Fr. Nicholas Gruner

[jrabs]

Why would Bishops all over the world hide pedophile priests for multiple offenses for years? Why were we lied to that VII called for the desecration of our Churches, the protestanation or our liturgy> It’s called cover your butt, and they’re not good at it.

Oh, someone to mix in irrelevant matters. Yes, lets discus multiple topics now.

 

[bear06]

I scanned this thread and didn’t see these articles by Pete Vere, a canon lawyer on Fr. Gruner’s suspension.

sspx.agenda.tripod.com/id26.html
theotokos.org.uk/pages/fatima/ngruner/wanderer.html

I don’t think anyone can claim that the Apostolic Signitura didn’t confirm Fr. Gruner to be suspended. This was the Vatican’s statement on the matter:

The Congregation for the Clergy, upon the mandate from a higher authority, wishes to state that Rev. Nicholas Gruner is under an ‘a divinis’ suspension, which has been confirmed by a definitive sentence of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature

The Apostolic Signatura is well within its jurisdiction to uphold the previous ruling and did so. If some of you want to argue that they had no right to do it, then good luck with that. Hopefully, you’re not wrong.

 

[jrabs]

Come on folks! Everyone knows Fr. Gruner is a saint and Pope JP II, Pope B XVI & Sr.Lucia are liars! If you don’t believe me, just ask most of the radtrads on this forum! After all they say JP II is a anti-pope and a heretic! What more prove do you need?!?!

Pax… your so full of it, I advise you not to stray to far from the bathroom!

Yes - however there are so many passionate souls being led astray. And that is the very sad part.

 

[Like]

Why would Bishops all over the world hide pedophile priests for multiple offenses for years? Why were we lied to that VII called for the desecration of our Churches, the protestanation or our liturgy> It’s called cover your butt, and they’re not good at it.

Yeah! And your on the same level as Pax and spread heresay!

 

[bear06]

Oh, someone to mix in irrelevant matters. Yes, lets discus multiple topics now.

It’s the scattergun approach. It’s often used by some to divert the attention of topic of the conversation. My kids use the same thing when they get busted. “But the other sister did this!” - As if this excuses them.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Let me see…does the Vatican support his views? Nope. Then why would I? I do not need to investigate - I need to be obedient. I have opted to believe the Vatican and not a conspiracy theory.

We do need to stand up for what is good and right when lies are spread.

The grace of infallibility is not attached to Cardinal Bertone’s judgment on the consecration of Russia or the revealing of the Third Secret, nor anyone else’s either, including Fr. Gruner’s.

How you can come to any sort of conclusion without any investigation I have no idea.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

It’s the scattergun approach. It’s often used by some to divert the attention of topic of the conversation. My kids use the same thing when they get busted. “But the other sister did this!” - As if this excuses them.

Yes, I know exactly what you mean. Like when someone is discussing the consecration of Russia and the Third Secret and someone else constantly brings up Fr. Gruner and whether or not he is suspended as if that was relevant, as opposed to dealing with the arguments themselves.

 

[jrabs]

The grace of infallibility is not attached to Cardinal Bertone’s judgment on the consecration of Russia or the revealing of the Third Secret, nor anyone else’s either, including Fr. Gruner’s.

How you can come to any sort of conclusion without any investigation I have no idea.

Agreed.
Yet JPII and Sr Lucia both said it was done and completed themselves. Are they both mistaken?

Why would I investigate further when there are two impeccable first hand witnesses verifying the information?

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Agreed.
Yet JPII and Sr Lucia both said it was done and completed themselves. Are they both mistaken?

Why would I investigate further when there are two impeccable first hand witnesses verifying the information?

Hi jrabs,

Actually, I don’t think Pope John Paul II has ever explicitly said that the 1984 consecration sufficed. In fact during the consecration he made a statement which indicated he knew that it was not fulfilling the instruction of the Blessed Mother.

And of course there are arguments against Sister Lucia’s letter being authentic. But you would have to investigate further to know what they are.

 

[jrabs]

Hi jrabs,

Actually, I don’t think Pope John Paul II has ever explicitly said that the 1984 consecration sufficed. In fact during the consecration he made a statement which indicated he knew that it was not fulfilling the instruction of the Blessed Mother.

And of course there are arguments against Sister Lucia’s letter being authentic. But you would have to investigate further to know what they are.

Oh well, ye be a doubter then. What more can I say.
I shall not lead folks astray.

 

[childofmary1143]

Agreed.
Yet JPII and Sr Lucia both said it was done and completed themselves. Are they both mistaken?

Why would I investigate further when there are two impeccable first hand witnesses verifying the information?

Can you produce a Vatican link that Pope John Paul II clearly states that the Consecration of Russia has been done?

 

[jrabs]

Can you produce a Vatican link that Pope John Paul II clearly states that the Consecration of Russia has been done?

please see post # 45 for a link to Jimmy Akin’s article. He has all the references all loaded up for you in his excellent article.

 

[bear06]

Yes, I know exactly what you mean. Like when someone is discussing the consecration of Russia and the Third Secret and someone else constantly brings up Fr. Gruner and whether or not he is suspended as if that was relevant, as opposed to dealing with the arguments themselves.

The topic of this thread is Fr. Gruner. If someone is going to quote from Fr. Gruner’s website in order to show proof that Russia wasn’t consecrated and the Third Secret wasn’t revealed then why wouldn’t Gruner’s status be brought up?

 

[MarieO2]

Oh well, ye be a doubter then. What more can I say.
I shall not lead folks astray.

Some folks would rather be lead astray than be obedient and trust God and Holy Mother Church. Amazing how easily they flock to conspiracy theories. Obviously they have way too much time on their hands. Idle minds are the devils workshop and Grunerites have lots of that going on.

 

[jrabs]

And of course there are arguments against Sister Lucia’s letter being authentic. But you would have to investigate further to know what they are.

See, I think those stores are made up by the Gruner folks too. According to Cardinal Bertone in this article below, he does not say such nonsense.

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0500986.htm
VATICAN LETTER Feb-18-2005 (860 words) Backgrounder. With photo. xxxi

Secrets, superstitions, sainthood: Cardinal talks of Sister Lucia

By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service
An excerpt…
VATICAN CITY (CNS) –
Italian Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone of Genoa, who celebrated Sister Lucia’s funeral in the pope’s name, discussed all three issues with the press.

In 2000, when Pope John Paul II ordered the publication of the so-called “third secret” of Fatima – a description of a vision the Blessed Virgin Mary showed the children – groups such as the Canadian-based Fatima Center immediately began claiming that the publication was incomplete and the Vatican was hiding something.

And when Sister Lucia died, the Fatima Center posted a message on its Web site saying it would “continue to campaign for the release of the full third secret.”

But Cardinal Bertone, who had spent hours with Sister Lucia discussing the third secret and the Vatican’s interpretation of it before it was published, categorically denied anything remains a secret.

“I can say, without any doubt, that it is absolutely certain that everything having to do with the secret of Fatima has been revealed and that the third part of the secret is contained in the four pages that we published in their entirety and which correspond exactly to the letter written personally by Sister Lucia,” Cardinal Bertone said Feb. 14 before flying to Portugal for the funeral.

The cardinal said he was aware that people, despite the affirmations of Pope John Paul – unquestionably devoted to the Fatima message – continue to claim there is more to the secret, but he insists the Vatican published everything in its possession.

“I explicitly asked Sister Lucia if she had written something before or after what has been published of the third secret. She herself confirmed that she had written nothing either before or after,” Cardinal Bertone said.

 

[MarieO2]

By the way, Fr. Gruner’s work and his Fatima Crusader magazine have the Apostolic Blessing and approval of Pope John Paul II !!! Fancy that.

Fancy that…you are very wrong. Wherever did you get that idea. :hypno:

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

The topic of this thread is Fr. Gruner. If someone is going to quote from Fr. Gruner’s website in order to show proof that Russia wasn’t consecrated and the Third Secret wasn’t revealed then why wouldn’t Gruner’s status be brought up?

Because its irrelevant to the arguments themselves.

If someone wishes to discuss the status of Fr. Gruner, fine, but that has nothing to do with whether Russia has been consecrated or the full Third Secret has been revealed.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

So, if we suppose that Fr. Gruner is correct then Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and all the members of the Apostolic Signatura, are all either 1. Mistaken, 2. Evil, or 3. Cowards.

I have a question for you…

For years Fr. Guner (and a few others) maintained that the words pro multis in the consecration should have been translated as “for many” rather than “for all”. Also, Fr. Guners (and a few others) maintained, for years, that the old Mass “was never abrogated”.

During all those years, John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger, and virtually ever member of the hierarchy (except for Cardinal Stickly) towed the party line and pretended that the old Mass was abrogated, and that “for all” was a perfectly fine translation of pro multis (even though the evidence to the contrary was irrefutable).

Since being elected Pope, Benedict XVI has had the courage to admit that what Fr. Gruner (and a few others) were saying about the Old Mass and the words of consecration was exactly correct.

Fr. Gruner (and a few others) stood virtually alone in the face of unheard of slander for maintaining the truth - a truth which Rome has finally admitted (thanks to the courage of our new Pope).

Here’s my question: During all those years when Fr. Guner (and a few others) were standing for the truth against virtually the entire hierarchy, were John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger: 1.) misled, 2.) evil, or 3.) cowards.

We can exclude # 1 because, as we know (and as Rome has now admitted publicly), John Paul II appiointed a commission of nine Cardinals to study that point in 1986. One of those Cardinals was Cardinal Ratzinger. The commission found, unanimously, that the Old Mass had never been abrogated.

That means we can exclude the possibility that they were misled. Therefore, using your choices, that leaves us with just two other options. So tell me, which of the two applies to John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger during the time John Paul II was Pope? According to you, the only two choices would be that they were cowards or evil. Which do you say it is?

Now, would anyone really be surprise to learn that the current party-line with respect to the Third Secret is also wrong, and that Fr. Gruner (and a few others) are right again? Especially when our new Pope has admitted that Fatima is one of his greatest regrets?

Solideo Paolini: "But in the end, let us pray for our Holy Father Benedict XVI. The Message of Fatima asks us to pray, to pray a lot for our Holy Father; and the reigning Pope said, at least once, that Fatima is one of his biggest regrets of his life. He was probably moved to act in a certain way and has remained trapped by it. fatimapeaceconferences.co…ni_2007_en.asp

 

[maggieodae]

I have a question for you…

For years Fr. Guner (and a few others) maintained that the words pro multis in the consecration should have been translated as “for many” rather than “for all”. Also, Fr. Guners (and a few others) maintained, for years, that the old Mass “was never abrogated”.

Beyond the pale and still rolling down the slippery slope.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Let me ask this question.

What does it matter if Pope John Paul II consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary or not?

After all, Fatima is a private revelation and is not a de fide of the faith.

No faithful Catholic is required to believe in any private revelation.

That is part of what bothers me about Fr Gruner. He seems to want to raise Fatima to a dogma of the Church.