Hypothetical situation for priest

  • Thread starter Thread starter notredame_999
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So technically by your logic, even the Pope himself doesn’t have to belive in Fatima?
What part of the Catechism paragraphs did you not get?

I am not contradicting Sr Lucia, she recieved a private revelation.

What part of a private revelation not being part of the Deposit of the Faith are you having trouble understanding?

No, the pope is not required to believe in any private revelation just as every other Catholic is free to believe or not believe in them.

It is not Dogma. It is not infallible. It is not part of the Public Revelation given to the Church.

This is not my logic, this is what the Church Teaches.
 
What part of the Catechism paragraphs did you not get?

I am not contradicting Sr Lucia, she recieved a private revelation.

What part of a private revelation not being part of the Deposit of the Faith are you having trouble understanding?

No, the pope is not required to believe in any private revelation just as every other Catholic is free to believe or not believe in them.

It is not Dogma. It is not infallible. It is not part of the Public Revelation given to the Church.

This is not my logic, this is what the Church Teaches.
Well then the catechesim in error if it really teaches that. Part of believing in Fatima is believing in the commands attached to it- for the laity that means going to confession for the first five saturdays. For the clergy that means consecrating Russia. I have no faith in any clergy who doesnt believe in Fatima.
 
Well then the catechesim in error if it really teaches that. Part of believing in Fatima is believing in the commands attached to it- for the laity that means going to confession for the first five saturdays. For the clergy that means consecrating Russia. I have no faith in any clergy who doesnt believe in Fatima.
Then you are at odds with what the Church Teaches.

Paragraph 66 of the Catechism references Dei Verbum 4, which says;
4. Then, after speaking in many and varied ways through the prophets, “now at last in these days God has spoken to us in His Son” (Heb. 1:1-2). For He sent His Son, the eternal Word, who enlightens all men, so that He might dwell among men and tell them of the innermost being of God (see John 1:1-18). Jesus Christ, therefore, the Word made flesh, was sent as “a man to men.” (3) He “speaks the words of God” (John 3;34), and completes the work of salvation which His Father gave Him to do (see John 5:36; John 17:4). To see Jesus is to see His Father (John 14:9). For this reason Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making Himself present and manifesting Himself: through His words and deeds, His signs and wonders, but especially through His death and glorious resurrection from the dead and final sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed, that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal.

The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ (see 1 Tim. 6:14 and Tit. 2:13).
The last part of the paragraph, which I have underlined is of most importance. It also references Holy Scripture.

We can go no further.
 
Then you are at odds with what the Church Teaches.

Paragraph 66 of the Catechism references Dei Verbum 4, which says;
4. Then, after speaking in many and varied ways through the prophets, “now at last in these days God has spoken to us in His Son” (Heb. 1:1-2). For He sent His Son, the eternal Word, who enlightens all men, so that He might dwell among men and tell them of the innermost being of God (see John 1:1-18). Jesus Christ, therefore, the Word made flesh, was sent as “a man to men.” (3) He “speaks the words of God” (John 3;34), and completes the work of salvation which His Father gave Him to do (see John 5:36; John 17:4). To see Jesus is to see His Father (John 14:9). For this reason Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making Himself present and manifesting Himself: through His words and deeds, His signs and wonders, but especially through His death and glorious resurrection from the dead and final sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed, that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal.

The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ (see 1 Tim. 6:14 and Tit. 2:13).
The last part of the paragraph, which I have underlined is of most importance. It also references Holy Scripture.

We can go no further.
Perhaps Our Lady wanted the third secret released by 1960 because it foretold of a “Council” that would spread apostasy.

Which might include a new catechism
 
Perhaps Our Lady wanted the third secret released by 1960 because it foretold of a “Council” that would spread apostasy.

Which might include a new catechism
It seems that you can not understand what the difference is between private and public revelations.

Also Pope John Paul II released the Third Secret and Sr Lucia confirmed this, but I guess you think they are lieing about that as well.

As I said there is no reason for further discussion on this as you lack a full understanding of what the Church Teaches and you refuse to conform to it (by it I mean the Church and what it Teaches).
 
Well then the catechesim in error if it really teaches that. Part of believing in Fatima is believing in the commands attached to it- for the laity that means going to confession for the first five saturdays. For the clergy that means consecrating Russia. I have no faith in any clergy who doesnt believe in Fatima.
Your thinking is very similar to some of the early African Schismatics . I hope that you reevaluate your faith and submit to Catholic doctrine.

Pax,
OA
 
Your thinking is very similar to some of the early African Schismatics . I hope that you reevaluate your faith and submit to Catholic doctrine.

Pax,
OA
I already submit to Catholic doctrine, traditional that is. Vatican II was a pastoral council, therefore there are parts to it I disagree with. I also disagree with Evangelium Vitae. Finally, I do not think the consecration of Russia has taken place the way Our Lady wanted it to.
 
What questions did you have a problem with?
Actually, all of your questions.

I mean really, a priest having to take down a mugger? I’ve been around for quite awhile, in NYC no less, and I have never heard of a priest having to take a “mugger down”. Is that really a question that bothers you about the priesthood?

Where are your questions about the seminary, about the requirements to enter, about the daily life of a postulant or parish priest, college credits required and other such questions that one normally asks about the priesthood? I have not heard you talk about the love of the priesthood, or the Church, or of you praying upon your decision. Or have you already had these basic questions answered? I have not heard you say anything about a vocational director. I think you do need to see one so you can find out what he thinks of your questions. You might recieve an answer not to your liking however…

I think there are much more basic questions that you need to face before getting into such heavy, theological ones. Thats all I’m saying…
 
Actually, all of your questions.

I mean really, a priest having to take down a mugger? I’ve been around for quite awhile, in NYC no less, and I have never heard of a priest having to take a “mugger down”. Is that really a question that bothers you about the priesthood?

Where are your questions about the seminary, about the requirements to enter, about the daily life of a postulant or parish priest, college credits required and other such questions that one normally asks about the priesthood? I have not heard you talk about the love of the priesthood, or the Church, or of you praying upon your decision. Or have you already had these basic questions answered? I have not heard you say anything about a vocational director. I think you do need to see one so you can find out what he thinks of your questions. You might recieve an answer not to your liking however…

I think there are much more basic questions that you need to face before getting into such heavy, theological ones. Thats all I’m saying…
I think anyone who even conisders the priesthood already has a great love for the church, saints, and the priestly ministry. That goes without saying.
 
I already submit to Catholic doctrine, traditional that is.
While you claim this your other posts prove that you do not submit.

Your support of a suspressed priest and the instance that Pope John Paul II and Sr Lucia are lieing show this.

Your denial of the basic Church Teaching that private revelations are not required for belief and that they can not bind the Church is also against Church doctrine.
Vatican II was a pastoral council, therefore there are parts to it I disagree with. I also disagree with Evangelium Viitae. Finally, I do not think the consecration of Russia has taken place the way Our Lady wanted it to.
While it was a pastoral council the documents still require assent by all Catholics.
 
If I thought I had a reasonable chance for survival (unless there was a situation in which intervening was a moral imperative) I’d do what I could to take him down (in the most loving way possible, lol).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top