Author Topic: Fatima and sedevacantism (Read 10573 times)

Raoul76 · « **Reply #15 on:** June 16, 2009, 02:16:58 AM »

I am always happy for a correction when I am talking above my station. But I never said "God didn't set the conditions" gladius. I am just not sure what God's conditions are in this situation.

Pius XII, Vicar of Christ, servant of the servants of God, DID consecrate the whole world to the Heart of Mary, or try to. That was his action based on this approved apparition.
Are you saying he was talking out of his you-know-what? Then you are the one who knows better than the Pope?

If Russia had been consecrated, if it had converted, I agree, history might have been changed. For one, Catholic Russia may have destroyed the Jєωιѕн United States... But Russia was never Catholic to begin with; it has always been mostly Orthodox. Certainly in 1917 it wasn't going to convert.

The way I am coming to see this message is as a symbolic warning, a prophecy against communism in general, IN ALL ITS FORMS, including democracy -- hence Pius XII's desperate consecration of the whole world.

Again, I'm not questioning God. I'm questioning your interpretation of God. If we disagreed on a passage in the Apocalypse would you say I was questioning God? Some people think the Mark of the Beast is an actual mark; I also think the Mark is symbolic. This is just how I see things. If the mark were physical and real, then no one would be fooled by it... Do you see?

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #16 on:** June 16, 2009, 02:20:59 AM »

Quote from: Raoul76

Gladius, I usually agree with you, but you are way off base here.[/quote

Actually, I am not.

Quote
The devil indeed has supernatural powers.

No, he does not. ALL creation is of the NATURAL ORDER. GOD ALONE is of the SUPER-natural order. He can and does ELEVATE us to his level - by means of sanctifying grace. Btw, there is also something called the preternatural. Adam was given gifts on this level, but he lost them when he fell.

Quote
What makes you think he couldn't possess some kids to see the Virgin Mary? I don't think that's what happened. But it is SO VERY possible.

Reread my words. You will actually see that I did not say he could not do so.

Quote
The reason CM is saying that is because the apparition was approved by Benedict XV, who he considers an anti-Pope because of the BoD-confirming 1917 Code of Canon Law. What he is saying is entirely in character, and consistent, if you accept his logic.

He is wrong. :cheers:

CM · « **Reply #17 on:** June 16, 2009, 02:21:48 AM »

A pope cannot be held personally responsible for any works he approves in forma communi, only those he approves in forma specifica, thereby assuming authorship of the work, even if he did not pen it himself. This is why the heretical 'Code' is not sufficient to indicte Benedict XV, and it is why, even though I reject the heresies in the "Compendium of Christian Doctrine' by 'Cardinal' Respghi, which was later renamed 'Catechism of Pope Pius X', I cannot reject Pope Pius X, since he only approved it in forma communi, thereby leaving the authorship of the work in the hands of Respighi. He may not have even known the heresies were in there, and if he did, he was still not a public heretic; he never taught them.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #18 on:** June 16, 2009, 02:24:26 AM »

The manipulation of nature above our level of understanding is NOT the same as something SUPER-natural.

CM · « **Reply #19 on:** June 16, 2009, 02:33:05 AM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

He is wrong.

Nope. Benedict XV taught universal salvation and brotherly love and that Catholics and non-Catholics should unite, and that worldly peace is more important that spiritual peace, that there are Christians outside of the Catholic Church, and that the Catholic Church does not have true unity, and all the while was willfully ambiguous, a real deceiver, the first of many.

http://willingcatholicmartyr.blogspot.com/2009/05/benedict-xv-was-antipope.html
http://www.thecatholicfaith.us/index.htm

ANTIPOPE.