Why I reject fatima

[Techno2000]

This is precisely why I have chosen to quit concerning myself with the rules about what happens after I die. Once “I” die, in the way that “I” think “I” exist as a mortal, thinking human being with a brain and will and whatever I experience, then whatever goes on after that, is “out of my control.”

What IS under my control, is whether I act in a loving way. Whether I feel anger and desire for revenge against those who have done terrible things to me or others. Can I look at a serial sex molester/rapist testify in court and not wish he would feel the pain he has inflicted on others? This is what I worry about – learning to love my enemies as Jesus taught me, and to rejoice when they mock my religion like Jesus said in the beatitudes.

If I spend my life listening to Jesus as God the Father instructed from the cloud, and doing my best to “do what He says” as instructed by Mary, that’s the best I can do. Everything else in addition to the precepts of the Church are optional. I don’t need to buy into others’ idea that focusing repeatedly on the horrors of somewhere I would never go, is a Good Thing.

Let others fight and argue about what happens after I die. Jesus left us clear lessons we can use to learn to live our best. And if I do that, and it isn’t good enough, then how would I have been better off for having pondered how terrible “hell” is?

I don’t need to spend an hour a day focused on how terrible it would be if I drove drunk and killed somebody. If I just don’t drink at all, it’s never an issue. More scaring about the dangers of drunk driving, can’t make me drink less than zero. :whacky:

Just like “mortal sin” is never something I can do without specifically intending to, so if I don’t do that I really don’t care how terrible “hell” is except it’s interesting to discuss terrible things, but only if in the mood not as a discipline. For you, you go for it if that’s what you think helps you become closer to union with God.

MS

I agree with you, but this just the internet , not life or death, its just a forum for entertainment only, some people take it way too serious, me included.

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

I agree with you, but this just the internet , not life or death, its just a forum for entertainment only, some people take it way too serious, me included.

I use it for entertainment for sure, but really I have a compulsion both to learn, and to “help.”

One thing that triggers me, is that I personally may not care about something or feel I know enough, but it hurts when I see other people being told something they have no reason to doubt, but I believe it is wrong. I feel a Solemn Duty to prevent “bad teachers” from teachings falsehood to “my fellow students” because I’m really academic and that’s both a blessing and a challenge not to jump into somebody’s face when they’re coming across like “people who know” when really they’re just pulling stuff out of the air.

And when I say “coming across,” I completely own that as my opinion. How they come across to me may be very different than what they intended, so I do my best to be “un-offendable” so that I don’t either worsen a situation or create on where there didn’t have to be.

So I’ll have to work on being more immune to that; if I troll someone I want it to be intentional and not just because I’m clueless jerk.

 

[Techno2000]

I use it for entertainment for sure, but really I have a compulsion both to learn, and to “help.”

One thing that triggers me, is that I personally may not care about something or feel I know enough, but it hurts when I see other people being told something they have no reason to doubt, but I believe it is wrong. I feel a Solemn Duty to prevent “bad teachers” from teachings falsehood to “my fellow students” because I’m really academic and that’s both a blessing and a challenge not to jump into somebody’s face when they’re coming across like “people who know” when really they’re just pulling stuff out of the air.

And when I say “coming across,” I completely own that as my opinion. How they come across to me may be very different than what they intended, so I do my best to be “un-offendable” so that I don’t either worsen a situation or create on where there didn’t have to be.

So I’ll have to work on being more immune to that; if I troll someone I want it to be intentional and not just because I’m clueless jerk.

Yes, we are all on different spiritual levels…if much is given, much is expected…if little is given, little is expected.

 

[Elena321]

This is precisely why I have chosen to quit concerning myself with the rules about what happens after I die. Once “I” die, in the way that “I” think “I” exist as a mortal, thinking human being with a brain and will and whatever I experience, then whatever goes on after that, is “out of my control.”

What IS under my control, is whether I act in a loving way. Whether I feel anger and desire for revenge against those who have done terrible things to me or others. Can I look at a serial sex molester/rapist testify in court and not wish he would feel the pain he has inflicted on others? This is what I worry about – learning to love my enemies as Jesus taught me, and to rejoice when they mock my religion like Jesus said in the beatitudes.

If I spend my life listening to Jesus as God the Father instructed from the cloud, and doing my best to “do what He says” as instructed by Mary, that’s the best I can do. Everything else in addition to the precepts of the Church are optional. I don’t need to buy into others’ idea that focusing repeatedly on the horrors of somewhere I would never go, is a Good Thing.

Let others fight and argue about what happens after I die. Jesus left us clear lessons we can use to learn to live our best. And if I do that, and it isn’t good enough, then how would I have been better off for having pondered how terrible “hell” is?

I don’t need to spend an hour a day focused on how terrible it would be if I drove drunk and killed somebody. If I just don’t drink at all, it’s never an issue. More scaring about the dangers of drunk driving, can’t make me drink less than zero. :whacky:

Just like “mortal sin” is never something I can do without specifically intending to, so if I don’t do that I really don’t care how terrible “hell” is except it’s interesting to discuss terrible things, but only if in the mood not as a discipline. For you, you go for it if that’s what you think helps you become closer to union with God.

MS

Your right,the focus should be on now and following Jesus but at the same time how do I follow something that seems concerning to me (about literal burning hell).
It is easier to just put it aside and move on but what if someone agnostic etc asked me about it one day?
I’ve seen that some people reject Christianity because they can’t cognitively make sense of God is love,we should practice kindness and sacrificial love,but if you choose not to be with God,then you choose to go to a place God created of eternal fleshly burning and screams…

I do believe that people choose themselves seperation from eternal life.
I also agree with Gods justice but what I can’t put my head around is the “God created burning hell” bit.

I come from a country that doesn’t believe in capital punishment let alone burning people.
People say,well,God is perfect and justice therefor burning is justified.
To me though,it’s the opposite.Ie:if we humans who are imperfect don’t burn people how would God who is perfect allow such an act(even if a person goes there willingly)?

 

[Elena321]

One can choose not to believe in the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima. I don’t think as a Catholic, one can “reject” it.

So there’s no real answer then.Basically a person can feel " it’s not for them" and be silent on it but know that the Catholic Church in its wisdom from the Holy Spirit has been shown the truth about it.
Then,by default,doesn’t every Catholic have to believe in a “literal burning” hell because the apparition has been approved by people led by the Holy Spirit therefor the visions =truth?

 

[Techno2000]

Your right,the focus should be on now and following Jesus but at the same time how do I follow something that seems concerning to me (about literal burning hell).
It is easier to just put it aside and move on but what if someone agnostic etc asked me about it one day?
I’ve seen that some people reject Christianity because they can’t cognitively make sense of God is love,we should practice kindness and sacrificial love,but if you choose not to be with God,then you choose to go to a place God created of eternal fleshly burning and screams…

I do believe that people choose themselves seperation from eternal life.
I also agree with Gods justice but what I can’t put my head around is the “God created burning hell” bit.

I come from a country that doesn’t believe in capital punishment let alone burning people.
People say,well,God is perfect and justice therefor burning is justified.
To me though,it’s the opposite.Ie:if we humans who are imperfect don’t burn people how would God who is perfect allow such an act(even if a person goes there willingly)?

I think this web page explains Hell the best:olrl.org/doctrine/cry.shtml

 

[switalabe]

I guess people don’t like to get “snookered.” I think that’s a good thing; we should follow whatever desires we have for truth as much as possible.

 

[LightBound]

Dear fellow CAF members,
Please do not post links to pages that are not faithful to the Magisterium. This is so important when discussing things like Fatima or Catholic teachings. This forum gets a lot of traffic from lurkers and to post a link that takes one outside the Church can be damaging and harmful to an inquirer who doesn’t know about splinter and sedevacantist groups.

The site below is a very good resource for determining if a page you are considering using as a recommendation or resource for others is truly faithful to the Magisterium. A quick rule of thumb is if a site has negative comments about the Holy Father or the past few Popes, condescendingly calls the Mass in Ordinary Form the “Novus Ordo” or makes disparaging comments about it or denies its validity or seems to take issue with Vatican ll, you should stay away from the webpage.

The site just linked in a recent post on the thread referencing the Cry of a Lost Soul rejects the validity of the Mass in OF:catholicculture.org/culture/reviews/view.cfm?recnum=865

This is the main page for checking “red flag” sites catholicculture.org/search/resultslist.cfm?resourcetype=2&requesttype=sitebrowserate&fidelity=red&resources=0&useability=0

Early in my internet days, I was led astray for a time to an extreme Traditionalist group when I landed upon their beautifully illustrated website. I wasn’t aware that they were not in communion with the Church and found myself buying into what they were saying. Thankfully, I was awakened to their deceit and was able to be reconciled with the true Church, the one that has stood the test of time and didn’t run off when the Mass was changed to something they didn’t like. Please be so cautious with these red flag sites. The message of Fatima is of importance, but not at the risk of using a site that blatantly rejects the validity of the Mass in OF.

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

Your right,the focus should be on now and following Jesus but at the same time how do I follow something that seems concerning to me (about literal burning hell).
It is easier to just put it aside and move on but what if someone agnostic etc asked me about it one day?
I’ve seen that some people reject Christianity because they can’t cognitively make sense of God is love,we should practice kindness and sacrificial love,but if you choose not to be with God,then you choose to go to a place God created of eternal fleshly burning and screams…

I do believe that people choose themselves seperation from eternal life.
I also agree with Gods justice but what I can’t put my head around is the “God created burning hell” bit.

I come from a country that doesn’t believe in capital punishment let alone burning people.
People say,well,God is perfect and justice therefor burning is justified.
To me though,it’s the opposite.Ie:if we humans who are imperfect don’t burn people how would God who is perfect allow such an act(even if a person goes there willingly)?

Those are some really interesting thoughts. But you know what, honestly I think “agnostic” is underrated. “Faith” is the evidence of things not seen (“known” in a physical science sense IMO) according to Heb 11:1 so if we could see it, we wouldn’t need faith. OTOH, if we claim there is no God, then we are claiming insight into the unprovable. I think agnostic is a perfectly honest place to be in from time to time at least, and it’s one of the reasons I recognized that if we just do what Jesus says instead of thinking about all this stuff, His “marching orders” and ideas about love, do not require “belief” but simply to “taste and see” how good they are when tried.

MS

 

[Memaw]

So there’s no real answer then.Basically a person can feel " it’s not for them" and be silent on it but know that the Catholic Church in its wisdom from the Holy Spirit has been shown the truth about it.
Then,by default,doesn’t every Catholic have to believe in a “literal burning” hell because the apparition has been approved by people led by the Holy Spirit therefor the visions =truth?

Jesus spoke of the fire of Hell. What kind of fire, we don’t knew except it is a non-consuming fire. Not like fire here on earth. Are we going to tell Him he’s wrong just because we don’'t like the idea of it?? God Bless, Memaw

 

[thistle]

Father John Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary:

FIRE OF HELL. The physical reality, outside the person, by which those in hell are punished besides their loss of the vision of God. It is called fire in the Scriptures to emphasize the excruciating pain it causes, and to identify it as some external agent tormenting the lost. But it is not ordinary fire, since it does not consume what it burns, and, although material, it can affect the purely spiritual substance of the soul.

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

Jesus spoke of the fire of Hell. What kind of fire, we don’t knew except it is a non-consuming fire. Not like fire here on earth. Are we going to tell Him he’s wrong just because we don’'t like the idea of it?? God Bless, Memaw

So are you meaning this, from Matt 13?
41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all who cause others to sin and all evildoers. 42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.

He was talking about the weeds being the children of the evil one.

The problem is, we mortal humans, except for Jesus, has had both good and bad seeds planted in the gardens of our minds, and so we all have weeds and wheat growing together. That’s why Jesus said don’t try to “pull up the weeds” because that (to me anyway) could be construed to me going out and killing “evildoers” and even “heretics” which of course we did some but that may have not been what Jesus would have done if He were still directly calling the shots then. They may have some evil thoughts, but Christians have hope for life even after sinning while wearing our “temples” fashioned as mortal flesh.

But here He doesn’t say there will be burning forever. In fact, what if He threw the weeds into Purgatory for purification? Wouldn’t that fire cause some wailing and gnashing of teeth? I can say from “personal experience” that purgative contemplation can be pretty scary indeed – to where death seems like a comfort. Since this was all about explaining a parable anyway, might not that be another way to take it?

Jesus changed the “wages of sin is death” by bringing “mercy” to the law, which fulfilled it even while it made the “law of sin and death” obsolete for those who walk in the spirit. (ref Rom 7-8). Which by the way implies that once we are born of the spirit, we simply don’t have to sweat these things. Or we would have to find a way around:

Rom 8:1-2
Hence, now there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has freed you from the law of sin and death.

Does this sound like St. Paul is advising that we concern ourselves with the horrors of hell, on a daily basis, or more like we can be free of these concerns? (rhetorical question)

This is why I prefer using the written Word for some of my ideas about life and death, and following Jesus’s words, compared to what people tell me about apparitions. They (not the apparitions but what apparition-pushers say about them) end up coming up with bizarre conclusions that somehow we can’t really follow Jesus unless we know how bad hell is, and do certain specific formulations of pray. Our trials on earth are designed to bring us the suffering we need; if we accept them and process them as our Lord told us, we wouldn’t have to play fear games. So yeah that’s why I don’t believe Mary really wants us to stew about hell – if you believe she does, power to you and the Church says we both get our “right to choose” in this regard. You must agree with that, or you are against Church teachings, right?

MS

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

Rom 8:1-2
Hence, now there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has freed you from the law of sin and death.

Does this sound like St. Paul is advising that we concern ourselves with the horrors of hell, on a daily basis, or more like we can be free of these concerns? (rhetorical question)

This is why I prefer using the written Word for some of my ideas about life and death, and following Jesus’s words, compared to what people tell me about apparitions. They (not the apparitions but what apparition-pushers say about them) end up coming up with bizarre conclusions that somehow we can’t really follow Jesus unless we know how bad hell is, and do certain specific formulations of pray. Our trials on earth are designed to bring us the suffering we need; if we accept them and process them as our Lord told us, we wouldn’t have to play fear games. So yeah that’s why I don’t believe Mary really wants us to stew about hell – if you believe she does, power to you and the Church says we both get our “right to choose” in this regard. You must agree with that, or you are against Church teachings, right?

You know what? The more I think about it, the more I am suspicious that some apparitions, are actually binding us to some of the very things Jesus came to free us from. Maybe they didn’t at Fatima, and if the Church says it’s “worthy of belief” then let me hope the Lord has confused the words of so many who have taken these apparitions to behave in ways unlike what the Word says, and the confusion isn’t in the apparition itself. I might ask my wife for help understanding this because something seems seriously wrong. How can Jesus teach us one thing, and then His Mother come and gin us up to do just the opposite? I must be missing something here, that has not yet been brought up on this thread.

 

[Techno2000]

So are you meaning this, from Matt 13?
41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all who cause others to sin and all evildoers. 42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.

He was talking about the weeds being the children of the evil one.

The problem is, we mortal humans, except for Jesus, has had both good and bad seeds planted in the gardens of our minds, and so we all have weeds and wheat growing together. That’s why Jesus said don’t try to “pull up the weeds” because that (to me anyway) could be construed to me going out and killing “evildoers” and even “heretics” which of course we did some but that may have not been what Jesus would have done if He were still directly calling the shots then. They may have some evil thoughts, but Christians have hope for life even after sinning while wearing our “temples” fashioned as mortal flesh.

But here He doesn’t say there will be burning forever. In fact, what if He threw the weeds into Purgatory for purification? Wouldn’t that fire cause some wailing and gnashing of teeth? I can say from “personal experience” that purgative contemplation can be pretty scary indeed – to where death seems like a comfort. Since this was all about explaining a parable anyway, might not that be another way to take it?

Jesus changed the “wages of sin is death” by bringing “mercy” to the law, which fulfilled it even while it made the “law of sin and death” obsolete for those who walk in the spirit. (ref Rom 7-8). Which by the way implies that once we are born of the spirit, we simply don’t have to sweat these things. Or we would have to find a way around:

Rom 8:1-2
Hence, now there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has freed you from the law of sin and death.

Does this sound like St. Paul is advising that we concern ourselves with the horrors of hell, on a daily basis, or more like we can be free of these concerns? (rhetorical question)

This is why I prefer using the written Word for some of my ideas about life and death, and following Jesus’s words, compared to what people tell me about apparitions. They (not the apparitions but what apparition-pushers say about them) end up coming up with bizarre conclusions that somehow we can’t really follow Jesus unless we know how bad hell is, and do certain specific formulations of pray. Our trials on earth are designed to bring us the suffering we need; if we accept them and process them as our Lord told us, we wouldn’t have to play fear games. So yeah that’s why I don’t believe Mary really wants us to stew about hell – if you believe she does, power to you and the Church says we both get our “right to choose” in this regard. You must agree with that, or you are against Church teachings, right?

MS

Look at it this way, the knowledge of Hell can help us to pray for others so they won’t go there, and at same time we are assuring our own salvation by praying for them.

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

Look at it this way, the knowledge of Hell can help us to pray for others so they won’t go there, and at same time we are assuring our own salvation by praying for them.

OK. I can give you that. I can look at it that way with you, and back you up that there is merit in it – without having to claim one way or other whether “your approach” in “your situation” is “better” or “worse” than I believe “mine is for me.”

Fair enough? :tiphat:Isn’t that what the Church means when it says “worthy of belief” but not “required” – so we can all be like :grouphug: ?

 

[Path_Finder]

Pope Pius Himself viewed the Miracle of the Sun 4 different times in His Vatican garden.

zenit.org/en/articles/pius-xii-saw-miracle-of-the-sun

Pius XII wrote, “I have seen the ‘miracle of the sun,’ this is the pure truth.”

The miracle of the sun is most known as the episode that occurred in Fatima, Portugal, on Oct. 13, 1917. According to the Fatima visionaries, Mary had said there would be a miracle that day so that people would come to believe. Thousands had gathered at the site of the visions, and the sun “danced,” reportedly drying instantaneously the rain-soaked land and spectators.

Confirming the dogma

Pius XII’s note says that he saw the miracle in the year he was to proclaim the dogma of the Assumption, 1950, while he walked in the Vatican Gardens.

He said he saw the phenomenon various times, considering it a confirmation of his plan to declare the dogma.

 

[LightBound]

I think this web page explains Hell the best:olrl.org/doctrine/cry.shtml

It’s a shame the article link used for this was to a site that denies the validity of the Mass in Ordinary Form and is not faithful to the Magisterium.

It doesn’t support a belief very well to promote things about any apparition or Church teaching when the sources used come from some radical dissident group instead of one in full communion and obedience to Rome…

catholicculture.org/search/resultslist.cfm?resourcetype=2&requesttype=sitebrowserate&fidelity=red&resources=0&useability=0

 

[Path_Finder]

Our Lady of the Rosary Library (OLRL) does many good things and their tracts are helpful and very traditional. I’m sorry if anything they have published is contrary to the Church teachings.

 

[Techno2000]

It’s a shame the article link used for this was to a site that denies the validity of the Mass in Ordinary Form and is not faithful to the Magisterium.

It doesn’t support a belief very well to promote things about any apparition or Church teaching when the sources used come from some radical dissident group instead of one in full communion and obedience to Rome…

catholicculture.org/search/resultslist.cfm?resourcetype=2&requesttype=sitebrowserate&fidelity=red&resources=0&useability=0

I pick and choose what I like from different sites, I cant keep up with all of them.

 

[Ed_Silvia]

On October 1, 1930 Pius XI gave his approval and every Pope since has voiced belief in the message of Fatima. That, seriously, should be enough for the faithful.

The essence of the Fatima apparitions is Our Lady’s invitation to draw close to Her to help us save souls. That is what the faithful should be doing with our lives, saving souls, otherwise we are only lukewarm.

Jesus doesn’t like lukewarm.
Revelation 3:16 But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, not hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth.

Our Lady’s place as Queen of the Angels & the Saints is secured for all time by the Church’s infallible dogma of the Immaculate Conception & Her Assumption into Heaven.

Please take a good look at the Lady and the toddler on Her arm in my signature. That miraculous statue is in the Convent of The Immaculate Conception In Quito Ecuador and Our Lady of Good Success told Mother Mariana De Jesus Torres more than 400yrs ago the convent & statue will be defended by Jesus & Mary no matter what and will remain there until the end of time. They say a picture tells a thousand words. Why would the creator of the universe want to be depicted like that? What kind of infulence does a mother have over a child that age?