The problem with Fatima

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cone
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
1Lord1Faith said:
40.png
JimR-OCDS:
Christians are often more focused on sin management than on love, because they have not experienced God’s love in their souls.

Those who have and express it, are treated as New Age heretics. If you doubt me, watch how Pope Francis is treated by some Catholic in social media forums.
Click to expand...
As you have eluded to, this ^ describes a good portion of CAF.
Click to expand...
I would be hesitant to make judgments about how much anonymous people on the internet have, or don’t have, experience of God’s love in their souls.

Jesus talked about Hell a lot. Pope Francis talks about the devil, a lot, and performs exorcisms.

If a parent provides information to their teenager about the hazards of starting smoking, that is “judgmental” in one way - judgmental of smoking. I have seen many Catholic politicians who began a thread of faulty reasoning which eventually led to their promotion of abortion. They would have been better off if someone had taken the risk, early on, to give them accurate information. That person would of course been denounced as judgmental. So no one spoke up.

As a result of fear of being labelled judgmental, silence results in children being killed. A politician puts their own eternal salvation in jeopardy. We are living in a generation of silence: silent pastors, silent bishops, silent relatives, silent fellow Catholic laity.
 
Last edited:
Just fyi, Scruples and scrupulosity are not the same thing.
 
The point of showing the seers of Fatima hell was to inspire them to pray for sinners. The Blessed Virgin already assured them that they would all go to Heaven when they died. St. Jacinta in particular suffered much and offered many mortifications and prayers for the souls of sinners.
 
Salvation comes from Jesus. Yes God in the flesh. But you dont pray to the Father for salvation. Jesus said. No man comes to the Father but by me.
Acts 6:31. Believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved! It doesnt say. Might!!!be saved
GENUFLECTED???really!!
As for hell being real. See luke 16:19-31
 
pacman2076 said:
Acts 6:31. Believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved! It doesnt say. Might!!!be saved
Click to expand...
Judas believed on the Lord Jesus for awhile. Once saved, always saved?

That verse does not mean "Accept Jesus as your personal Savior this day: then 30 years from now, when you die, you go to Heaven. You can then cash in the assurance you banked today. For the next however many years, you have that assurance because of your decision, today. "

The message of Fatima is for ongoing conversion, for the rest of our lives. That is consistent with that verse.
 
Last edited:
Our Lady of Fatima made the Sun dance in the Sky a miracle witnessed by thousands of people. Also the sun got so close and dried all the clothes and grass of the people after rain. Look it up in the newspapers. So you are saying you believe that the children were lying about all that they said even though the biggest public and publicized miracle happened as the children said it would . Also the thousands of witnesses are lying who witnessed it .

We are in times of Our Lady of Fatima. This is a miracle and warning for us.

Hell is real. Just as Heaven is real . Many saints have seen and been to hell. Maybe they are all lying which is something you are entitled to believe. God allows children to be tortured and martyred too by the way. Its not like Our lovely Queen and Mother snuck away from God to show the children hell. God allows everything. I would see hell if it meant I can lay eyes on the most beautiful woman and creation and mother of God. God had a plan for these children.
 
The jews follow the first 5 books. Catholics follow whatever the pope says. True christians follow what scripture says. Religions follow whatever tradition men created to attain some worldly goal of power.
 
So no Jews follow God except through the Torah?
No Catholics follow God at all unless the pope happens to quote the Bible?
"Religions’ have nothing to do with God?

And “True Christians” follow what Scripture says.

OK, I suppose then that you don’t eat pork, don’t wear mixed clothing fabrics, worship on the Sabbath, obey the government as your lawful authority. . .oh and you must also eat and drink the flesh and blood of Jesus. And if you use your eyes to sin, you pluck them out. And you pray for the dead. And you turn the other cheek. And your women are silent in church, of course.
 
pacman2076 said:
The jews follow the first 5 books. Catholics follow whatever the pope says. True christians follow what scripture says. Religions follow whatever tradition men created to attain some worldly goal of power.
Click to expand...
pacman, I hate to break it to you, but your man-made tradition is about 500 years old. Even more ironic is that the Scriptures which were not torn out by protestants are not even believed by protestants. Faith alone? James 2:24 disagrees. Scripture alone? Well, 1 Timothy 3:15 believes the Church is also the foundation of the truth. Scripture + Church is the way to go if you believe the protestant Bible. I was a protestant earlier this year before converting. PM me if you want to duke it out there rather than with people talking about Fatima here.
 
Last edited:
Ironically, that is not in the bible.
 
Last edited:
BoomerangToo said:
40.png
pacman2076:
True christians follow what scripture says.
Click to expand...
Which scriptures do true Christians follow?
Click to expand...
True Christians follow those scriptures identified as reliable by the Magisterium. There are slight variations for Protestant and Orthodox bibles, but overall they use the same bible for their doctrine that Catholics use.

Fatima is not “public revelation”. It is considered consistent with public revelation however. A Catholic or Protestant can omit every private revelation, and belief and living the truth in public revelation can save one.

Private revelation is like music. One can totally omit music from all church services and still have the fullness of the gospel and worship. But why would you want to?

Private revelations can be bad, so some are unapproved. (For that matter, some church music is downright tacky, distracting, and heretical).

Since Catholics and Protestants trust the Magisterium to approve which gospels are in the bible, and which are not - a big responsibility! - I regard the Magisterium as trustworthy to approve, or not approve private revelations. But even approved private revelations are never taken on an equal level with public revelation.
 
Last edited:
Thank you.
Poor Lucia dos Santos was 12 years old when she had a vision of hell. No wonder she developed “scrupulosity” later in life. Hell was her vision and she lived with it for another 80 plus years. Mary communicated something to us through Lucia’s torturous vision. Maybe it is just to pray more.
 
otjm said:
The General Instructions of the Roman Missal appear to say otherwise, contrary to your opinion: "315. It is more appropriate as a sign that on an altar on which Mass is celebrated there not be a tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved.[127]
Click to expand...
All correct, but incomplete…see #314: “…the Most Blessed Sacrament should be reserved in a tabernacle in a part of the church that is truly noble, prominent, readily visible, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer.”

I think that’s JoshuaisLord’s point–the tabernacle in his examples was neither “prominent” nor “readily visible.” Tucking it away in a separate room, as I’ve seen in some churches, violates the clause in 315 that says “organically connected to the church and readily noticeable by the Christian faithful.” If you have to search for it, it’s not readily noticeable!
 
Last edited:
Yes that is the traditional view of the sun event.

L.A. Marzulie just did a teaching on this event. And describes it as a UFO . event
Outside of the known at that time
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
40.png
otjm:
The General Instructions of the Roman Missal appear to say otherwise, contrary to your opinion: "315. It is more appropriate as a sign that on an altar on which Mass is celebrated there not be a tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved.[127]
Click to expand...
All correct, but incomplete…see #314: “…the Most Blessed Sacrament should be reserved in a tabernacle in a part of the church that is truly noble, prominent, readily visible, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer.”

I think that’s JoshuaisLord’s point–the tabernacle in his examples was neither “prominent” nor “readily visible.” Tucking it away in a separate room, as I’ve seen in some churches, violates the clause in 315 that says “organically connected to the church and readily noticeable by the Christian faithful.” If you have to search for it, it’s not readily noticeable!
Click to expand...
Agreed. Adoration chapels are wonderful in themselves. But the church, itself, needs the Blessed Sacrament to be prominent and readily visible to people in the church. It should not be in a separate room, or in a remote corner of the church. It should certainly be as prominent as the lectern.
 
An attached chapel can be called a “separate room”. I have no interest entering into that debate.

The issue at hand is the placement of a free standing altar, with the tabernacle against the wall beyond the altar, or on what is often termed the “high altar”, for those parishes which did not remove the original altar.

That results in what is the source of this thread, and to the specific post to which I was replying. The debate goes on; but it seems that the debate could be alleviated by placing the tabernacle elsewhere in the church other than as in the thread.

And yes, my original post did not give the whole list as set out in the GIRM; however, it was sufficient as a reply to the post I was responding to. So the GIRM is not contrary to what I said, it is more extensive.
 
dann said:
L.A. Marzulie just did a teaching on this event. And describes it as a UFO . event
Click to expand...
The people who witnessed the event saw the Holy Family in the sky while the sun was dancing. Now why would aliens want people to believe in the Holy Family? :crazy_face:
 
Hasn’t anyone read the Wikipedia article on “Miracle of the Sun”? If you have, you’ll see it’s not quite so clear: 1 photograph of the event, showing nothing unusual; some people present saw nothing; others saw something, but their descriptions are wildly different. There are several scientific explanations for what people saw–ice crystals acting as prisms, natural reaction of the eye when you look at the sun, etc. And of course as we all know, neither the sun nor the earth actually moved at all. At best it was a matter of perception. The crowd had been told for weeks that something “special” would happen. And, as with all these “miracles” at Lourdes, Fatima, etc. people see and believe what they want to see and believe. So if you want to believe in these private revelations, knock yourself out, but don’t cast stones at those of us who are more skeptical.
 
Last edited:
It could be some sort of Galactic Conspiracy, not sure.

Perhaps we need a conspiracy subforum to hash these things out. 🤔
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top