Author Topic: Fatima Is A False Apparition (Read 9233 times)

roscoe · « **Reply #15 on:** February 02, 2010, 07:22:51 PM »

The Cardinal Rampolla was a freemason myth has been debunked repeatedly on this site by moi. He Very rarely and only casually saw Della Chiesa for the last 26 yrs of his life-- that is a long time. Wake up Catholics!!!

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #16 on:** February 02, 2010, 08:26:38 PM »

Quote from: fkpagnanelli

Fatima is a false apparition.

Your opinion is noted.

Quote

I know you have raised the apparition to the level of a dogma in your mind...

Would you care to share his words that show this, or would you care to give an explanation of your other methods of knowing such a thing about the thoughts of another person?

Caminus · « **Reply #17 on:** February 02, 2010, 08:32:06 PM »

Well, see, since they feel free to inject thoughts into the minds of dead Popes, that ain't nothin'. See, its all in the habit.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2010, 06:33:11 AM »

Clearly you guys reject Fatima because it flies in the face of your >PiusX antipopes theory. Then you go looking for other "reasons" to back up your claim.

Lots of people had problems with things at Lourdes and LaSalette as well.

Fatima has received at least implicit approval from the Church. So again here you have exposed the sedevacantist antipope conundrum. If the Popes have approved Fatima, it gives credibility to it.

At every turn, you show that with sedevacantism you turn your private judgment into your own little magisterium. Oh, which by the way is absolutely the same subjectivist error that has been undermining EENS all these years. You find yourself in a web of contradictions. You might as well be Pope Augustine, for anyone who rejects your decrees and theological conclusions is outside the Church--i.e., anyone not in subjection to CM/fk cannot be saved.

ggreg · « **Reply #19 on:** July 09, 2012, 06:38:29 PM »

Quote from: fkpagnanelli

Quote from: Raoul76
Anyone who studies Fatima even for an afternoon will be inundated with things that just don't add up.

Thank you for that informative post. I agree with everything you said, except you do not believe that Fatima must be rejected, but it must. All these Freemasonic ties lead right back to the Vatican and antipope Benedict XV. Anyone who studies Della Chiesa for even an afternoon will be inundated with heresies and Freemasonic overtures in all his encyclicals. Oh not to mention, Della Chiesa's mentor was "cardinal" Rampolla, a notorious Freemason.

Do you really think Della Chiesa didn't know? Certainly, he did. Della Chiesa was handpicked by the modernists, as was Pacelli.

The Vatican fell in 1914, boys! That you have to get right. You claim submission to an antipope, you follow that antipope right to hell.

What would you suggest happened on October 13th 1917 then when the "miracle of the Sun" happened?

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #20 on:** July 10, 2012, 07:20:02 PM »

Quote from: ggreg

Quote from: fkpagnanelli
Quote from: Raoul76
Anyone who studies Fatima even for an afternoon will be inundated with things that just don't add up.

Thank you for that informative post. I agree with everything you said, except you do not believe that Fatima must be rejected, but it must. All these Freemasonic ties lead right back to the Vatican and antipope Benedict XV. Anyone who studies Della Chiesa for even an afternoon will be inundated with heresies and Freemasonic overtures in all his encyclicals. Oh not to mention, Della Chiesa's mentor was "cardinal" Rampolla, a notorious Freemason.

Do you really think Della Chiesa didn't know? Certainly, he did. Della Chiesa was handpicked by the modernists, as was Pacelli.

The Vatican fell in 1914, boys! That you have to get right. You claim submission to an antipope, you follow that antipope right to hell.

What would you suggest happened on October 13th 1917 then when the "miracle of the Sun" happened?

Raoul76 is certainly capable of speaking for himself but in his byline (or is it signature line) he makes it clear that his past views on Fatima are to be ignored.

theology101 · « **Reply #21 on:** July 10, 2012, 08:24:08 PM »

Quote from: fkpagnanelli

(5) The Blessed Mother doesn't come to give "secrets", but instead comes to publicly urge the Faithful to repentance;

This is really what I would have the most problem with. I distrust any Christian message that is "secret". The Gospel is meant for all the world, not a select few, and so I wonder about that. Smacks of Gnosticism almost, as though there is some secret knowledge that only a few in the Church are privileged with.

lefebvre_fan · « **Reply #22 on:** July 10, 2012, 09:40:03 PM »

Quote from: theology101

Quote from: fkpagnanelli

(5) The Blessed Mother doesn't come to give "secrets", but instead comes to publicly urge the Faithful to repentance;

This is really what I would have the most problem with. I distrust any Christian message that is "secret". The Gospel is meant for all the world, not a select few, and so I wonder about that. Smacks of Gnosticism almost, as though there is some secret knowledge that only a few in the Church are privileged with.

It's not like such a thing would be unheard of, though. Our Lady of La Salette confided a secret to each of the visionaries, Maximin and Mélanie, who sent them to Pius IX and which have never been published in their original versions (Mélanie later published her secret, although the extent to which it adheres to the original version or is a product of her own creation remains unclear).

Sigismund · « **Reply #23 on:** July 10, 2012, 10:43:51 PM »

Quote from: fkpagnanelli

Quote from: Clovis
Quote from: fkpagnanelli
(3) The "angel" allegedly gave the Precious Blood to two visionaries, thereby breaking Church discipline, something that a messenger of God would never, ever do;

In both the Coptic and the Byzantine rites the laity recieve the Precious Blood.

Thanks for pointing that out. It would then depend under what bishop (a Latin rite or other rite) had jurisdiction over the visionaries. If the bishop allow for it, then the alleged angel would not have done anything wrong in this regard.

Thanks again and good point.

Um... do you really think angles need a bishop's permission for anything? I feel pretty confident angels outrank them.

Wait...forget I said anything. Don't feed the trolls.

Sigismund · « **Reply #24 on:** July 10, 2012, 10:48:19 PM »

I also just noticed that this is an ancient post that has been resuscitated.

theology101 · « **Reply #25 on:** July 10, 2012, 10:51:41 PM »

Quote from: lefebvre_fan

Quote from: theology101
Quote from: fkpagnanelli

(5) The Blessed Mother doesn't come to give "secrets", but instead comes to publicly urge the Faithful to repentance;

This is really what I would have the most problem with. I distrust any Christian message that is "secret". The Gospel is meant for all the world, not a select few, and so I wonder about that. Smacks of Gnosticism almost, as though there is some secret knowledge that only a few in the Church are privileged with.

It's not like such a thing would be unheard of, though. Our Lady of La Salette confided a secret to each of the visionaries, Maximin and Mélanie, who sent them to Pius IX and which have never been published in their original versions (Mélanie later published her secret, although the extent to which it adheres to the original version or is a product of her own creation remains unclear).

I've never even heard of OL of La Salette. Can't be blamed, it took me a long time to understand Marian theology, and I still don't really.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #26 on:** July 10, 2012, 10:52:50 PM »

Capt. McQuigg said:

Quote

Raoul76 is certainly capable of speaking for himself but in his byline (or is it signature line) he makes it clear that his past views on Fatima are to be ignored.

I'm glad it worked... Hopefully that means less time in purgatory :)

Hobbledehoy · « **Reply #27 on:** July 11, 2012, 12:44:48 AM »

Quote from: theology101

I've never even heard of OL of La Salette. Can't be blamed, it took me a long time to understand Marian theology, and I still don't really.

Here is some information and approved prayers. The prayers are to be found in the 1950 typical edition of the Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, nos. 435, 436: this tome is also known as The Raccolta (New York: Benziger Brothers, Inc., 1957) that has been reprinted by Loreto Publications (these prayers are found on page 332 of that edition). If you don't have The Raccolta, you may consider acquiring one.

Hobbledehoy · « **Reply #28 on:** July 11, 2012, 12:47:06 AM »

Here are some beautiful images of Our Lady of La Salette.

SaintBasil · « **Reply #29 on:** July 11, 2012, 08:20:24 AM »

I believe in the appartition.

Most telling for me is the fact that t3 Illiterate, Peasant children foretold of a movement that had yet to occur.
They specifically foretold of the Communist Revolution 6 months before it had yet to occur, and it did. These children were under 10, children generally dont speak in such way.

Additionally, I believe that Sister had an imposter..photos are pretty telling, nor is there any way she wouldve gone and accepted the apostate Vatican 2 changes.

These are the Photos of suposed Sister Lucy
http://www.fatimamovement.com/022_TheImposterSisterLucy.htm