t like about the Church and this pontificate to formally (that is, with full moral culpability) breaking communion with Peter, especially when you have taken the first step of material resistance to papal authority.

Dear Marie

Thank you for your post. I have been following this thread.

I see the same axe being ground that was ground in the last thread in respect of Fatima.

If a Catholic puts ANYTHING above the teachings of the deposit of the faith that is the full revelation of Christ Jesus that person is in a serious jeopardy of faith.

If a revelation causes a person to break from union with Rome then that is clearly in pure disobedience to the church and to Christ Jesus. To break away from Christ Jesus’ church, to leave His fold is to reject His Church, thus rejecting the Authority He left to His Church by Apostolic Succession from St Peter.

Certain quarters latch onto axes and grind them and they, out of pride, do not relinquish their axe, but continue to grind.

The Church cannot err in dogma. The Holy Spirit cannot err, therefore neither can formation of doctrine and dogma. If a Catholic doesn’t know that, then I would seriously question their knowledge on much deeper issues…such as obedience to Rome and the Pontificate.

Some quarters will not accept authority. It is the same pride that stems from ‘I will not serve’ that leads a soul not to accept Papal Authority.

Some quarters will not accept change and growth. The Gospel is the LIVING Word of God and if something lives, it grows not in that the Gospel chanes but the enligtenment of it causes the Church to grow and change. The Church thus changes and develops as the continuing enlightenment of the Gospels under the Holy Spirit increases our understanding of the revelation of Christ Jesus… The church it retains it’s essence, it’s core…the 7 Sacraments and dogma and doctrine, but it develops on what it has. This growth can only be done under Authority to prevent error in dogma and misinterpretation by the Body of Christ, the authority lies with the Pope under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Any revelation outside of Vhrist Jesus’ full revelation serves us to be better able to live the Gospel and understand the Gospel in our time of living and to increase the Body of Christ. Not to supercede it and cause souls to break away fom the church.

Some quarters seek to undermine the Church by any means necessary either from within the Church or from outside of the Church.

Axes and grinding them always leads to disobedience, division and increasing pride.

Axes and pride, very very dangerous ground for any soul.

God Bless you and much love and peace to you

Teresa

 

[John_19_59]

The Church cannot err in dogma. The Holy Spirit cannot err, therefore neither can formation of doctrine and dogma.

That is correct.

Now was Vatican II dogmatic?

Carefull now!