AJPM,

You are losing me here.  You write in such a way that I can't make heads or tails out of your exact meaning.  

1.  Can you explain to me this obligation that you say we have to "prove prophecy."  What is the exact nature of this obligation and who imposed it.  Please cite approved sources.
2.  You admit that Catholics are not bound by private revelation, it is good that this is clear.  So what is your point then?
3.  Do you believe that Catholics must believe a certain interpretation of words from scripture that has not yet been taught to us by the Church?

1. Once again, the obligation...

[19] Extinguish not the spirit. [20] Despise not prophecies. [21] But prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

2. Once an approved private revelation of the Catholic Church accurately predicts the future in such a way that it becomes prophetic, it is no longer just  a private revelation only. It is a prophetic private revelation (a prophecy).This we must prove and hold according to Scripture, lest we extinguish the Spirit.

3. Pope Leo XIII, PROVIDENTISSIMUS DEUS:

15. But he must not on that account consider that it is forbidden, when just cause exists, to push inquiry and exposition beyond what the Fathers have done; provided he carefully observes the rule so wisely laid down by St. Augustine -- not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires...

First Vatican Council, Chapter 3 On faith:

Since human beings are totally dependent on God as their creator and lord, and created reason is completely subject to uncreated truth, we are obliged to yield to God the revealer full submission of intellect and will by faith. This faith, which is the beginning of human salvation, the catholic church professes to be a supernatural virtue, by means of which, with the grace of God inspiring and assisting us, we believe to be true what He has revealed, not because we perceive its intrinsic truth by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God himself, who makes the revelation and can neither deceive nor be deceived.Faith, declares the Apostle, is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen [17]. Nevertheless, in order that the submission of our faith should be in accordance with reason, it was God's will that there should be linked to the internal assistance of the holy Spirit external indications of his revelation, that is to say divine acts, and first and foremost miracles and prophecies, which clearly demonstrating as they do the omnipotence and infinite knowledge of God, are the most certain signs of revelation and are suited to the understanding of all. Hence Moses and the prophets, and especially Christ our lord himself, worked many absolutely clear miracles and delivered prophecies;
while of the apostles we read: And they went forth and preached every, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it [18] . Again it is written: We have the prophetic word made more sure; you will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place [19]

You are not answering the questions.  

You are just not understanding the answers. Maybe slow it down, and ask just one question at a time. When one question is resolved we will move on to the next question. Fair enough?

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

Quote from: Ambrose

You are not answering the questions.  

You are just not understanding the answers. Maybe slow it down, and ask just one question at a time. When one question is resolved we will move on to the next question. Fair enough?

Ok, regarding question 1 above:  "1.  Can you explain to me this obligation that you say we have to "prove prophecy."  What is the exact nature of this obligation and who imposed it.  Please cite approved sources. ".

You answered, "1. Once again, the obligation...    2. Once an approved private revelation of the Catholic Church accurately predicts the future in such a way that it becomes prophetic, it is no longer just  a private revelation only. It is a prophetic private revelation (a prophecy).This we must prove and hold according to Scripture, lest we extinguish the Spirit. "

I asked you to define the exact nature of the obligation using approved sources.  You did not do that.  I also asked you who imposed the obligation.  Who has to "prove prophesy?"

I am asking you to support your position.  A quote from the bible is not enough.  What do the commentaries say on the verse?  How has the verse been Traditionally understood by the Church?   How have the theologians explained this point?  These are the questions that remain unanswered on this first point.

I asked for one question Ambrose. Try again.

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

Seems as if Our Lady (The Queen of Prophets) refutes an empty seat...

"The Vicar of My Son will suffer a great deal, because for a while the Church will yield to LARGE persecution, a time of darkness and the Church will witness a frightful crisis[/u]. He will suffer a great deal. I will be with him until the end and receive his sacrifice. The mischievous would attempt his life several times to do harm and shorten his days. Neither he nor his successor will see the triumph of the Church of God. (Our Lady of LaSalette, 1846)

"As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as no one has ever seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only consolation which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by My Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests." (Our Lady of Akita, 1973)

What say you?

Let's talk:

Theological controversies cannot be cogently answered by appeals to private revelation, even those apparitions of Our Blessed Mother that have been expressly approved by the authority of Holy Mother Church.

It seems to me that Our Lady appears to confirm the teachings of the Church rather than give material to be used for polemical exchanges.

Lourdes is the best example. Our Lady deigned to visit her handmaiden Bernadette, destined to become a great Saint exalted even upon the sacred Altar by Canonization, in order to confirm the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception infallibly given by Pope Pius IX.

The messages of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima have been widely abused in various polemical exchanges regarding some disputed matter or another. This, I think, diminishes the sublimity and profundity of these glorious messages given to us by Our Blessed Mother.

Though the messages of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima constitute private revelation, the contents thereof are a wondrous epitome of the depositum fidei and, by benign dispensation of Divine Providence, they were given particularly for the sake of those interior souls living in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries and who, despite the aberrations and disorder of the present age, would aspire to the heights of prayer and penance, especially and particularly by means of true devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary. Together with the miracle of the terpsichorean Sun, the most remarkable thing of Fatima (at least to me) is the manner in which sublime truths of dogmatic and moral theology are given in a celestial simplicity readily understood even by children, akin to the manner in which the sacred Evangelists recorded the life and words of Our Lord in the holy Gospel. Such a thing, impossible to imitate or artificialize, is (at least to me) one of the signs that Fatima is indeed beyond question.

I personally believe the message of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima is the spiritual doctrine of St. Louis-Marie de Montfort applied to the predicament of interior souls in the present ages. Fatima ultimately leads to total Consecration to Eternal Wisdom through Mary Most Holy, and this constitutes the most perfect renewal of our Baptismal vows. This would compel a soul earnestly endeavoring to cultivate the interior life to pay heed to Our Lady's message at Fatima.

So, my take on it is that, in the midst of polemics and so forth, one should not lose sight of the real significance of the celestial visitation of Our Lady, assumed into Heaven and reigning there as supreme Arbitress of the Kingdom conquered by her Divine Son by His Precious Blood.

God gives the gift of prophecies to His Church precisely to clear up theological controversies, and so we are not swayed by the winds of false doctrine...

[11]And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors and doctors, [12] For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: [13] Until we all meet into the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ; [14] That henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive

Quote from: Malleus 01

I do not speculate on that any longer because neither sedevacantists nor members of SSPX obey him in  all things.  

If we go to Mass , obey the Commandmewnts  frequent the Sacraments and believe and live as Catholics and keep ourselves unstained and pray our Holy Rosaries - This is not disobedience is it?  There are no laws against these things.

Obedience is there to Keep Catholics on the straight and narrow.  

In todays world - Obedience to Rome would have the opposite effect.

So the purpose of Obedience is rendered moot.

Therefore , who is or isnt Pope is a non issue - Not because we say so but because of Romes infidelity to Christ who is our King.  

It remains our charge to always put GOD first.

I hear you. I am just as upset about Rome's infidelity to Christ as you are. The point is Our Lady says we have a Pope during this crisis. That alone is enough reason to abandon sedevacantism completely. Prophecy is essential so that we are not swayed by the winds of doctrine (sedevacantism).

[11] And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors and doctors, [12] For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: [13] Until we all meet into the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ; [14] That henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive. [15] But doing the truth in charity, we may in all things grow up in him who is the head, even Christ: Eph 4:11-15

The Pope must do the Consecration of Our Lady's Immaculate Heart to Russia with all the bishops to end the crisis. We are supposed to be praying for the Pope not deposing him! This is certainly a serious matter, for a huge punishment hangs in the balance. We can lawfully resist the Pope if He commands us to abandon the traditions of the Church. Our Lord did the same with the scribes and the Pharisees who apostatized (by all human means of judging). Deposing the Pope is not necessary in order to hold our traditions. There is everything to lose and nothing to gain in deposing the Pope.

No one is deposing him... The man is not Catholic, he does not want to be Pope. He refuses all and every single sign of authority as far as we are concerned even by Sedeplenist standards he has abdicated his authority.

He practices Judaism with more fidelity celebrating "their ancient traditions" more then the Catholic ones which he despises. He loves "the fruits" of the Liturgical revolution, practices them personally, canonizing those who led the revolution.

The pope issue is becoming important, because you will have to now be forced to accept as canonized Saints to be revered/imitated in the liturgy at some point in the coming year. Now you can choose to deny him as a Saint, and keep the faith. Or just simply "be obedient" to heretics and go to Hell by accepting that the man is worthy of veneration after doing the most apostate objective actions possible in the public light. Promoted the worst religious indifferentism, apostasy in the history of the Church. Not even the French revolutionaries could have ever dreamed of the Abomination of desolation that has taken place in the Holy places of worship in our Catholic altar's throughout the world. The Mass is offered in UNION with the Saints, not false Saints. Do not forget that after this year, Paul VI is next and now in the greatest crisis of the CHURCH EVER! We are led to believe that EVERY single man who objectively speaking never actively preached the faith, the primacy of the Petrine office (except to punish traditionalists), papal infallibility, Vatican I or previous Council's, universal laws that are harmful to souls etc... That ALL of them are Saints! Wow... Just the pretension and pride that it takes to much such an assumption, to think that it will somehow be binding on the faithful... Whereas before there was nothing that traditional Catholics were being asked objectively speaking about swallowing the revolution whole and entire, sure you had Escriva, Mother Teresa of Culcutta and so forth. I have read pretty different stuff on both of them, and it was still questionable in my mind where was the truth. However, it is IMPOSSIBLE to defend JP II and John XXIII since there is so much information and since the Pope is such a public figure. This is the important thing to distinguish we can be certain of JP II and John XXIII as opposed to a more obscure prelate in the Church or religious who lived a life relatively more obscure life and therefore it might be less possible for us to be able to have such certainty of the facts. It is easier to see the cockroaches in the room when the lights are turned on, and this is precisely what we see in the case of JP II and John XXIII. I had always known one thing for certain if JP II was canonized, I would be instantly a Sedevacantist... It is theologically impossible for the man to be canonized and the man doing it retain his office.

+Pax+

God gives the gift of prophecies to His Church precisely to clear up theological controversies, and so we are not swayed by the winds of false doctrine...

The Church decides on controverted issues. Your interpretation of specific prophesies and their relation to controverted issues is your opinion. That opinion means nothing to others.

Quote

God gives the gift of prophecies to His Church precisely to clear up theological controversies, and so we are not swayed by the winds of false doctrine...

The Church decides on controverted issues. Your interpretation of specific prophesies and their relation to controverted issues is your opinion. That opinion means nothing to others.

That right there sums up this thread.

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

Quote from: SJB

Quote

God gives the gift of prophecies to His Church precisely to clear up theological controversies, and so we are not swayed by the winds of false doctrine...

The Church decides on controverted issues. Your interpretation of specific prophesies and their relation to controverted issues is your opinion. That opinion means nothing to others.

The Church and Scripture are not opposed as you are making them out to be. Church also tells us we must prove prophecy. The Church does not bind our conscience to an interpretation. If that were the case prophecy would not have to be proved by us!!! You are missing the point SJB. Catholic prophecy can not be relegated to the back burner or rendered insignificant as the protestants believe. Catholics must prove and hold prophecy. Do you not believe my interpretation of La Salette? O.K. Then what is yours? Read the quote from Our Lady and interpret it. That's the point of this thread. Does your interpretation make sense to you? If it does and it is different then mine, then prove it. That is what Catholics do. There must be schisms as you know...

[18] For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you; and in part I believe it. [19] For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you. 1 Cor 11:18-19


Those who prove and hold prophecy correctly will be "not be swayed by the winds of doctrine"  and be on the right side of the schism.

Nowhere have I said or implied that "The Church and Scripture are opposed" in any way. I never said that prophecy should be "rendered insignificant."

Where did you learn that we all should interpret private revelations and then argue our opinions? I'd say that approach causes more confusion and division than any benefit you might imagine. Anyway, we, as Catholics, are NOT instructed to do this.

You are putting words in my mouth. Just about all prophecy starts as private revelation. Not all private revelation is prophecy. Also, I said prophecy should be proved in accordance with Scripture, and Vatican I. Someone else asked me, "why they should believe my interpretation." Actually a better reply would have been, "that it should be already suitable to his understanding". Also for prophecy to be proved some minor interpretation is sometimes required. Even so, we are assured by the Church that it is not so hard to understand...

First Vatican Council, Chapter 3 On faith:

Since human beings are totally dependent on God as their creator and lord, and created reason is completely subject to uncreated truth, we are obliged to yield to God the revealer full submission of intellect and will by faith. This faith, which is the beginning of human salvation, the catholic church professes to be a supernatural virtue, by means of which, with the grace of God inspiring and assisting us, we believe to be true what He has revealed, not because we perceive its intrinsic truth by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God himself, who makes the revelation and can neither deceive nor be deceived.Faith, declares the Apostle, is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen [17]. Nevertheless, in order that the submission of our faith should be in accordance with reason, it was God's will that there should be linked to the internal assistance of the holy Spirit external indications of his revelation, that is to say divine acts, and first and foremost miracles and prophecies, which clearly demonstrating as they do the omnipotence and infinite knowledge of God, are the most certain signs of revelation and are suited to the understanding of all. Hence Moses and the prophets, and especially Christ our lord himself, worked many absolutely clear miracles and delivered prophecies; while of the apostles we read: And they went forth and preached every, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it [18] . Again it is written: We have the prophetic word made more sure; you will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place [19]

Now if prophesies are most certain signs of revelation suited to the understanding of all, then why do you not understand the prophecy of Our Lady of La Salette?