My problem with the visions at Fatima

[CrossoverManiac]

Even though this is a ridiculous logic, I’ll answer, God asked Abram to sacrifice his son, Abraham complied, God intervened.
If God wished it then I’d have to comply.

This is apples and oranges. This leap of faith that Abraham was made to do was for two reasons:

1). Test of loyality. During Abraham’s time, human sacrifice was not unheard of, and God used this to put Abraham to the test. Who did Abraham love more: his son or God. Abraham chose God.

2). Test of faith. According to St. Paul, Abraham believed in the promise that God made to him; that his descendents would be as numerous as the stars in the sky. Abraham believed that God would raise his son from the dead and had no fear in sacrificing him. But God had other plans and did not allow Abraham to sacrifice Isaac.

None of these are non-biblical. We are to love more than anyone or anything else, even family. And we are to have faith that God is in control and will do what’s in the best interest for those that love him, even if it doesn’t seem so at the time. Mary telling children to devote themselves to devotation to

The Bible also teaches to check the scripture to confirm what a spirit or vision tells us. I find it hard to believe that Mary would tell anyone salvation is found in her Immaculate Heart. In fact, Mary would point to the source of her Immaculate Heart, the one that gave it to her, God, and not herself.

 

[CrossoverManiac]

I’ve really tried to make sense out of this, but maybe I’m just too tired. Could you perhaps rephrase so I know where you’re going with this?

Let me explain it again. Just because someone claimed that God is telling them to relay a message, doesn’t mean they are. Even the Bible warn of people who claim to speak for God whereas God told them no such things.

 

[blessedstar]

Let me explain it again. Just because someone claimed that God is telling them to relay a message, doesn’t mean they are. Even the Bible warn of people who claim to speak for God whereas God told them no such things.

Can you discern by yourself which alleged ‘message’ or ‘vision’ or ‘apparition’ is true and which is false?

Or would it be that the Catholic Church has authority, experience, wisdom and power of discernment to do that bearing in mind they have a duty to protect the faithful?

Personally I don’t want to be my own Pope, I trust the Holy Spirit to guide the Holy See.

 

[CrossoverManiac]

About predictions: some say that the miracles and prophecies prove that Fatima is from God. That only proves Fatima is a supernatural event. That doesn’t mean its from God.

1). The Bible warns of lying wonders (false miracles and visions) and false prophets.

2). The first two seconds of Fatima were not made public until 1941, after the events they supposely predicted (the rise of communism in Russia and the start of WWII). How do we know they actually predicted these events before they happened?

3). From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Fatima:

*Some believe that Lucia Santos verified that this ceremony fulfilled the requests of the Virgin Mary. However, in the Blue Army’s Spanish magazine, Sol de Fatima, in the September 1985 issue, Sister Lúcia said that the ceremony did not fulfill the Virgin Mary’s request, as there was no specific mention of Russia, and “many bishops attached no importance to it”.

In 2001, Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone issued a statement, claiming that he had met with Sister Lúcia, who reportedly told him, “I have already said that the consecration desired by Our Lady was made in 1984, and has been accepted in Heaven.” Sister Lúcia died on February 13 (same day as the apparitions), 2005, without making any public statement of her own to settle the issue.*

So did the general blessing over the world fulfilled the requirement to set forth by the Lady of Fatima. According to one source, Sister Lucia said it didn’t fulfill the requirement. But another source said it did. Who’s telling the truth and who isn’t? And if it didn’t, then how come Russia is free of communism? Perhaps God can work miracles without help from the Immaculate Heart.

 

[CrossoverManiac]

Can you discern by yourself which alleged ‘message’ or ‘vision’ or ‘apparition’ is true and which is false?

Or would it be that the Catholic Church has authority, experience, wisdom and power of discernment to do that bearing in mind they have a duty to protect the faithful?

Personally I don’t want to be my own Pope, I trust the Holy Spirit to guide the Holy See.

Back in Christ’s day, the Sanhedin was the religious leaders ruling at that time. They were appointed by God and had power and authority given to them. That did not mean everything they did was right. They did sentence the Messiah to death. I believe the Pope, bishops, and priests are our spiritual leaders and authority on earth. That doesn’t mean I switch my brain off and take everything they say without question.

 

[zorrox]

God loves mankind and He sent His mother to three little children in Fatima.

She said “Do not offend God anymore trough sin, He is already so much offended”

God wants us to do penance for our own sins and those of others.

We need remainders of the reality of heaven, hell, sin and grace.
they are real even if we do not see them.

If the Church says the apparitions are worthy of belief, what on earth or in hell would hinder you to believe in the almighty power of God to send His mother to earth?

 

[CrossoverManiac]

Can you discern by yourself which alleged ‘message’ or ‘vision’ or ‘apparition’ is true and which is false?

Good thing the Bible is there to help us with it. The New Testament church is commended for reading the Scripture to check to see if what they have been told is true. I don’t see any reason why we would stop reading the Bible and checking if a certain teaching is Biblical or not.

 

[blessedstar]

God did not choose to be incarnated without the help of Mary.

I think if you don’t believe in Fatima that is up to you and no-one can argue with you or force you to believe something you feel you cannot believe.

As for those who believe they have every right to believe as the Vatican has approved the Fatima apparitions and messages as worthy of belief for the entire Catholic faithful.

So really, what is there to argue about?

 

[CrossoverManiac]

God did not choose to be incarnated without the help of Mary.

I think if you don’t believe in Fatima that is up to you and no-one can argue with you or force you to believe something you feel you cannot believe.

As for those who believe they have every right to believe as the Vatican has approved the Fatima apparitions and messages as worthy of belief for the entire Catholic faithful.

So really, what is there to argue about?

This is a discussion forum. You should expect someone sooner or later to express and to attempt to convince others of a view point that would not have.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

The New Testament churches read the Old Testament as “scripture” since at the time of Paul they did not possess the New Testament. . .an individual church might have a letter of Paul, or Peter, or James (and not all the letters which were written by these men, or John, were Scripture); on top of that, within the life time of John, the Jewish people ‘changed’ what we call the “Old testament” canon and omitted books like Maccabbees 1 and 2, for example.

And Scripture as we know it was not available to the early Christians until the end of the 4th century A.D.

Thank God that we had in addition to the Scripture Sacred Tradition, the Holy Spirit to guide us to all truth, and the Church which Christ established, to bring together all these things, along with the witnesses and the example of the holy martyrs, to make a cohesive whole, and that the magesterium of the church can guide us about these questions and concerns and be our source of authority. . .through the Holy Spirit, in the name of Jesus, Son of the Father.

 

[CrossoverManiac]

Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe Fatima is of God. I’m going to pray about it some to be sure.

 

[blessedstar]

I know this is a discussion forum, but why would anyone want to convince souls against what the Catholic Church has already accepted as true?

That is why I say, what is there to argue about?

No-one says you have to believe it, you are a person with a conscience and you have to follow that but the Authority for the Catholic Faithful rests with the Church and the Holy See has said it is worthy of belief.

 

[CrossoverManiac]

The New Testament churches read the Old Testament as “scripture” since at the time of Paul they did not possess the New Testament. . .an individual church might have a letter of Paul, or Peter, or James (and not all the letters which were written by these men, or John, were Scripture); on top of that, within the life time of John, the Jewish people ‘changed’ what we call the “Old testament” canon and omitted books like Maccabbees 1 and 2, for example.

And Scripture as we know it was not available to the early Christians until the end of the 4th century A.D.

Thank God that we had in addition to the Scripture Sacred Tradition, the Holy Spirit to guide us to all truth, and the Church which Christ established, to bring together all these things, along with the witnesses and the example of the holy martyrs, to make a cohesive whole, and that the magesterium of the church can guide us about these questions and concerns and be our source of authority. . .through the Holy Spirit, in the name of Jesus, Son of the Father.

Not if tradition contradicts scripture. Christ warned the Jews of His day not to use the tradition of men to nullify God’s word. As far as I’m concerned, scripture always trumps and overrides tradition.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

As far as you are concerned. . .

And yet you have not produced any scriptural “trump” over this apparition.

Your original premise was that in a ‘legitimate’ apparition that <the messenger glories the Lord, not themselves> (and I quote you).

The messages at Fatima do not, not, not have Mary glorifying herself.

So I don’t see your problem. The messages have been approved as ‘worthy of belief’ but are not compulsory** for** belief; and the messages glorify God and no one else.

There is no disconnect. Scripture and Sacred Tradition (as always) are in perfect tune with each other.

 

[jmcrae]

Even though the Church has not proclaimed any “official” teaching regarding apparitions. It did canonize those who saw the visions. And the canonization is indeed infalible. So the Church is sort of…subtly…saying that the apparitions are true.

Actually what canonization means is that the person lived an exemplary life, worthy of imitating.

I think any mother would be praising God to have such prayerful, obedient, honest children, whether what they saw was real, or not.

 

[CrossoverManiac]

As far as you are concerned. . .

And yet you have not produced any scriptural “trump” over this apparition.

I already did at the very beginning of this thread.

Rev. 22: 8-9:
"8
It is I, John, who heard and saw these things, and when I heard and saw them I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed them to me.
9
But he said to me, “Don’t! I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brothers the prophets and of those who keep the message of this book. Worship God.”

Are you saying if a spirit told you to give your devotion to someone other than God, you wouldn’t call that spirit in question?

Your original premise was that in a ‘legitimate’ apparition that <the messenger glories the Lord, not themselves> (and I quote you).

The messages at Fatima do not, not, not have Mary glorifying herself.

Asking people to devote the world to them and not God doesn’t strike you as an attempt to glorify themselves? You tell me what it is then? I want you to tell me how that isn’t glorifying Mary.

So I don’t see your problem. The messages have been approved as ‘worthy of belief’ but are not compulsory** for** belief; and the messages glorify God and no one else.

There is no disconnect. Scripture and Sacred Tradition (as always) are in perfect tune with each other.

Not if they accept the words of a spirit that contradict scripture.

 

[jmcrae]

I already did at the very beginning of this thread.

Rev. 22: 8-9:
"8
It is I, John, who heard and saw these things, and when I heard and saw them I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed them to me.
9
But he said to me, “Don’t! I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brothers the prophets and of those who keep the message of this book. Worship God.”

Are you saying if a spirit told you to give your devotion to someone other than God, you wouldn’t call that spirit in question?

I’m honestly not seeing where that’s happening in the message of Fatima. Are you maybe thinking that “my Immaculate heart” is something Mary gave to herself, rather than the gift of God to her, for the purpose of His glory?

Asking people to devote the world to them and not God doesn’t strike you as an attempt to glorify themselves? You tell me what it is then? I want you to tell me how that isn’t glorifying Mary.

Mary glorifies Jesus; not herself. Every message she brings to the world can be summed up in one: her words in John 2:5 - “Do whatever he tells you to do.”

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Mary is not and never has asked to be glorified instead of God. Neither in those messages nor anywhere else.

Please go back and read those quotes in their entirety. You will see that right at the beginning Mary tells us that what she asks is “God’s wish”, not hers.

And then go to Luke Chapter 2 and read the magnificat, “for He that is mighty has done great things for me. . .every generation shall call me blessed. . .” Right there Mary tells us that every generation shall call her blessed, **as the will of God. **

Right there in Scripture.

If Mary is ‘glorifying herself’ in the Fatima message by telling us that God wills us to do things in the name of the woman whom He Himself chose as mother of His Son and whom He, in scriptures, has commanded every generation to proclaim as blessed. . .

then she is ‘glorifying herself’ in Luke 2 when she tells us that “every generation shall call me blessed.”

In all cases, Mary’s glory comes solely through God.

 

[CrossoverManiac]

Mary is not and never has asked to be glorified instead of God. Neither in those messages nor anywhere else.

Please go back and read those quotes in their entirety. You will see that right at the beginning Mary tells us that what she asks is “God’s wish”, not hers.

God wishes for you to walk around naked in public. You have to believe me because I said ‘God wishes’. As I said, just because someone claims that God wishes for something, don’t make it true.

And then go to Luke Chapter 2 and read the magnificat, “for He that is mighty has done great things for me. . .every generation shall call me blessed. . .” Right there Mary tells us that every generation shall call her blessed, **as the will of God. **

Right there in Scripture.

If Mary is ‘glorifying herself’ in the Fatima message by telling us that God wills us to do things in the name of the woman whom He Himself chose as mother of His Son and whom He, in scriptures, has commanded every generation to proclaim as blessed. . .

Jesus himself called Christians blessed in his Beautitudes. Does that mean all Christians are to have the same level of devotion as Mary?

then she is ‘glorifying herself’ in Luke 2 when she tells us that “every generation shall call me blessed.”

In all cases, Mary’s glory comes solely through God.

You left out the other half of that verse.

Luke 1:48
“48
For he has looked upon his handmaid’s lowliness; behold, from now on will all ages call me blessed.
49
The Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is his name.”

Mary is blessed for the things God has done for her even though she is but a lowly handmaid.

 

[Jim_ov_Cov]

Whoever refuses to believe the apparitions of Fatima must propose what they think really happened, and then we can tear holes in that proposal.
As I see it the visionaries were either mad, bad or truthful, and since the Church has canonised two of them, we must conclude that they were truthful.
This still doesn’t mean the belief in these visions is necessary for salvation, but I would argue that a Catholic must accept that it is reasonable to believe they took place.
And as for the ‘everything’s in scripture’ arguement, I can’t believe that informed people really accept that. It’s patent nonsense.