Miser, I'm always open to new information, but the video's main point against Blessed Anna Maria Taigi was that she said the beeswax candles had to be 100% beeswax. How can we beleive this person when nowhere does he explain when the Church supposedly began to allow 51% beeswax. Nor does he cite any Church prohibition of writing holy words on a tiny piece of paper and ingesting it.In regard to the sources cited, none of themsay anything at all about Blessed Anna Maria Taigi.
Pope Benedict IV who wrote Heroic Virtue Vollume 3 lived in the 8th to 9th Century.
Edward Healy Thompson's book on Blessed Anna Maria Taigi was completely suportive of her.
Yves Dupont, who wrote the coming Chastisement said nothing about her.
Pseudo Methodias's book was written in the 7th Century.
So my question is why the animosity toward her and the other Blesseds who speak of the Three Days Darkness?
Thanks for responding by addressing the evidence, Cera. This is the kind of discussion I have been trying to promote so that we can examine the evidence closely and get to the bottom of it.
I have no animosity towards any Blessed or Saint unless asking questions about disputed prophecies that may be falsely attributed to them is animosity. Is it a sin to ask questions when there is contradictory evidence?
Asking questions and closely examining evidence to determine if lies about precious Blesseds and Saints which are being spread does not show animosity towards these Holy ones. No. It is an act of charity towards them. I'm sure they would not want lies spread about themselves! Would you want lies spread about you after you die?
If I post information about the problems with the Divine Mercy apparitions is that showing animosity towards the great Saint Faustina? No. It shows I care about the truth. Shouldn't everyone?
We live in a time of great deception. Most trads I know do not dispute that the Concilliar Church paraded a fake Sr Lucy around and published a fake third secret and performed fake consecrations of Russia. Yet they get all in a huff if you ask questions about Fatima, its timeline, and other end times prophecies that have very questionable elements. Why?
Anyway, the video is 2 hours and 40 minutes long and there are many, many examples of discrepancies about these prophecies.
In fact, it is so full of evidence and sources it takes watching it a few times to take it all in.
His main point regarding the 3 Days is not about the beeswax candles. I'm not sure how you would think that if you watched the video??
At this timestamp he explains how the oldest book about her prophecies is from 1873, 36 years after her death.
https://youtu.be/QkbKwWyDyZg?t=484This video, which I have posted at CI before, also shows how the prophecy about the Three Days and attribution to AMT was not docuмented until many years after her death as well:
At this timestamp the video discusses the need for deeper research regarding prophecies attributed to her which are all from second hand sources:
https://youtu.be/QkbKwWyDyZg?t=460Yves Dupont, who wrote the coming Chastisement said nothing about her.
The video shows at this timestamp (57:11) that Dupont does actually discuss AMT and explains that the Great Monarch doesn't make sense
because he is going to convert the world after the Three Days of Darkness
wipes out all the non-Catholics.
Who will he convert?
https://youtu.be/QkbKwWyDyZg?t=3431Pope Benedict IV who wrote Heroic Virtue Vollume 3 lived in the 8th to 9th Century.
Yes, that's true. He wrote about how to determine if a prophecy is accurate. The video uses his writings as criteria for evaluating these prophecies.
Did you watch the video?
Pseudo Methodias's book was written in the 7th Century.
Yes, it was probably the original source for the Great Monarch story but that written docuмent is known as PSEUDO for a reason. It's explained here:
https://youtu.be/QkbKwWyDyZg?t=3487