Three Days of Darkness?

[Sir_Knight]

The command about blood on the doorpost was a command of GOD given in the inerrant, unfailingly correct pages of Sacred Scripture.

The command about 51% minimum beeswax candles is not.

That’s the crucial difference.

But it didn’t become part of Sacred Scripture until AFTER it happened. So, again, I don’t see a difference.

 

[AlexV]

Because Sacred Scripture is finished, closed, done, over.

In a century, the Church couldn’t suddenly say, “The Messages of Fatima (or elsewhere) are now a part of the Bible.”

That’s the crucial difference.

 

[M-Dent]

Because Sacred Scripture is finished, closed, done, over…

I’m it’s correct to state finished, closed, done, over?

As the Catechism (66) notes, Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

 

[AlexV]

The corpus of divine revelation is finished.

It remains for the Church to interpret some aspects of that revelation, and that takes the form of Councils, encyclicals, infallible proclamations, etc., etc.

Not telling people to buy beeswax candles to “survive”
(sic) a coming doomsday.

 

[Sir_Knight]

It’s also important to note that the Church has NOT approved a corpus of definitive “Three Days of Darkness” prophecies/revelations/whatever you want to call them.

So to call it “God’s warning” is a personal opinion. Tom’s, and those who agree with him. Not the Church.

That’s because the church has been given the mission of spreading the message of Christ any of prophecies/revelations/whatever you want to call them are beyond the scope of that mission.

 

[mikeledes]

Except that there’s no certainty that this is God’s warning, since this is a private revelation that hasn’t been approved by the Church.

Where has the Church declared otherwise? In what forum has the Church taught that Catholics ought to have a 3 days of darkness survival kit in their homes? Where has the Church put conditions on the mercy we’re to extend to the suffering? Why aren’t priests, bishops and even the Pope speaking, writing and preaching publically about this? Don’t you think this would at least concern them somewhat that there are possibly hundreds of millions of unprepared Catholics who would die as a result of not knowing what to do in this situation?

It doesn’t matter how many times you compare this to what happened in the Old Testament. This is nothing at all like what happened to those who mocked Noah, or what happened to Lot’s wife. This is a private revelation that supposedly occured after the close of public revelation, that isn’t contained in any approved apparitions, that hasn’t been the subject of any mass attempt by the bishops, priests and popes to educate Catholics of their peril and instructs Catholics to disobey the Biblical commandment to extend mercy to the suffering.

It doesn’t wash.

I believe that such a serious event, in which people’s lives and salvation are endangered, would be preached in every Catholic pulpit if it were taken seriously by the Church. If the Church has not taken this “prophecy” seriously, why should I?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[shannyk]

Just want to add that Alex is 100% right here.

Every point he’s made has been right on target correct according to the teachings of the CC.

The misunderstanding comes in when people don’t fully know what the Church teaches regarding saints, apparitions, public and private revelation, sacred scripture, and the Old and New covenants.

If everyone read up on those there would be nothing to discuss here.

As the Catechism (66) notes, Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

Yes exactly. This only bolsters what Alex said. Revelation IS already complete (as it states above), and it remains for US to glean from it all of it’s intended meaning. That comes from human growth and expanded knowledge and understanding, not from further revelation (as this clearly states).

 

[M-Dent]

The corpus of divine revelation is finished.

It remains for the Church to interpret some aspects of that revelation, and that takes the form of Councils, encyclicals, infallible proclamations, etc., etc. .

Certainly.

I’d also note, the Church has proclaimed a few private revelations as “worthy of belief”. Such as the events of Fatima and Lourdes. With the prudence of the Church, and her guidance by the Holy Spirit, and using one’s own reason, I tend to take them quite seriously.

 

[shannyk]

I’d also note, the Church has proclaimed a few private revelations as “worthy of belief”. Such as the events of Fatima and Lourdes. With the prudence of the Church, and her guidance by the Holy Spirit, and using one’s own reason, I tend to take them quite seriously.

As well you should.

The revelation(s) that speak of the Three Days of Darkness do not have such approval. Even if they did, they can not be ‘authenticated’, but rather they are said to be ‘safe’ and free from any error that would endanger the faithful.

From Catholicism for Dummies…

Apparitions are not part of public revelation, which was complete with the death of the last apostle, and so are not obligatory for the faithful to believe. Apparitions are private spiritual experiences of an individual or individuals. When the Church approves them, it does not determine that the apparition actually occurred, since it is actually a personal and subjective experience. Rather, it states that the content of the message is consistent with Catholic doctrine and that nothing stands in the way of fostering devotion to Jesus or Mary under particular titles or in visiting places for pilgrimage.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Because Sacred Scripture is finished, closed, done, over.

In a century, the Church couldn’t suddenly say, “The Messages of Fatima (or elsewhere) are now a part of the Bible.”

That’s the crucial difference.

But that doesn’t mean that divine revelation has stopped.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Except that there’s no certainty that this is God’s warning, since this is a private revelation that hasn’t been approved by the Church.

Where has the Church declared otherwise? In what forum has the Church taught that Catholics ought to have a 3 days of darkness survival kit in their homes? Where has the Church put conditions on the mercy we’re to extend to the suffering? Why aren’t priests, bishops and even the Pope speaking, writing and preaching publically about this? Don’t you think this would at least concern them somewhat that there are possibly hundreds of millions of unprepared Catholics who would die as a result of not knowing what to do in this situation?

It doesn’t matter how many times you compare this to what happened in the Old Testament. This is nothing at all like what happened to those who mocked Noah, or what happened to Lot’s wife. This is a private revelation that supposedly occured after the close of public revelation, that isn’t contained in any approved apparitions, that hasn’t been the subject of any mass attempt by the bishops, priests and popes to educate Catholics of their peril and instructs Catholics to disobey the Biblical commandment to extend mercy to the suffering.

It doesn’t wash.

As I said earlier, the Church’s mission is to preach the message of Christ – which is why they are not authorized to go around telling folks to be prepared with bee wax candles and no where does it state that divine revelation has stopped.

 

[shannyk]

M-Dent also neglected to include the entire passage he sighted from the catechism. It says…

66 “The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

 

[M-Dent]

As well you should.

The revelation(s) that speak of the Three Days of Darkness do not have such approval. Even if they did, they can not be ‘authenticated’, but rather they are said to be ‘safe’ and free from any error that would endanger the faithful. .

Right. Thus I don’t have much concern with something that isn’t even interpreted by the Church.

Just understanding events such as Fatima and spiritual fruits of how God allows the intercession of the Saints everyday is value enough to know our established Faith is lived out everday.

 

[djrakowski]

As I said earlier, the Church’s mission is to preach the message of Christ – which is why they are not authorized to go around telling folks to be prepared with bee wax candles and no where does it state that divine revelation has stopped.

No, but the Church has stated, as quoted in the Catechism earlier in this thread, that *public *revelation is closed, and that the content of *private *revelation is *not *binding on the faithful.

And, who cares if the Church isn’t authorized (whatever *that *means) to tell people to stock up on doomsday supplies? If the Church knows this alleged set of prophecies is true, then why would it avoid engaging in public ministry that could easily prevent the death and suffering of perhaps millions of Catholics? What does it say of a Church that supposedly knows that we’re all going to face the possibility of death in a horrible cataclysm, a death that could be easily avoided, but does nothing to warn us about it? Such a Church is not to be trusted as Christ’s Church.

Perhaps there’s another explanation: the Church *has *engaged in the activities that help us avoid suffering - the preaching of the Gospel, and not fear-mongering.

 

[Sir_Knight]

The feast of Divine Mercy is APPROVED by the church but NOT binding on the faithful because it came from private revelation.

 

[shannyk]

As I said earlier, the Church’s mission is to preach the message of Christ – which is why they are not authorized to go around telling folks to be prepared with bee wax candles

Exactly. Because Christs message for salvation doesn’t include beeswax candles. If it did, he would have made sure that the Church would tell us definitively. He doesn’t leave salvation to chance or to subjective private revelation.

 

[shannyk]

The feast of Divine Mercy is APPROVED by the church but NOT binding on the faithful because it came from private revelation.

Divine Mercy only edifies what we already knew through public revelation about God’s Merciful nature. It wasn’t a new concept that came through a private revelation, and it doesn’t attempt to insert a new concept of salvation. Actually, that’s a great example of
how private revelations can bolster and help us better experience the faith that we already have through the Church’s teaching.

 

[djrakowski]

Divine Mercy only edifies what we already knew through public revelation about God’s Merciful nature. It wasn’t a new concept that came through a private revelation, and it doesn’t attempt to insert a new concept of salvation. Actually, that’s a great example of
how private revelations can bolster and help us better experience the faith that we already have through the Church’s teaching.

Right - I also find it illustrative that our late Holy Father, John Paul II, went to great lengths to promulgate the Feast of the Divine Mercy, but instituted no rite to bless “Three Days of Darkness Survival Kits.”

 

[AlexV]

The Church hasn’t approved the Three Days of Darkness, on any level.

 

[shannyk]

Right - I also find it illustrative that our late Holy Father, John Paul II, went to great lengths to promulgate the Feast of the Divine Mercy, but instituted no rite to bless “Three Days of Darkness Survival Kits.”

Is it even conceivable that it could be ‘required’ to have something material for our spiritual well being? Where does that leave people who don’t/can’t have these ‘things’? I don’t have to have a Bible, a Rosary, a Scapular, or any Sacramental item to be saved. Why on earth would I have to have a beeswax candle? It’s rather heretical to say that God would require us to possess material goods to achieve salvation, or even to be ‘safe’ from Demons etc.