Sr. Lucia says "Final battle...will be about Marriage and the Family."

[qui_est_ce]

I assure you science is true whether you believe it or not, that’s the great thing about math and physics.

Completely agree. And yet there is much that is true even though science hasn’t discovered it yet.

 

[qui_est_ce]

You’re trying to equate an empirically verifiable question of science with a question of ethics. This is an obvious category error.

I’ll demonstrate this with one simple question:

Can you show me that your definition of marriage is empirically verifiable through the scientific method, while showing that other definitions are not scientifically verifiable?

The obvious answer is no. So trying to equate the question of the definition of marriage with actual science (heliocentricism, genetics, etc) is a fallacious argument.

The question of the definition of marriage is a question of either 1)ethics/philosophy/natural law or 2) emotions. The classical definition is rooted in philosophy and reason, while the liberal definition is rooted in emotions and appeals to empathy.

Great post.

Science is limited by available methods. We know that many scientific theories have been proven false as new methods of exploration have become available. All one has to do is look at the advances in medicine in the past ten years. Relying solely on science severely limits what can be known about the universe.

 

[Lion_IRC]

I assure you science is true whether you believe it or not…

How can ‘science’ be true or false. Thats like saying the color green is ‘true’.
In point of fact, in the scientific method all hypotheses are merely tentative until disproven.

Eg. Science doesn’t prove Pluto is a planet.
And science often has to correct its own cough mistakes.

 

[Lion_IRC]

…It’s disingenuous and dangerous to attribute God to any type of disaster, War, or terrorist act.

Is it really?

…This way of thinking leads to fear, hatred, and justification for both.

Does it?

Then the Lord said to Moses, “Get up early in the morning and confront Pharaoh as he goes to the river and say to him, ‘This is what the Lord says: Let my people go, so that they may worship me. If you do not let my people go, I will send swarms of flies on you and your officials, on your people and into your houses. The houses of the Egyptians will be full of flies; even the ground will be covered with them.

Was Moses being “disingenuous”? He was certainly attributing this event to God.

 

[Lion_IRC]

My husband and I will definitely be fighting on the righteous good side against Satan and his evil doers.

Your profile states that you are an agnostic.
How does an agnostic know about satan and his evil doers?

 

[Expatreprocedit]

Then she concluded: ‘nevertheless, Our Lady has already crushed his head’.”

It is the male offspring of Eve- Christ- who crushes Satan’s head.

 

[fred_conty]

I don’t believe that God actively destroyed anything. That’s just a story, no one turned to salt. Many dispute the actual existence of Sodom and Gomorrah, like Noahs ark and genesis, not literal stories

We do not know for sure that these were not historical.

But even if a person were to take them as myths or some other type of fictional literature, the author has a point to make. And that point is what we consider to be the literal interpretation of scripture. And if cities were destroyed, that is a teaching, whether it be historical or mythical. And the teaching itself has to be accepted.

In these cases you mentioned, very drastic results happened because they were gravely disobedient. And we take that as a lesson not to be forgotten whether historical or fictional. The consequences of sin is death.

"O God, take pity on us and bless us, and let your face shine upon us… "
Psalm 66

 

[I_trust]

It is the male offspring of Eve- Christ- who crushes Satan’s head.

Rather…The male offspring of Mary (the new Eve)

jimmyakin.com/2014/07/who-will-crush-the-serpents-head.html
Thus St. John Paul II stated:

The Father’s plan begins to be revealed in the “Protoevangelium”, when, after the fall of Adam and Eve, God announces that he will put enmity between the serpent and the woman: it will be the woman’s son who will crush the serpent’s head (cf. Gn 3: 15Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)).

The promise begins to be fulfilled at the Annunciation, when Mary is given the proposal to become the Mother of the Savior [General Audience, Jan. 5, 2000].

In the same way, Benedict XVI continued his discussion of the passage by stating:

It [Gen. 3:15Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)] is the announcement of revenge: at the dawn of the Creation, Satan seems to have the upper hand, but the son of a woman is to crush his head. Thus, through the descendence of a woman, God himself will triumph. Goodness will triumph. That woman is the Virgin Mary of whom was born Jesus Christ who, with his sacrifice, defeated the ancient tempter once and for all. This is why in so many paintings and statues of the Virgin Immaculate she is portrayed in the act of crushing a serpent with her foot [ibid.].

So both pontiffs acknowledge a Marian dimension to the text: It is through her Son that Mary crushes the serpent’s head.
There is thus no need to pit the Marian interpretation against the Christological one. They are in harmony.

 

[I_trust]

Even though it was made public, it’s still a private revelation. Public revelation ended with the death of St. John. We are under no obligation to believe in Fatima so why would God use something private to warn the whole world?

Answer is in the Catechism…

“Throughout the ages, there have been so-called ‘private’ revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive revelation, but** to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history.** Guided by the magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium[collective sense of the faithful] knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church. Christian faith cannot accept ‘revelations’ that claim to surpass or correct the revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such ‘revelations’” (Catechism of the Catholic Church 67).

“Private” revelations can be authentic as stated by the Catechism above. And they can be a call to the entire Church (not just the one receiving the revelation) as stated tn the Catechism above. The word “private” in this context does not mean the call and content of the revelation was meant only for the individual receiving the revelation.

 

[J_Peterson]

Answer is in the Catechism…

“Private” revelations can be authentic as stated by the Catechism above. And they can be a call to the entire Church (not just the one receiving the revelation) as stated tn the Catechism above. The word “private” in this context does not mean the call and content of the revelation was meant only for the individual receiving the revelation.

I’m still free to not believe it. Honestly it doesn’t help me to more fully live the Gospel so I don’t pay much attention to these things (although I do say the Fatima prayer when I say the Rosary). I’m all for having different devotions within the Church, it’s rather beautiful (like a bouquet of hundreds of flowers) but when a private revelation is made out to be a warning that we all must pay attention to or else… I can’t get behind it. There are other things within the Church to help us live the Gospel. Personally, I’m devoted to St. Francis; he is helping me live my faith…probably in the same way that Fatima or other apparitions help others…