Author Topic: Joey Lomangino is dead (Read 24164 times)

JohnGrey · « **Reply #165 on:** June 23, 2014, 10:36:18 AM »

Quote from: Fortitudo

Quote from: ggreg
Quote from: Fortitudo

Everyone gets to decide for themselves.

That is not what you were saying a few pages ago.

Yes, all along.

You, as a Catholic, can decide all by yourself if you want to pay attention to any private revelation or not. It is not condemned, as people here have very dishonestly tried to say.

I take great offense at people disregarding the message of an apparition and calling it demonic because the sight of the little girls in ecstasy makes them uncomfortable.

Actually, that's doctrinally incorrect. Most people believe, erroneously, that approbation of private revelation by the Church amounts to formally declaring that revelation to be true, when that isn't the case. Approbation actually is a declaration of permissibility, that the revelation in question is likely of divine original and free from doctrinal error, and that Catholics are free to believe the content of the revelation, to make pilgrimage, etc. Lacking that, especially from the local Ordinary where the revelation is supposed to have taken place has refused, such exercise is forbidden in the abstract.

JohnGrey · « **Reply #166 on:** June 23, 2014, 10:55:01 AM »

Quote from: Fortitudo

Actually, I thought Fr. Gruner made a very good point: he said he believes the Virgin came at Garabandal because her request at Fatima that the secret be revealed in 1960 was not complied with. Why else for her to come in 1961? It makes sense to me.

That's a false syllogism. Your major premise is that the objective fact of Our Immaculate Queen's appearance in Garabandal should be taken as fact, which it isn't. The only objective facts we have in this case are that:

1.) A group of children claimed to have repeated visitations by Our Lady, and in a few cases an Archangel.

2.) There are some anecdotal reports of preternatural behavior which are used by supporters and detractors to support their opinions.

3.) Most germane, there were several purported prophecies, at least 2 of which have now been proven utterly false.

The question is not why would she appear to us, and try to manufacture a reason, but to question, based on the evidence, whether anything supernatural happened, and if so, whether the prophecies of that revelation have been borne out. In at least two very important points, that test has been failed. Moreover, I should ask why Our Lady at Beauraing, if indeed she did appear (the Church has, according to some sources, given approbation), why she would say there that her forthcoming apparition (which is supposed to have occurred at Banneaux) would be her last. Food for thought, I suppose.

Quote

Especially since the Garabandal message deals specifically with the fall of the cardinals, bishops, and priests, which is what the secret purportedly describes.

That's hardly unique to Garabandal. Christ Himself that it was impossible that scandal should not come to His Church. Some three centuries later, St Athanasius famously said at Nicaea:

"The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops."

Fortitudo · « **Reply #167 on:** June 23, 2014, 11:20:43 AM »

I'm not familiar with the apparitions you referenced.

Your quote is incorrectly attributed to St. Athanasius - it belongs to St. John Chrysostum, as I recall.

JohnGrey · « **Reply #168 on:** June 23, 2014, 11:41:02 AM »

Quote from: Fortitudo

I'm not familiar with the apparitions you referenced.

Your quote is incorrectly attributed to St. Athanasius - it belongs to St. John Chrysostum, as I recall.

No according to popular tradition, Athanasius is the originator, who was then paraphrase or echoed by Chrysostom who purportedly said:

"The road to Hell is paved with the bones of priests and monks, and the skulls of bishops are the lamp posts that light the path."

chaz89 · « **Reply #169 on:** June 23, 2014, 11:41:47 AM »

You're both correct but Athanasius said it first.

There are others who stated it as well.

http://www.traditionalcatholicpriest.com/2013/12/08/saints-say-that-road-to-hell-is-paved-with-skulls-of-bishops-and-priests/

Fortitudo · « **Reply #170 on:** June 23, 2014, 12:27:35 PM »

Quote from: chaz89

You're both correct but Athanasius said it first.

There are others who stated it as well.

http://www.traditionalcatholicpriest.com/2013/12/08/saints-say-that-road-to-hell-is-paved-with-skulls-of-bishops-and-priests/

Very good.

Nadir · « **Reply #171 on:** June 24, 2014, 12:11:57 AM »

Quote from: JohnGrey

Quote from: Fortitudo
Actually, I thought Fr. Gruner made a very good point: he said he believes the Virgin came at Garabandal because her request at Fatima that the secret be revealed in 1960 was not complied with. Why else for her to come in 1961? It makes sense to me.

That's a false syllogism. Your major premise is that the objective fact of Our Immaculate Queen's appearance in Garabandal should be taken as fact, which it isn't. The only objective facts we have in this case are that:

1.) A group of children claimed to have repeated visitations by Our Lady, and in a few cases an Archangel.

2.) There are some anecdotal reports of preternatural behavior which are used by supporters and detractors to support their opinions.

3.) Most germane, there were several purported prophecies, at least 2 of which have now been proven utterly false.

The question is not why would she appear to us, and try to manufacture a reason, but to question, based on the evidence, whether anything supernatural happened, and if so, whether the prophecies of that revelation have been borne out. In at least two very important points, that test has been failed. Moreover, I should ask why Our Lady at Beauraing, if indeed she did appear (the Church has, according to some sources, given approbation), why she would say there that her forthcoming apparition (which is supposed to have occurred at Banneaux) would be her last. Food for thought, I suppose.

Quote
Especially since the Garabandal message deals specifically with the fall of the cardinals, bishops, and priests, which is what the secret purportedly describes.

That's hardly unique to Garabandal. Christ Himself that it was impossible that scandal should not come to His Church. Some three centuries later, St Athanasius famously said at Nicaea:

"The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops."

Well now that's got the nit-picking out of the way about who said "The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops" what did you have to say about the points in JohnGrey's post, Fortitudo?

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #172 on:** June 24, 2014, 12:35:36 AM »

There is enough evidence that PJXXIII is an anti-pope. The point that
Jim Condit, Jr made in the third interview on the "Siri Thesis" already
posted under the "Crisis in the Church" threads.
An anti-pope is not protected by the Holy Ghost. And reason most all
the Bishops signed the docuмents of Vatican 2 is their head was not
their head, meaning an anti-pope.
So it can be concluded that since an anti pope is sitting on the Throne
of St. Peter, there have never been any true visions of the Blessed Virgin
Mary, and our Lord since election of PJXXIII.
This includes Garabandel, and all so called visions afterwards.
Through discernment, it can be found something wrong with them.
Our Lady, and Our Lord will not contradict themselves, and the
infallible teachings of the Church.

Fortitudo · « **Reply #173 on:** June 24, 2014, 09:03:26 AM »

Quote from: Nadir

Quote from: JohnGrey
Quote from: Fortitudo
Actually, I thought Fr. Gruner made a very good point: he said he believes the Virgin came at Garabandal because her request at Fatima that the secret be revealed in 1960 was not complied with. Why else for her to come in 1961? It makes sense to me.

That's a false syllogism. Your major premise is that the objective fact of Our Immaculate Queen's appearance in Garabandal should be taken as fact, which it isn't. The only objective facts we have in this case are that:

1.) A group of children claimed to have repeated visitations by Our Lady, and in a few cases an Archangel.

2.) There are some anecdotal reports of preternatural behavior which are used by supporters and detractors to support their opinions.

3.) Most germane, there were several purported prophecies, at least 2 of which have now been proven utterly false.

The question is not why would she appear to us, and try to manufacture a reason, but to question, based on the evidence, whether anything supernatural happened, and if so, whether the prophecies of that revelation have been borne out. In at least two very important points, that test has been failed. Moreover, I should ask why Our Lady at Beauraing, if indeed she did appear (the Church has, according to some sources, given approbation), why she would say there that her forthcoming apparition (which is supposed to have occurred at Banneaux) would be her last. Food for thought, I suppose.

Quote
Especially since the Garabandal message deals specifically with the fall of the cardinals, bishops, and priests, which is what the secret purportedly describes.

That's hardly unique to Garabandal. Christ Himself that it was impossible that scandal should not come to His Church. Some three centuries later, St Athanasius famously said at Nicaea:

"The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops."

Well now that's got the nit-picking out of the way about who said "The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops" what did you have to say about the points in JohnGrey's post, Fortitudo?

Nothing worth commenting on.

JohnGrey · « **Reply #174 on:** June 24, 2014, 12:07:27 PM »

Quote from: Fortitudo

Nothing worth commenting on.

:cheers:

Lord, I thank You, and this man, for the gift of humility.

ggreg · « **Reply #175 on:** July 03, 2014, 07:53:48 AM »

Quote from: clare

Quote from: ggreg
Quote from: clare
Quote from: ggreg
The main seer, Conchita, said, clearly and on several occasions, that he Joey Lomangino would get new eyes on the day of the miracle. This was something she claimed Our Lady had told her.

If I were a Garabandal devotee, I would say that his death and his receiving new eyes might be the same event!

Does not wash, because it was supposed to be the day of the Miracle in the Pines in Garabandal a that he got his eyesight back. Not just any random day. Yesterday was not the day of the Miracle.

I'm not a devotee though. It's just what I'd think if I were, and then I'd perhaps work on whether the word day meant a literal period of 24 hours!

I think you will find that the claim was that Our Lady appeared. I would hope she could use plain and simple language unlike this chap.