Unity Publishing?

[Eliza10]

You’ll get no sympathy for your cause from me; I’m not throwing Rick Salbato under the bus…
[and] …
I think that the purpose of this thread was to shoot a messenger!

You can see in what I have written that “throwing” this person under a bus is not my intention. Look and you will see that I am criticizing his manner of slandering an alleged visonary. Its not right and not Catholic. While it is just and right to criticze this, attacking a person would not be. I’m not doing that.

And also your guess at my inner motive is incorrect. I’d rather not have presumptions made about my motives - I’m sure you wouldn’t either.

In my opinion it’s an error to think that alleged seers and alleged locutionists must be considered authentic until a Church investigation proves them to be false.

I haven’t said anything like this. I think its fine to have an opinion such as yours, or any opinion of whether messages are false or true, while one waits for the Church’s decision. Its particularly helpful when one uses the truth revealed to us by the Magisterium of the Chruch as a measure of what is true or not. It would be helpful if Rick did this rather than spread gossip about the messenger. I am like most sincere Catholics - interested in the truth of a matter, not gossip and cruel innuendos.

I’ve read some of “Anne’s” "messages’. They are obviously not authentic locutions; Rick’s findings only support the obvious.!

You read the messages, and do not think they are authentic, and I respect your opinion. Your opinion holds a weight, but it doesn’t enlighten, since you don’t tell us why you have this opinion.

Then again, my unexplained opinion (that the messages ring true) also does not enlighten. In respect of the guidelines of this forum I am sticking to the topic and avoiding a debate about messages from a yet-unapproved visionary.

I strongly disagree that Ricks nefarious “findings” support anything obvious - or righteous.

(Here’s “good and true and righteous”):

.http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/uploads/images/Pope Benedict#1#.jpg

 

[adrift]

You’ll get no sympathy for your cause from me; I’m not throwing Rick Salbato under the bus.

In my opinion it’s an error to think that alleged seers and alleged locutionists must be considered authentic until a Church investigation proves them to be false.

I’ve read some of “Anne’s” "messages’. They are obviously not authentic locutions; Rick’s findings only support the obvious.

I think that the purpose of this thread was to shoot a messenger!

Your assessment is right on. She wishes to discredit Rick by calling him uncharitable. She is using a passive aggressive style in order to distract from her true purpose. She doesn’t like that he tells the truth. She can’t attack on the truth so she slanders.

 

[Eliza10]

Your assessment is right on. She wishes to discredit Rick by calling him uncharitable. She is using a passive aggressive style in order to distract from her true purpose. She doesn’t like that he tells the truth. She can’t attack on the truth so she slanders.

Wow, adrift. I know you are not my psychoanalyst since I don’t have one. Its craziness for any person to assume to know my “wishes”, my “true purpose”, or what “she doesn’t like”. This is not possible, unless you claim to be a seer of some kind? God alone knows my heart. Discussions pressuming on my inner motives are off topic here, and inappropriate anywhere in this forum.

If I slander anywhere I want to know. I am human and I can sin. But God won’t have me take on guilt for something I haven’t done. I am not calling Salbato uncharitable. I am calling his gossip uncharitable. It is right to judge actions, not persons. This is what I have done. If you think I have done otherwise, than as my sister in Christ, please point it out so I can consider, with the help of God, if I am in error in this matter.

 

[adrift]

She has permission of her local bishop to produce and disseminate these books while he is in the process for the Imprimitaur. Bishops, piests and theologians thast have examined the works and say are in line with Church doctrine or teaching.

…http://campus.udayton.edu/mary//images/olr06.jpg

This is what she claims and it should jump at everyone that the imprimatur is the permission to print. So it is double talk that this person is using to fool gullible people who have no idea what it means to have an imprimatur.
Salbato challenges that there is even a bishop which it looks like there is not.
Here is a letter exchange between this woman’s representative and someone who was trying to find out information. This is very shady and Unity Press has not slandered her.

 

[Eliza10]

…Salbato challenges that there is even a bishop which it looks like there is not.

Here is a letter exchange between this woman’s representative and someone who was trying to find out information. This is very shady and Unity Press has not slandered her.

LOL, the only things shady there is that Michael person. And if you read Salbato of course you think there is a bishop. Read from primary source not hostile secondary ones, and you will find ther truth, if that is what you truly seek. If instead you are looking for gossip and arrogance, go no further than Unity.

Adrift, If you or anyone else wants to bash people, you must add Unity Publishing to your favorites. I hope you are not a person who likes to bash people. But the fact is there are those who seem have a preference for denouncing other Catholics, and with much authority and diligence, too. Its a hobby for them I guess.

At Unity Publishing , it seems there are an abundance of those who play the part of judge or “investigative journalist!”, and they do it with arrogance and superiority.

The guy in your Unity link sounds slimey to me. Thats just my opinion! Anyone else can read your link and form their own opinion. But I do thank you very much you for providing a link that sop clearly supports the purpose of this thread, which is to display real concerns about Unity Publishing.

Boy, the velvety charm of the writer in your link turns me off: *"*Thank you for providing the information on Bishop __, and forgive me for my curiosity, but I’m a little confused."

Somehow, just somehow, I don’t think the writer is* really* wanting to be forgiven for his so-called “curiosity” (I think he really means “dirt-digging”). I sincerely don’t think he’s thinks for one second that he is “confused”. Insincerity is what I smell when I read that. Thats my reaction. You are welcome to yours. An opinion is an opinion and I am offering mine.

Please don’t hijack this thread to talk about the Anne and the mesages that her local bishop has given her permission to distribute. If anyone is interested, they can go ahead read the slimey Unity links given in this thread. And if they are truly interested in the truth they can read the eminent and authoritative support for Anne’s Catholicity and genuineness at directionforourtimes.com/ and also on that home page the bulk of the work is available to read all or in part online in pdf. Interested parties are welcome to compare and contrast the two and start their own thread here with their findings.

In light of how Salbato proclaims harsh and unfair judgment based on shoddy and shady research, I’d be inclined to see what he said about other servants of Our Lord and Our Lady - and then do some further research, to contrast the two. I would expect to discover some real kindred souls of Our Lord tossed in his reject pile!

…http://a.abcnews.com/images/Nightline/nm_jesus_070507_ms.jpg

 

[Ave_Maria_1]

I am very much NOT in favor of “anne” the lay apostle and the need to promote her volumes. I know many people are gaga over her. Our Lord did not say to spread volumes of a future locutionists works but to spread the gospel.

She will be Our Lord’s closest advisor upon His soon return???

My 'Climb the Mountain" is filled with underlined things that are red flags.

Yet I have friends who almost want to cut me off because I am not enralled with this latest visionary; they look to her for guidance. For a mom of 6 kids, she sure has a lot of time to write.

I give :nope:

 

[adrift]

Wow, adrift. I know you are not my psychoanalyst since I don’t have one. Its craziness for any person to assume to know my “wishes”, my “true purpose”, or what “she doesn’t like”. .

What rubbish. I notice that you did not address the main point. You can’t attack the truth so you attack the person presenting the truths. Of course it is possible to deduce from ones words, what there purpose is.
Lets look at yours

Yes, it is not Jesus-like. Not at all.
Yes, paranoid, or something. Its just not right.
In your face: I think, is putting is overly charitably! (But, better to err on the side of charity
They sound like lies to me
I think you should be careful about that. Its serious sin to spread lies about someone - and the way this article is written, there is no way of knowing if Salbato’s completely unsubstantiated accusations are true…

You accuse him of lying. Do you have proof he lied or is it unsubstantiated slander?
Your purposes become quite clear in these statements

So why is Salbato writing this stuff? Because its a temptation for a writer to write Enquirer-style investigative reports? It certainly gets attention. Its big business for the gossip rags. People gobble it up! And no one cares if its true! They get a good feeling - that they have some kind of “insider info”!
I think if you don’t see anything wrong with this article, then you probably have been desensitized, and perhaps our discussion here will resensitize you. I think we should all be sensitve when a brother or sister in Christ is disparaged or slandered. It hurts Jesus, so it should hurt us.
Well Jesus was rough with the sinners in the Temple. Rough is okay for a just cause. If you don’t see any injustice at all in what Salbato wrote, then I believe you have, as you say, become desensitized.
My point is that Unity Publishing is a very tainted secondary information source. Yes, clearly, Rick Salbato “likes to investigate alleged apparitions”. But he is Catholic - therefore he needs to go about his chosen work as we all are instructed by Our Lord: with Christlike charity. That is grossly lacking in the example I gave (and Lux_et_Veratias confirms is lacking elsewhere on his website).

I believe it is irrepsonsible to quote this website as a source for that reason. Quote the primary source directly rather than risk that you lead astray another who then may explore other parts of this disreputable website, and may expose himself to Salbato’s ugly unsubstantiated, undocumented gossip stories. Its called slander. Enquireer-style stories are always a draw - away from Our Lord. In the case I cited, its a very humble Catholic he calumniates, who has support of her local bishop to do what she does, and has also been praised for her obediance to the Magisterium of Our Church.

You can see in what I have written that “throwing” this person under a bus is not my intention. Look and you will see that I am criticizing his manner of slandering an alleged visonary. Its not right and not Catholic. While it is just and right to criticze this, attacking a person would not be. I’m not doing that.

You AREN’T attacking him?
Of course you are.

 

[Eliza10]

Hi Adrift,

My post no. #25 is full of errors and hard to read. I just reread it, oh my - I had been awake 48 hours straight when I wrote that - my mind was racing but apparantly my accuracy way off. Geesh.

I really do hope we can find a point of agreement in some place and at least agree to disagree on things. I really don’t want to argue just to argue. And it is okay for people to have two different opinions. Don’t you agree?

What rubbish. I notice that you did not address the main point. You can’t attack the truth so you attack the person presenting the truths. Of course it is possible to deduce from ones words, what there purpose is.
Lets look at yours [deleted]

You accuse him of lying. Do you have proof he lied or is it unsubstantiated slander?
Your purposes become quite clear in these statements [deleted]

You AREN’T attacking him?
Of course you are.

I honestly don’t think I am attacking him. I think I am attacking his very wrong, very unCatholic way of so-called reporting on other Catholics. I think its just and right to point it out, because of his public website labeled “Catholic”.

I think he should call his website “DISunity publishing”.

I think I am speaking strongly, but not nearly so strongly as he does of others when he slanders what he deduces is their probable character and probable motives.

I do think the situation calls for strong words. My biggest complaint is that he lacks charity. “They’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love,” may be a children’s song, but its a great truth of God. Its right at the top of things Jesus wants us to know and practice.

My having uncharitable words for his actions, or attacking his actions, is NOT the same thing as having uncharitable words for him or attacking him.

I choose my words carefully, but I can make a mistake, and don’t mind that being pointed out. But as far as my accusing him of lying, I did not. You can see, since you quoted it here, that I said “It sounds like lies to me”. Its my honest opinion. “Sounds like to me” is not accusing, its opining.

…http://italophiles.com/images/angels11.jpg

 

[adrift]

I choose my words carefully, but I can make a mistake, and don’t mind that being pointed out. But as far as my accusing him of lying, I did not. You can see, since you quoted it here, that I said “It sounds like lies to me”. Its my honest opinion. “Sounds like to me” is not accusing, its opining.

It is awful hard even with little icons to tell tone in a post. I know that what I am about to say would loose some of the edge if you could hear me. I guess that is why we really need to give the benefit of the doubt and clarify by asking questions when in doubt. Everything we write is merely our opinion. This is what I see in your post. Your opinion is that he lies. I really don’t see a difference between accusing him of lying and having an opinion that he is lying. It seems the same to me. You say he slanders. Slander is another word for lying. What he expresses are his opinions. On the subject of web pages, I don’t trust any web page 100%. I would not judge his web page as not being Catholic.:nope: He raises questions. Questions that should be answered in your own mind especially if you disagree. The person using his site must use their own common sense that is true of all sites. When I investigate the truth, I try to look at all sides those who agree and those who don’t. I also try to find sources other than the web. Sometimes that is difficult or impossible. I don’t take anything at face value except if the Church has ruled on it.

Post 25 was so out of character for you that it made me very sad.

 

[Eliza10]

It is awful hard even with little icons to tell tone in a post. I know that what I am about to say would loose some of the edge if you could hear me. I guess that is why we really need to give the benefit of the doubt and clarify by asking questions when in doubt…

Thanks for clarifying! This is all true.

…Everything we write is merely our opinion. This is what I see in your post. Your opinion is that he lies. I really don’t see a difference between accusing him of lying and having an opinion that he is lying. It seems the same to me. …

Maybe. I don’t know, maybe I should say: falsehoods? Insincerity? In the example I gave, the writer Michael strikes me as insincere. If someone was questioning me like that, my thought would be, “You don’t want to know the truth. You want to find me wrong, and it doesn’t matter what the truth is.”

Maybe also I should be more specific about what I think is not true. Maybe I’ll do that later.

…You say he slanders. Slander is another word for lying. What he expresses are his opinions. .

The example I gave is pretty clear, though.

…On the subject of web pages, I don’t trust any web page 100%. I would not judge his web page as not being Catholic.:nope: …

I think its Catholic in name - but detracting fellow Catholics the way he does is not a Catholic practice. Its a worldy practice.

…He raises questions. Questions that should be answered in your own mind especially if you disagree…

Its the baseless questions against character that he is raising that is so objectionable.

…The person using his site must use their own common sense that is true of all sites…

I agree. I gave the example of how he “investigated” Anne (rather than investigate her messages) so that poeple could see that the way he investigates is suspect. I think you only have to read the pages linked here and you can see.

I have more to say on that - because, as I said, I should be more specific since there seems to be a need that I should. I’ll do that in another post. Its been a full week for me and I’m so tired.

…When I investigate the truth, I try to look at all sides those who agree and those who don’t. I also try to find sources other than the web. Sometimes that is difficult or impossible. I don’t take anything at face value except if the Church has ruled on it…

That works. In addition, I use my intuition. Most importantly, I keep my heart open to the Holy Spirit, and I trust Him to lead me into all truth. I purposely stay open to seeing what is true in a thing while asking God to show me what is not. I also do not let myself get intimidated by someone’s overly-intellectual or overly authoritative style. I forge on with confidence knowing the Holy Spirit can lead me into all truth no matter how thick the woods are.

Also, as far as websites, I read with discernment how the person writes. Does he truly seem like a truth-seeker? Thats key for me. When I read truth, when I read the words of a truth-seeker, my spirit soars.

What I saw at that dis-Unity site of which I speak bothered me so much I opened this thread. I had thought once that was a good site, and now I think quite the opposite. I see that he is one who is quick to denounce, and is not careful to investigate real facts. It all gives me a bad feleing but I will be more specific in another post.

I think its very good that you do not take anything at face value unless it has already been approved of the Chruch. The trouble with some people, though, and I believe Salbato is one - is that they look at anything not approved by the Church as very suspect, and then are very vocal in accusing and detracting. Its a matter of “guilty until proven innocent” for them. Then in the case of Salbato with Anne, I guess he ignores proof of innocence. But more on that later.

…http://images.allposters.com/images/CLI/NG-1575_b.jpg

Post 25 was so out of character for you that it made me very sad.

Well I was annoyed. I will look it over later and see if its as bad as you say.

 

[byers]

I am very much NOT in favor of “anne” the lay apostle and the need to promote her volumes. I know many people are gaga over her. Our Lord did not say to spread volumes of a future locutionists works but to spread the gospel.

She will be Our Lord’s closest advisor upon His soon return???

My 'Climb the Mountain" is filled with underlined things that are red flags.

Yet I have friends who almost want to cut me off because I am not enralled with this latest visionary; they look to her for guidance. For a mom of 6 kids, she sure has a lot of time to write.

I give :nope:

Yes and it looks like it pays well too

 

[Ave_Maria_1]

In my early years of my reconversion, I was an apparition and message chaser! I followed Medj. and other visionaries (so-called).
I think many who do this are like I was–spiritually starved in liturgical deserts. But at some point in time, one MUST see to their own relationship to Our Lord and Our Lady and begin to look less and less to what other self proclaimed ‘seers’ are saying.

My big doubts on Medj. (and I have been there) began with the blatant disobedience on the part of the seers and parish. And then the calumniation of the bishop. Never would Our Lady allow this! But in the continuing banal messages, she never een addresses it. Disobedience is VERY bad! The bishop bashing is as well. That Ordinary is not there by accident. IF God wishes the messages to have approval, it will one day happen but obedience must be seen on the part of those involved for them to ever be accounted holy themselves.

I looked through Unity publishing. I cannot disagree with what is there. Some call it ‘uncharitable’ to publish negative things and in this politically correct world, that is understandable. Was Our Lord ‘uncharitable’ when He called the pharisees a brood of vipers or when He told some that they would die in their sins??? No. The truth can be ‘offensive’ and that is not a sin.

Medj. could indeed bring schism in the Church if many of the
(even wonderful and holy) followers determine to follow the ‘gospa’ if the Vatican rules negatively. Folks, we could be being set up here!

And that ‘anne’ is yet another person putting out reams of ‘inspiring’ messages and seeking people to purchase her volumes. There have been many like that over the past dry decades. But I have a BIG problem with her stuff. So all the saints in heaven are grateful to her!** And her salvation is assured!!! She is false.

One needs supernatural glasses to look at these things.

We must develop our own prayer lives built on an intense sacramental life and be detached from seeking signs and wonders.

 

[adrift]

I think for this discussion I need to post two things.
The first is what is procedure is used.

The Church, given teaching authority by Christ and as the conduit for fullness of Truth on this earth, has the obligation to preserve Her sheep from deviations from the Truth and to to guarantee them the “objective possibility of professing the true faith without error” (Catechism, No. 890). Because of this, the Bishops will look at books published by Catholics on Catholic matters in their dioceses, giving them their “okay” if nothing therein is found to be contrary to the Faith (relevant Canon Law: “Title IV: The Means of Social Communication,” ¶ 822-832)

The procedure works like this: when a Catholic writes a book on faith, morals, theology, liturgy, books on prayer, editions of Sacred Scripture, etc., he will submit his manuscript to his diocese’s Censor. If the Censor finds no problem with it, he will give it his stamp, which reads “Nihil Obstat,” or “nothing stands in the way.” He then sends it to the Bishop for his review. If the Bishop finds nothing objectionable, he gives the book his “Imprimatur” which means, “let it be printed.”

If the Catholic writing the book is a member of a religious order, the manuscript is first sent to his religious superior before it is sent to the Censor and Bishop. If the religious superior finds no impediment to publication, he will give the book his stamp of “Imprimi Potest,” which means “it can be printed.”

Nowadays, after the Imprimatur, you might see these words:

The "Nihil Obstat" and "Imprimatur" are official declarations that a book or pamphlet is free of doctrinal or moral error. No implication is contained therein that those who have granted the Nihil Obstat and the Imprimatur agree with the content, opinions or statements expressed.

 

[adrift]

Second one

Norms for Discernment

1. The first norm for evaluating miraculous events is that there be moral certainty, or at least great probability, that something miraculous has occurred. The commission may interview the visionaries, call other witnesses, visit the site of the events.

1. The second norm deals with the personal qualities of the subjects who claim to have had the apparition; they must be mentally sound, honest, sincere, of upright conduct, obedient to ecclesiastical authorities, able to return to the normal practices of the faith (such as participation in communal worship, reception of the sacraments).

1. A third category deals with the content of the revelation or message: it must be theologically acceptable and morally sound and free of error.

1. The fourth positive criterion is that the apparition must result in positive spiritual assets which endure (prayer, conversion, increase of charity).

These four criteria may also be restated in a negative way. There must be no doubt that what is occurring is truly exceptional and beyond human explanation. There must be no doctrinal error attributed to God or to the Blessed Virgin Mary or some other saint. The third negative criterion is that there must be no hint of financial advantage to anyone connected with the apparitions, nor must any of the visionaries be accused of serious moral improprieties at the time when the visions were being received, nor may there be evidence of mental illness or psychopathic tendencies

 

[adrift]

It is a legitimate course of inquiry to look into the background of all involved in a claim of supernatural events.

It is a legitimate inquiry to ask if there is Church approval and that the steps of inquiry have followed the rules of the Church.

The example I gave is pretty clear, though.

I am loss when you say the example you gave. I am not sure to what example you are referring

Its the baseless questions against character that he is raising that is so objectionable.

Hmmmmm. Baseless? I hate the pun but what do you base that they are baseless on?

I agree. I gave the example of how he “investigated” Anne (rather than investigate her messages) so that poeple could see that the way he investigates is suspect. I think you only have to read the pages linked here and you can see.

I have already stated that it is a legitimate investigation to see who the seer is. If she is mentally sound, honest, sincere, of upright conduct, obedient to ecclesiastical authorities, able to return to the normal practices of the faith. If there isn’t a problem then there should be no objection to this investigation.

hat works. In addition, I use my intuition. Most importantly, I keep my heart open to the Holy Spirit, and I trust Him to lead me into all truth. I

That’s why I trust the Church since that is where the Holy Spirit operates.

What I saw at that dis-Unity site of which I speak bothered me so much I opened this thread. I had thought once that was a good site, and now I think quite the opposite. I see that he is one who is quick to denounce, and is not careful to investigate real facts. It all gives me a bad feleing but I will be more specific in another post.

I do not see evidence that he is quick to denounce nor that he is not careful. I can’t help wonder if you come to these conclusion because he is negative to something you accept.
I have attempted to use your link to read some of her but I couldn’t find anything but a very lucrative store.
I am interested in what you believe he slandered her with so far I can’t see it but maybe when you point it out it will be clear.

 

[Eliza10]

I am very much NOT in favor of “anne” the lay apostle and the need to promote her volumes…

When I first read this comment, I decided to not respond since I really hadn’t intended to discuss Anne, and because its okay to have this opinion, and because I think many people, out of love for their faith, err on the sie of caution. Its certainly better to err on the side of caution than the side of error. But after reading your second post, I have mroe thoughts.

I know many people are gaga over her. Our Lord did not say to spread volumes of a future locutionists works but to spread the gospel…

…and if neccesary, use words.

There are many ways to share the gospel. As a former Protestant, I am continually amazed at the many different ways God works in the Catholic Chruch. There are many ways to grow in Christ, as we can see from our many different Saints.

Anne’s bishop seems to think that spreading the gospel is exactly what her works do, and that is why, as an extensively trained teacher of the Catholic faith and as an authority of Our Church, he is granting permission that they be distributed. He has even assigned a Priest, as a spiritual director, to oversee the whole things. So - its clearly more than a casual nod of approval he is giving. Its a commitment to Anne and her work. He is truly standing behind her.

So, the gaga people are gaga over the gospel. Over what Anne’s bishop, Sister Brige McKenna, and others think is so wonderful. They are aware that Anne says these are the very words of Our Lord, Our Lady, God the father, and the Saints, and they stand behind it, and they say its all Catholic.

Yes, the gaga people are gaga over what is undeniably Catholic. That should make you happy. Its all Catholic. They are certainly not gaga over error, acording to her bishop.

We live in such a time of error, and bad teaching, especially in our American Church. Its easy to overreact, hold tight to the truths we know and are sure of, and be suspicious of every other Catholic’s experience. But with that last part, prudence is called for. God is everywhere, and we can count on that he is workign in peoples lives, wherever they are in thier lives. So we must take care not to be overly critical of the Lord’s work in others.

I say it should be no surprise that God grants special graces - special prophets for our times. We really need them. If the local Church isn’t teaching, the people need something.

I do know that Jesus wants us to have unity. He prays for it. It is one of the major prayer intentions of his Sacred Heart. We must strive for unity within our Church at least. Let us begin by not spreading dis-unity. Lets respect other people’s Catholic spirituality – unless it is against the teachings of our Church, then of course we need to lovingly point them in the right direction.

One never tires of the work of the Lord. It is new every time. There are so many ways to spread the truth.

She will be Our Lord’s closest advisor upon His soon return???..

This doesn’t sound like anything I have read so far, and I have read most of Climbing the Mountain, which I borrowed from a local parish library. Anne is so very humble. We can all learn from someone more humble than us.

So perhaps, being out of context, you have it confused. I do know that calling Christ “The Returning King” is as true today as when Christ promised His “soon return” to His apostles, as we see in scripture.

If she said that very thing, it must make sense in the context - because it didn’t seem to bother her bishop, or all those others with more training, faith, theoloogy, credentials and holiness than you and I.

My 'Climb the Mountain" is filled with underlined things that are red flags…

Well, look at all those others who did not find anything to underline, and no red flags. Think of it - her bishop is behind her personally, and behind her work. That alone should make you realize the likely truth - that you aren’t seeing things right with regard to this.

Yet I have friends who almost want to cut me off because I am not enralled with this latest visionary; they look to her for guidance…

Is that really why they have backed away? Could it be you have expressed a negative or judgemental view of their renewal of faith? When people are vocally distainful of what is precious to you, its human nature to back away.

For a mom of 6 kids, she sure has a lot of time to write]…

The more I read, the more I see how it can be done with her 6 kids. Truly, with God, all things are possible and these works reinforce that for me. They encourage anyone that they can have an involved and intimate walk with Our Lord, moment by moment, and work and serve Him, no matter how packed their life is. The readers can see exactly how she does it with 6 kids. :yup:

 

[adrift]

Anne’s bishop seems to think that spreading the gospel is exactly what her works do, and that is why, as an extensively trained teacher of the Catholic faith and as an authority of Our Church, he is granting permission that they be distributed.

I have looked and looked and I cannot find where her Bishop has given her an Nihil Obstat which means there cannot be an imprimatur. I find no evidence that he has granted distribution. The web site post a letter from her bishop. Nowhere in that letter does it grant permission to distribute. Perhaps you have another source. You have the book what does it have?

 

[Eliza10]

I have looked and looked and I cannot find where her Bishop has given her an Nihil Obstat which means there cannot be an imprimatur…

I never said that her Bishop gave her a Nihil Obstat. I never said there was an (name removed by moderator)rimatur. I said her local Bishop gave her permission to distribute her writings. He said that her spirituality and the spiritual path she proposes are in conformity with the Catholic Church and of the great spiritual leaders of the past and present. What words of praise and support! Wow!

… I find no evidence that he has granted distribution. The web site post a letter from her bishop. Nowhere in that letter does it grant permission to distribute. …

Well all her books say she has permission. Also, in the letter on the website (I assume you mean on this page: directionforourtimes.com/churchposition.html ) her Bishop writes:
"I have asked a priest of the diocese, Fr. Darragh Connolly, to assist in the work of the movement and to ensure that in all its works and publications it remains firmly within the teaching and practice of the Catholic Church. "

Why would the Bishop assign a Priest of his own Diocese to assist in the work of the movement and oversee its publications if he didn’t give permission for there to be publications??

See, your question doesn’t make sense.

The Bishop also writes: “*She has submitted all her writings to me and will not publish anything without my permission. She has submitted her writings to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and I have done so, as well. *”

Then he gives his address and invites you to call the Bishop’s representative if you have any further questions.

What more evidence could you possiblly need than that? It looks like its all there on the table. No secrets! Even an invitaiton to ask more.

Did you simply miss this when you read the letter? I don’t understand. Were you just overlooking? You are tired, maybe?

…Perhaps you have another source. You have the book what does it have?

I have exactly what it says on the website it has. Permission from her local bishop. No imprimitaur. When the Bishop writes, "*The movement is in its infancy and does not as yet enjoy canonical status. ", *then I can only assume he means the Church takes its time with movements like this. I can only assume that Imprimitaurs are not awarded automatically to those who are personally hearing from Jesus through inner locutions. I mean, do you know of a single other person who has received inner locutions from our Lord who recieved an Imprimitaur while their messages were new? I am thinking of Saint Faustina whose books were put on the Index of Forbidden Books, but now they carry Imprimitaurs…

Also both Anne and her Bishop have submitted all her works to the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith.

So I do not understnad your point here. Are you simply saying that you only read things with Imprimitaurs? Then just go ahead and say it. Its your perogative to read things only with Imprimitaurs. But the Church does not require that of us.

Then why even get in this debate, if its all closed to you anyway?

.http://www.wga.hu/art/v/verocchi/painting/baptism1.jpg

 

[Eliza10]

Hi Adrift, I can’t answer all now, its late. Especailly I don’t like to read that so-called “Unity” site but I guess I can again later. Just a couple of points for now:

…That’s why I trust the Church since that is where the Holy Spirit operates…
…

100% true. But its not the only place the Holy Spirit operates. He is supposed to operate in us. We are supposed to be born of the water AND the Spirit.

…I have attempted to use your link to read some of her but I couldn’t find anything …
…

At the home page, you scroll down almost to the bottom, on the right, where there is a little moving icon of a green book with turning pages. It says free downloadable pdf, and you click on either the volumes or the booklets.

Also you can download and listen to Anne’s talks online.

So thats where it is. But you know, if you don’t look at it with openness that it could be of God, then you could completely miss the hand of God. I know, because I tell my Protestant freinds about Catholicism, and, even though they love Jesus and embrace his truth, in thier hearts and in His word, the Bible, they have pre-determined that the Catholic Chruch is wrong and they simply cannot see the truth in it. “Gobbledy-gook” says my truly good, truly Christ-loving Protestant friend when I tell her wonderful Catholic truths.

The only way I could cross the divide between Protestant and Catholic was a commitment to doing what Paul says to do - “find a point of agreement with people”. I read something Catholic, figuring I coud agree with something, and in my openness to truth, found I could agree with too much…

I suggest you read Anne’s works and really anything else with the same spirit of openness. Ask the Holy Spirit to be the one, not you, to discern whats wrong.

…but a very lucrative store.
…

– and byers also writes here: “and it looks like it pays well, too”

Both you and Byers make accusatory insinuations (above) concerning the finances of this movement - one that is overseen by her Bishop’s appointed representative. What is it that you both think that Anne, her Bishop, and her Bishops representative are doing financially that is so questionable? What evidence do you base your insinuations on?

Its very nice that some organiztions have free nuns or monks with vows of poverty working for them, but thats not always possible especially in these times where there is a shortage of nuns and monks. Some organizations have large endowments from wealthy people. Some send cheap trinkets or labels with your wrong name or address on them, hoping to recieve donations. There are many different ways to raise neccesary funds to keep afloat but they don’t all work for everybody.

This looks like this is a little self-supporting organization to me. The $5.00 books and $2 booklets, nicely bound on nice paper, with a choice of languages languages, seem fairly priced - not lucrative. Why do you look it it and suspect something completely opposite? If it was so “lucrative” then why would the books be downloadable, free? Doesn’t sound money-grubbing to me.

 

[Eliza10]

I am loss when you say the example you gave. I am not sure to what example you are referring

Referring back to what I mentioned earlier here, I was really turned off by “Unity”'s exposure of who the real Anne may be. Our Lady told Anne to remain as anonymous as possible, to protect her vocation as a wife and mother of six children. I realize Salbato does not believe that Our Lady is speaking. But it is humility to realize that even though one has an opinion, one’s opinion might possibly be wrong. If he is wrong in this case, he is defying Our Lady. He ought to take care! Or prudence - thats one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

If Salbato does not recognize the reality that he could be wrong, he can read the Bishop’s letter that says “‘Anne’ …wishes to remain anonymous.” He could honor the Catholic Bishop, at least!

Hmmmmm. Baseless? I hate the pun but what do you base that they are baseless on?

Baseless is trying to slander Anne’s character as a reason why her messages must be not true. But her Bishop, who knows her and has examined her, does not find fault with her character - only praise. Yet Salbato, who does not know and has not met her, feels qualified to publish web pages on his site that present her as having bad character - too tainted for the Lord to ever use! He has never met her: he bases his slander on rumors and “testimony” of an unnamed person who is remotedly and very questionalby connected to an alleged colleague. Thats baseless.

And Salbato’s implication concerning Anne - that Our Lord or Our Lady only would have anything to do with someone of impecable character and holiness - is just not Catholic. Anne quotes the words of Jesus to her: “I did not choose you because you are worthy, and I won’t leave you because you are not.” We cannot prove Jesus actually said that, but we can confirm that those are words consistent with the Catholic teaching of Jesus. Unlike Salbato’s. Which tells me that while one can read Salbato’s site and be contaminated with a perverted idea of what is Catholic (which is what I am warning others on this thread), on the otherhand, according to the testimony of Anne’s bishop and other theologians: if I read Anne’s works, I’ll be reading genuine Catholicism (supernatural or not).

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)