Author Topic: Fatima: Your Last Chance Conference in Rome (in progress) (Read 1161 times)

Neil Obstat · « **on:** May 16, 2012, 12:29:01 PM »

http://www.yourlastchance.org/

Direct link to John Salza's presentation 5-15-12 (55:38)

Salza has an interesting background and always gives a great talk.

It is the principle accusation of our detractors that Fatima
is only a private revelation, because other criticisms are
easily refutable by established facts of history. But this
false claim of private revelation is no more reliable than
the others.

Excerpt from the talk by Salza (minute 9+) :

By saying that we are only dealing with private revelation is
simply an effort to redirect the conversation, to divert the
topic into the realm of non-binding opinion, or speculation;
in effect, to cover up the popes' failures to obey heaven's
command, because they don't want to admit that the popes
have failed to obey heaven's command. But of course, if
Fatima regards non-binding opinion, then why do these same
people persecute us for holding such opinions? After all,
they wouldn't matter, according to their own criteria.

...

Many are familiar with the two kinds of revelation: general
revelation, revealed in Scripture and Tradition, and which
ended with Christ and the Apostles, also called the Deposit
of Faith; and private revelation, which God occasionally
gives to certain individuals. The Deposit of Faith, of course,
binds all men, what God wills all to believe for
salvation, while private revelation binds only the person to
whom the communication was directed, what God may
additionally require from such an individual.

There is, however, a third type of revelation. And it is called
public prophetic revelation, or public prophesy. It is
unique in that God gives it through a prophet after the
apostolic age, but intends the message for all humanity.

To deny the existence of public, prophetic revelation would
mean that God cannot communicate with humanity after the
period of revelation on matters that affect their salvation,
and that of course, is not true. Scripture reveals that God will
indeed continue to speak to us during the Church age.

...

The Church teaches that prophets did exist after the
Ascension of Our Lord.

...

When God intervenes in history with prophetic revelations, He is
telling us what we must do to save our souls. Those who listen
and obey will be saved, those who hear and deliberately disobey
will be damned. As Scriptures says, When prophesy shall fail,
the people shall be scattered abroad. (Prov xxviii. 19)

...

Elizabeth · « **Reply #1 on:** May 16, 2012, 12:33:34 PM »

I was especially struck when I heard him utter the second paragraph,
diversion into the realm of non-binding opinion, of speculation.

JohnGrey · « **Reply #2 on:** May 16, 2012, 01:21:22 PM »

What unmitigated drivel. The period of infallible public prophecy and miracles ended with the death of the last Apostle and, no matter what pronouncements Salza has to the contrary, no private revelation, no matter how many witness it nor the degree of its miraculousness, is salvifically obligate on the faithful. Period.

I have no problem with the idea of apostolates devoted to Fatima from the point of view that the Church having failed, by virtue of the apostasy, to heed the warnings of the apparition of Our Lady and consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart, now undergoes its just rebuke for its failure, and encouraging sacrifice and penitential prayer in reparation to our many slights against Our Queen and her Divine Son. Its another matter entirely to have these "Consecration Now!" farces, as though the critical hour had not come and gone. Russia was not consecrated, and she has spread her errors, to state, to citizen, to priest and even to the men that falsely claim the Holy Seat. The horse is gone; closing the barn door is pointless. Having a conference concerning the petitioning of the putative farmer to close the same door is doubly so.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #3 on:** May 16, 2012, 02:16:23 PM »

Quote from: JohnGrey

The period of infallible public prophecy and miracles ended with the death of the last Apostle and, no matter what pronouncements Salza has to the contrary, no private revelation, no matter how many witness it nor the degree of its miraculousness, is salvifically obligate on the faithful. Period.

I've heard this before. Could you direct me to a source? Would I find this in one of the Catechisms or specifically canon law?

PereJoseph · « **Reply #4 on:** May 16, 2012, 02:23:35 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Quote from: JohnGrey
The period of infallible public prophecy and miracles ended with the death of the last Apostle and, no matter what pronouncements Salza has to the contrary, no private revelation, no matter how many witness it nor the degree of its miraculousness, is salvifically obligate on the faithful. Period.

I've heard this before. Could you direct me to a source? Would I find this in one of the Catechisms or specifically canon law?

Condemned Proposition :

"21. Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith, was not completed with the Apostles" (Lamentabili Sane, St Pius X, 3 July 1907 AD).

Link : Lamentabili sane exitu

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #5 on:** May 16, 2012, 03:32:23 PM »

My, such hysteria. Curious.

There isn't any heresy going on in Salza's speech. Are your ears stopped by habitual practice, or is it deliberate self-obfuscation?

He's describing the very thing you are saying, which the enemies of Fatima have been dishing out for decades. These are the same things the popes have been hearing from their advisors, mostly from the Freemasons among them.

It isn't "revelation," which Salza states ended with the death of the Apostles. So get off that.

This is part of the longstanding theological study made by Fr. Gruner 15 years ago, and as he has explained many times (contained in the first presentation that I didn't bother to mention because I wrongly presumed the audience here was knowledgeable on that topic) and has not been refuted by anyone. If you guys are so convinced he is wrong, why don't you compose a theological refutation? Nobody else has.
You could be first! :idea:

Alternatively, you could take a breather and pay attention for a minute
maybe you could learn something (shock!):

A) Two kinds of revelation
...1) general revelation, Apostolic revelation
.......a) binding on all the faithful, Deposit of Faith
...2) private revelation,
.......a) binding on the individual who personally received it
.......b) not binding on those who did not receive it

B) A third kind of revelation
...1) public, prophetic revelation
.......a) you don't hear this described because it imposes a duty when it is known
.......b) binding on the faithful who have heard
.......c) fulfillment of Scripture: God's communication with the age of the Church
.......d) unpopular with Modernists whose agenda would be destroyed by it

This is the same issue as the "leaked letters" that certain SSPX leaders are all
worked up about because they were made public. The public's awareness of what
they have been saying behind closed doors is what they're afraid of, because then
it becomes clear they have said one thing in public and the opposite in secret.

A third kind of revelation. Why is it not preached from the pulpit at your local
parish, even SSPX parish? Well, then they would have to acknowledge that
Fatima imposed a responsibility on us. They would have to acknowledge that
it is a fulfillment of Sacred Scripture, and God's demonstrative practice of
communication with the people in the age of the Church, after the Apostolic age.

Bishop Williamson doesn't have any problem with it. Is that why you have a
problem with him? You would prefer, like the deists, to believe that God has
no ability to make the public aware of something when the hierarchy of
His Church has scrupulously avoided it for decades upon decades? (That wasn't
the case in 1917, but God knew it would be the case in 2012.)

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #6 on:** May 16, 2012, 04:00:16 PM »

Quote from: JohnGrey

What unmitigated drivel. The period of infallible public prophecy and miracles ended with the death of the last Apostle and, no matter what pronouncements Salza has to the contrary, no private revelation, no matter how many witness it nor the degree of its miraculousness, is salvifically obligate on the faithful. Period.

You're not paying attention, are you? Salza didn't say anything to the contrary.

You would impose on God the inability to provide a public, prophetic miracle
that confirms the importance and gravity of His Mother's message?

So you basically are saying that the Marian apparitions on May, June, July 13th
and August 19th in 1917 were not prophetic? And you therefore presume that the
public, prophetic miracle of October 13th of that year was what, a mass hallucination?
Didn't happen? Wasn't unprecedented in the history of the world? Take your pick.
What's your excuse?

Quote

I have no problem with the idea of apostolates devoted to Fatima from the point of view that the Church having failed, by virtue of the apostasy, to heed the warnings of the apparition of Our Lady and consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart, now undergoes its just rebuke for its failure, and encouraging sacrifice and penitential prayer in reparation to our many slights against Our Queen and her Divine Son. Its another matter entirely to have these "Consecration Now!" farces, as though the critical hour had not come and gone. Russia was not consecrated, and she has spread her errors, to state, to citizen, to priest and even to the men that falsely claim the Holy Seat. The horse is gone; closing the barn door is pointless. Having a conference concerning the petitioning of the putative farmer to close the same door is doubly so.

So the Church has failed, even though the Church has approved the Fatima
apparitions and miracles for 95 years, and you have "no problem" with
apostolates devoted to Fatima, but you deny that it's important to get the
Collegial Consecration accomplished?

I hope you're not a firefighter, because you would be saying that you
believe it's important for us to have a fire department but there isn't any
point in taking a truck to a burning house to put out the fire, because what's
done is done. It's too late now.

Are you aware that despair is a sin, opposite the theological virtue of hope?

Have you ever heard of the sin against the Holy Ghost,
which will not be forgiven in this world or in the next?

It's not too late for you, but it's your choice, whether you will persist in your error.