Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => General Discussion => Topic started by: Geremia on June 23, 2014, 12:53:49 AM
-
See this (http://traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f072_DivMercy.htm).
Her diary contains at least one heresy; that is enough for Pope Pius XII to place it on the Index:On October 2, 1936, she states that the “Lord Jesus” appeared to her and said, “Now, I know that it is not for the graces or gifts that you love Me, but because My Will is dearer to you than life. That is why I am uniting Myself with you so intimately as with no other creature.” (Divine Mercy in My Soul, The Diary of Sr. Faustina, Stockbridge, MA: Marian Press, 1987, p. 288)
So, more intimately than with the Immaculate Conception?
“From today on, do not fear God’s judgment, for you will not be judged.” (ibid., p. 168)
Who, besides Our Blessed Mother, can escape God's judgment?
These denigrations of our Blessed Mother, coupled with the Divine Mercy Chaplet hijacking her Rosary, make me really suspicious about that devotion.
“And the host came out of the Tabernacle and came to rest in my hands and I, with joy, placed it back in the Tabernacle. This was repeated a second time, and I did the same thing. Despite this, it happened a third time.” (ibid., p. 23) … “Oh, no, here it is again. I have to go put this back now.”
Seriously, what kind of silly vision is this?
_______________________________________________________________________________
Also, Pope Pius XII banned Sr. Faustina's image "in the forms proposed by" her (which were?). See this (http://traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f072_DivMercy.htm).
See AAS 51 [1959] (http://www.vatican.va/archive/aas/docuмents/AAS%2051%20%5B1959%5D%20-%20ocr.pdf), p. 271:NOTIFICAZIONE
Si rende noto che la Suprema Sacra Congregazione dei Sant'Offizio, prese in esame le asserite visioni e rivelazioni di Suor Faustina Kowalska, dell'Istituto di Nostra Signora della Misericordia, defunta nel 1938 presso Cracovia, ha stabilito quanto segue:
1. doversi proibire la diffusione delle immagini e degli scritti che presentano la devozione della Divina Misericordia nelle forme proposte dalla medesima Suor Faustina;
2. essere demandato alla prudenza dei Vescovi il compito di rimuovere le predette immagini, che eventualmente fossero già esposte al culto. Dal Palazzo del S. Offizio, 6 marzo 1959.
Ugo O'Flaherty, Notare
A notification of the Holy Office:
The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, having examined the alleged visions and revelations of Sister Faustina Kowalska of the Institute of Our Lady of Mercy, who died in 1933 near Cracow, has decreed as follows:
1. The distribution of pictures and writings which present the devotion to the Divine Mercy in the forms proposed by this Sister Faustina, should be forbidden;
2. It is left to the prudent discretion of the Bishops to remove such pictures which may have been already exposed for worship.
From the Holy Office, 6 March, 1959.
Ugo O'Flaherty, Notary
(source of translation (http://moerwiki.us.to/misc/Res%20pro%20Deo/Other%20Docuмents/Holy%20Office%20forbids%20Divine%20Mercy.pdf))
_______________________________________________________________________________
And something that strikes me odd about the Chaplet of Divine Mercy (https://www.ewtn.com/Devotionals/mercy/dmmap.htm) is this prayer in it: Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world.
Only Christ, through His priests, can properly offer Christ in atonement. It seems improper, to say the least, for laypeople to say this prayer. It would seem to make sense only if this were a prayer in the Mass.
-
Excellent summary and commentery geremia. I have seen all of these and am in agreement with you.
-
I hope Sede Catholic (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=profile&w=1977) joins this thread and makes some rebuttals, as he did on another thread here (http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=18473&min=15&num=5).
-
On October 2, 1936, she states that the “Lord Jesus” appeared to her and said, “Now, I know that it is not for the graces or gifts that you love Me, but because My Will is dearer to you than life. That is why I am uniting Myself with you so intimately as with no other creature.” (Divine Mercy in My Soul, The Diary of Sr. Faustina, Stockbridge, MA: Marian Press, 1987, p. 288)
So, more intimately than with the Immaculate Conception?
Special intimacy with one person doesn't preclude the special relationship that Jesus has with his mother. It is related to how well we respond to the graces that God gives to us. The espousal can be unique from onw person to another.
-
From today on, do not fear God’s judgment, for you will not be judged.” (ibid., p. 168)
Who, besides Our Blessed Mother, can escape God's judgment?
If you are in this friendship with Jesus (i.e. the state of sanctifying grace) then you should have nothing to fear from the judgement of God. when a soul reaches a certain intimacy with Jesus that is true, that soul should have nothing to fear from the judgement of God.
-
“And the host came out of the Tabernacle and came to rest in my hands and I, with joy, placed it back in the Tabernacle. This was repeated a second time, and I did the same thing. Despite this, it happened a third time.” (ibid., p. 23) … “Oh, no, here it is again. I have to go put this back now.”
Seriously, what kind of silly vision is this?
It appears to be Jesus' desire to be with his spouse. I don' know if this is a vision or how this really occured but this type of thing has happened before, in the case of St Imelda for example.
-
in the case of St Imelda for example.
Which was?
-
Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world.
Only Christ, through His priests, can properly offer Christ in atonement. It seems improper, to say the least, for laypeople to say this prayer. It would seem to make sense only if this were a prayer in the Mass.
Pope Pius XII addressed this issue when he addressed the question of the priesthood which the people share wih Jesus in their baptism. It is not the sme as the priesthood which offers mass but it is in relation to their baptism. Part of teh ceremony of baptism includes two annointings, that of the catechumens and that of the chrism that is an anticipation of the Sacrament of Confirmation.
-
Also, Pope Pius XII banned Sr. Faustina's image "in the forms proposed by" her (which were?). See this.
See AAS 51 [1959], p. 271:"AAS 51:271" said:
NOTIFICAZIONE
Si rende noto che la Suprema Sacra Congregazione dei Sant'Offizio, prese in esame le asserite visioni e rivelazioni di Suor Faustina Kowalska, dell'Istituto di Nostra Signora della Misericordia, defunta nel 1938 presso Cracovia, ha stabilito quanto segue:
1. doversi proibire la diffusione delle immagini e degli scritti che presentano la devozione della Divina Misericordia nelle forme proposte dalla medesima Suor Faustina;
2. essere demandato alla prudenza dei Vescovi il compito di rimuovere le predette immagini, che eventualmente fossero già esposte al culto. Dal Palazzo del S. Offizio, 6 marzo 1959.
Ugo O'Flaherty, Notare
"translation" said:
A notification of the Holy Office:
The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, having examined the alleged visions and revelations of Sister Faustina Kowalska of the Institute of Our Lady of Mercy, who died in 1933 near Cracow, has decreed as follows:
1. The distribution of pictures and writings which present the devotion to the Divine Mercy in the forms proposed by this Sister Faustina, should be forbidden;
2. It is left to the prudent discretion of the Bishops to remove such pictures which may have been already exposed for worship.
From the Holy Office, 6 March, 1959.
Ugo O'Flaherty, Notary
The Pope is certainly free to regulate the devotions which are practiced in the Church. As I recall everyone who was involved with these devotions obeyed Pope Pius XII.
-
Who, besides Our Blessed Mother, can escape God's judgment?
This is pure blasphemy. A Catholic with discernment can see this
right away.
I remember this Sr. Faustinas Diary was being promoted by good
and faithful Catholics. Even I fell for it for a while.
-
Father Peter Scott wrote against Faustina in 2010
http://www.angelusonline.org/index.php?section=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=2895
-
Father Peter Scott wrote against Faustina in 2010
http://www.angelusonline.org/index.php?section=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=2895
interesting
thanks
-
Father Peter Scott wrote against Faustina in 2010
He also wrote against the new rites of ordination and consecration. So, I don't know whether the SSPX continues to hold any view on which he wrote. In any event, I think much of what he writes is spot on.
-
He also wrote against the new rites of ordination and consecration.
Do you have links to that, or was it taken down when the SSPX officially repudiated such views?
-
Sure like the back issues of the SI SI NO NO are available
on the Angelus Site.
-
He also wrote against the new rites of ordination and consecration.
Do you have links to that, or was it taken down when the SSPX officially repudiated such views?
I have a print copy of the article from The Angelus. The date does not appear on the copy I have. The article is entitled: "Ought priests of the conciliar church to be re-ordained when they come to Tradition?" by Fr. Peter Scott.
-
He also wrote against the new rites of ordination and consecration.
Do you have links to that, or was it taken down when the SSPX officially repudiated such views?
I have a print copy of the article from The Angelus. The date does not appear on the copy I have. The article is entitled: "Ought priests of the conciliar church to be re-ordained when they come to Tradition?" by Fr. Peter Scott.
I thought that argued they New Rites were valid. Maybe I'm thinking of something else?
-
Does anyone here know what kind of arguments are offered, by Pope John Paul II or others, for why this devotions is really okay after being condemned in vigorous terms by two previous popes?
-
He also wrote against the new rites of ordination and consecration.
Do you have links to that, or was it taken down when the SSPX officially repudiated such views?
I have a print copy of the article from The Angelus. The date does not appear on the copy I have. The article is entitled: "Ought priests of the conciliar church to be re-ordained when they come to Tradition?" by Fr. Peter Scott.
I thought that argued they New Rites were valid. Maybe I'm thinking of something else?
I just re-read the article, and Fr. Scott says that there is a good probability that the new rites are valid in themselves, but that there are other serious problems with the ordinations and consecrations in the Conciliar church which raise very legitimate doubts about any Conciliar ordination.
So, I was partially mistaken having posted before re-reading the article and going from memory alone. Thank you for the correction.
Sorry for de-railing the topic; let's get back to the original topic now.
-
Does anyone here know what kind of arguments are offered, by Pope John Paul II or others, for why this devotions is really okay after being condemned in vigorous terms by two previous popes?
What need we have of arguments? The great JP2-We Luv U gave it to us!!!
Seriously, I've never heard that any arguments were given. If any were, I'd like to hear them. But I doubt any were proffered.
-
Does anyone here know what kind of arguments are offered, by Pope John Paul II or others, for why this devotions is really okay after being condemned in vigorous terms by two previous popes?
What need we have of arguments? The great JP2-We Luv U gave it to us!!!
Seriously, I've never heard that any arguments were given. If any were, I'd like to hear them. But I doubt any were proffered.
Just like how no real arguments have been found to interpret Vatican II's ecuмenism, religious liberty, and collegiality in continuity with the pre-Vatican II magisterium…
-
in the case of St Imelda for example.
Which was?
From the life of Blessed Imelda;
The patroness of fervent first communion, Blessed Imelda, came from one of the oldest families in Bologna; her father was Count Igano Lambertini and her mother was Castora Galuzzi. Even as a tiny child she showed unusual piety, taking delight in prayer and slipping off to a quiet corner of the house, which she adorned with flowers and pictures to make it a little oratory. When she was nine, she was placed, at her own wish, in the Dominican convent in Val di Pietra, to be trained there by the nuns. Her disposition soon endeared her to all, while the zeal with which she entered all the religious life of the house greatly edified the nuns. Her special devotion was to the Eucharistic presence of Our Lord at Mass and in the tabernacle. To receive Our Lord in Holy Communion became the consuming desire of her heart, but the custom of the place and time had fixed twelve as the earliest age for a first communion. She would sometimes exclaim: "Tell me, can anyone receive Jesus into his heart and not die? "
When she was eleven years old she was present with the rest of the community at the Ascension Day Mass. All the others had received their communion: only Imelda was left unsatisfied. The nuns were preparing to leave the church when some of them were startled to see what appeared to be a Sacred Host hovering in the air above Imelda, as she knelt before the closed tabernacle absorbed in prayer. Quickly they attracted the attention of the priest who hurried forward with a paten on which to receive It. In the face of such a miracle he could not do otherwise than give to Imelda her first communion, which was also her last. For the rapture with which she received her Lord was so great that it broke her heart: she sank unconscious to the ground, and when loving hands upraised her, it was found that she was dead.
http://catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=125
-
Another Eucharistic event in the life of a saint;
St. Juliana of Falconieri
Juliana was born in 1270 of the illustrious Florentine family of the Falconieri when her parents were already well advanced in years. Her uncle, the saintly Alexius Falconieri, declared to her mother that she had given birth "not to a girl but to an angel." At the age of fifteen she renounced her inheritance and was the first to receive from the hand of St. Philip Benizi the habit of a Mantellate nun. Many women followed her example; even her mother placed herself under Juliana's spiritual direction.
St. Philip Benizi commended to her care and protection the Servite Order over which he had charge. So severe were her mortifications and fastings that a grave stomach ailment developed; she could take no food, not even the sacred Host. At the point of death she asked that a consecrated Host be placed against her heart. Then occurred a miracle — the Host vanished, and Juliana died with a radiant face. After her death the picture of the Crucified, as it had been on the sacred Host, was found impressed upon her breast.
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/liturgicalyear/calendar/day.cfm?date=2014-06-19
-
In those Eucharistic miracles you mention, the saints/blesseds received/welcomed the Host.
In Sr. Faustina's vision, she kept returning It to the tabernacle, as though she were not in need of It or not worthy to receive It, which she certainly is, especially if she is sinless (because she apparently escapes God's judgment and is more united to Jesus than any other creature).
-
In those Eucharistic miracles you mention, the saints/blesseds received/welcomed the Host.
In Sr. Faustina's vision, she kept returning It to the tabernacle, as though she were not in need of It or not worthy to receive It, which she certainly is, especially if she is sinless (because she apparently escapes God's judgment and is more united to Jesus than any other creature).
Jesus does what He wants to. If He is coming out of the Tabernacle to her time after time then who are we to complain?
-
Jesus does what He wants to. If He is coming out of the Tabernacle to her time after time then who are we to complain?
I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about her repeatedly returning It to the tabernacle. That's what doesn't make sense.
-
In those Eucharistic miracles you mention, the saints/blesseds received/welcomed the Host.
In Sr. Faustina's vision, she kept returning It to the tabernacle, as though she were not in need of It or not worthy to receive It, which she certainly is, especially if she is sinless (because she apparently escapes God's judgment and is more united to Jesus than any other creature).
I do not know why. What I do know is that the love that Jesus has for each of us is a special love, it is not a "one size fits all" love.
Most of the time the gifts that god gives to the soul are spiritual and they cannot be described in human terms unless God permits it.
-
In those Eucharistic miracles you mention, the saints/blesseds received/welcomed the Host.
In Sr. Faustina's vision, she kept returning It to the tabernacle, as though she were not in need of It or not worthy to receive It, which she certainly is, especially if she is sinless (because she apparently escapes God's judgment and is more united to Jesus than any other creature).
I do not know why. What I do know is that the love that Jesus has for each of us is a special love, it is not a "one size fits all" love.
Most of the time the gifts that god gives to the soul are spiritual and they cannot be described in human terms unless God permits it.
Poche, you have a tendency to make statements which are unnecessary, because nobody argued the contrary, implying but not openly stating, that your opponents actually believe the contrary. This is the argumentation style of the modernists. It is misleading, confusing, and dishonest. I'll give you an example. "God does not have a one size fits all love for us." You deny that which was never proposed, thereby implying that the belief is secretly held. I've heard Bergoglio speak the same way. It is jarring to the ears.
-
In those Eucharistic miracles you mention, the saints/blesseds received/welcomed the Host.
In Sr. Faustina's vision, she kept returning It to the tabernacle, as though she were not in need of It or not worthy to receive It, which she certainly is, especially if she is sinless (because she apparently escapes God's judgment and is more united to Jesus than any other creature).
I do not know why. What I do know is that the love that Jesus has for each of us is a special love, it is not a "one size fits all" love.
Most of the time the gifts that god gives to the soul are spiritual and they cannot be described in human terms unless God permits it.
Poche, you have a tendency to make statements which are unnecessary, because nobody argued the contrary, implying but not openly stating, that your opponents actually believe the contrary. This is the argumentation style of the modernists. It is misleading, confusing, and dishonest. I'll give you an example. "God does not have a one size fits all love for us." You deny that which was never proposed, thereby implying that the belief is secretly held. I've heard Bergoglio speak the same way. It is jarring to the ears.
Actually somebody was arguing to the contrary becdause he was calling Sister Faustina a heretic.