Author Topic: ELEISON 379 - OCTOBER 18, 2014 (Read 44833 times)

1st Mansion Tenant · « **Reply #15 on:** October 20, 2014, 12:30:17 AM »

Was there some rule made after the apparitions at Fatima that there could never be any more authentic apparitions again? I understand the need to be cautious, and I have not followed any of the supposed seers such as Garabandal or Medjugorge, but is it not possible that there could be a true apparition in or times? And how can we be so quick to judge it's authenticity without obvious proof one way or the other?

Adolphus · « **Reply #16 on:** October 20, 2014, 12:51:51 AM »

Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant

Was there some rule made after the apparitions at Fatima that there could never be any more authentic apparitions again? I understand the need to be cautious, and I have not followed any of the supposed seers such as Garabandal or Medjugorge, but is it not possible that there could be a true apparition in or times? And how can we be so quick to judge it's authenticity without obvious proof one way or the other?

I would not trust a "seer" who attended the Novus Ordo Missae, even after having received revelations...

ultrarigorist · « **Reply #17 on:** October 20, 2014, 06:20:35 AM »

Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant

Was there some rule made after the apparitions at Fatima that there could never be any more authentic apparitions again? I understand the need to be cautious, and I have not followed any of the supposed seers such as Garabandal or Medjugorge, but is it not possible that there could be a true apparition in or times? And how can we be so quick to judge it's authenticity without obvious proof one way or the other?

We can be quick to judgment when the "seer" had a history of obliquely trumpeting her "locutions" on the net; and then going quiet after learned she would be published.

Adolphus · « **Reply #18 on:** October 20, 2014, 10:05:25 AM »

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora

Quote from: Adolphus
Quote from: Ekim
By that logic, why does Our Lady need Rosaries at all? By + Burke? +Fellay? +Ratzinger?

The reason, perhaps, that she chose a bishop from the SSPX was to use tradition as the means to her end. Or maybe, just maybe, she got tired of waiting 80+ years for a Novus Ordo prelate that she thought a traditional bishop might actually get the job done? Who are we to question the mother of God?

To question the Mother of God?…

Did She really give such messages? How could we know so? What else has She reveled?

As H.E. said: “Stay tuned”!

What for? To read this?

I don't think His Excellency is going to quote Fr. Grossin's opinion nor in which conditions Fathers Ortiz and Jely found the "seer".

Cristera · « **Reply #19 on:** October 20, 2014, 11:32:32 AM »

Quote from: Adolphus

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
Quote from: Adolphus
Quote from: Ekim
By that logic, why does Our Lady need Rosaries at all? By + Burke? +Fellay? +Ratzinger?

The reason, perhaps, that she chose a bishop from the SSPX was to use tradition as the means to her end. Or maybe, just maybe, she got tired of waiting 80+ years for a Novus Ordo prelate that she thought a traditional bishop might actually get the job done? Who are we to question the mother of God?

To question the Mother of God?…

Did She really give such messages? How could we know so? What else has She reveled?

As H.E. said: “Stay tuned”!

What for? To read this?

I don't think His Excellency is going to quote Fr. Grossin's opinion nor in which conditions Fathers Ortiz and Jely found the "seer".

Mr. Adolphus: If you think Bp. Williamson is talking about Mme. Rossiniere, you are very wrong. Get informed before inoculate your poison.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #20 on:** October 20, 2014, 11:35:14 AM »

If Our Lady did appear to Bp. Fellay, and instruct him to conduct a Rosary Crusade, then I, for one, am going to have to rethink the whole matter. We have a pretty deep attachment to Bp. Williamson, accompanied by a very deep suspicion of Bp. Fellay and most of what he says or does. If the SG inaugurated these Rosary Crusades under direct,(or indirect), instruction from Our Lady, then why wasn't that fact announced from the very beginning? Why didn't the bishop indicate then that he was acting under obedience to what was, or what he thought sincerely to be at the time, the Holy Virgin's request? To tell you the truth, I have always thought that the Rosary Crusades were rather cynical ploys, designed to bind the sspx faithful more tightly to their leaders. If I'm wrong, then I suppose I must repent in leisure.

Elsa Zardini · « **Reply #21 on:** October 20, 2014, 11:57:43 AM »

Adolfito, How about doing your homework? That’s a different seer. And, you
say “I would not trust a "seer" who attended the Novus Ordo Missae”. Can a mexican (you) who has never attended Resistance Masses offered by Resistant Fathers in Mexico be trusted? Or, is that ok for ashke…nαzιs ? Just saying...

Matthew · « **Reply #22 on:** October 20, 2014, 02:29:26 PM »

Quote from: Nemmersdorf

But.... Our Lord would not be too pleased for one of His bishops to espouse falsehoods...

That's neither here nor there. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

We're not talking about criticizing a bishop's actions or beliefs. I explicitly stated that criticizing a Bishop's actions was A) compatible with Catholicism and B) allowed on CathInfo.

What I will not allow on CathInfo is an outburst of name-calling and hate towards ANY Bishop. And yes that includes Bishop Fellay.

Go ahead and look -- you won't find such a post on CathInfo.

"But I was told CathInfo is the cesspool of humanity. That no one on the forum can even remember what being in the State of Grace felt like. That..."

Well maybe you were misinformed!

Matthew · « **Reply #23 on:** October 20, 2014, 02:33:18 PM »

Quote from: Nemmersdorf

But.... Our Lord would not be too pleased for one of His bishops to espouse falsehoods...

Then I would suggest respectfully addressing the falsehoods and exposing them here.

No one is afraid of the truth; least of all me.

Good men can be deceived or wrong. It happens all the time. I don't believe Bishop Williamson is infallible. Hearing that he might be espousing some kind of false apparition doesn't shake my "faith" in him. I don't believe him to be super-human or perfect.

I just believe him to be a good Bishop who has labored many years amidst poverty and persecution to teach as many men the Truth as possible, and help us all get to heaven. I don't have to take others' word for it; I knew him personally for 3 years. So for me it's "not open for debate".

I can't expect others to have that kind of "inside scoop", but I can expect everyone to act within the bounds of Catholic morality and Catholic charity when dealing with a consecrated Bishop.

Adolphus · « **Reply #24 on:** October 20, 2014, 02:55:47 PM »

Quote from: Cristera

Quote from: Adolphus
Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora
Quote from: Adolphus
Quote from: Ekim
By that logic, why does Our Lady need Rosaries at all? By + Burke? +Fellay? +Ratzinger?

The reason, perhaps, that she chose a bishop from the SSPX was to use tradition as the means to her end. Or maybe, just maybe, she got tired of waiting 80+ years for a Novus Ordo prelate that she thought a traditional bishop might actually get the job done? Who are we to question the mother of God?

To question the Mother of God?…

Did She really give such messages? How could we know so? What else has She reveled?

As H.E. said: “Stay tuned”!

What for? To read this?

I don't think His Excellency is going to quote Fr. Grossin's opinion nor in which conditions Fathers Ortiz and Jely found the "seer".

Mr. Adolphus: If you think Bp. Williamson is talking about Mme. Rossiniere, you are very wrong. Get informed before inoculate your poison.

Thank you very much for the clarification. I am glad to know His Excellency is referring to a different seer.

I apologize for the confusion I might have caused.

Adolphus · « **Reply #25 on:** October 20, 2014, 03:28:16 PM »

Quote from: Elsa Zardini

Adolfito, How about doing your homework? That’s a different seer. And, you say “I would not trust a "seer" who attended the Novus Ordo Missae”. Can a mexican (you) who has never attended Resistance Masses offered by Resistant Fathers in Mexico be trusted? Or, is that ok for ashke…nαzιs ? Just saying...

Elsa,

First of all, I would like you to behave as a mature person and stop referring to me using diminutive names.

Secondly, whether or not I have pending homework is a personal business, and as such, there is no reason to be ventilated in a public forum.

Now, regarding your last question, I must say that I only attend Catholic masses. There is no such thing as resistance masses.

Now, if what you mean by resistance masses is Catholic masses celebrated by priests who do not agree with Bp. Fellay's directives, then I could say that I do attend to such masses when I can. Not in Mexico, since I am not in Mexico, though.

Pete Vere · « **Reply #26 on:** October 20, 2014, 05:19:53 PM »

Quote from: curioustrad

"Appararition-ism" has always been a good way to explain what the apparent events cannot.

Along with Garabandal why is Bishop Williamson always falling for false apparitions ?

It allows him an alternate answer to the types of question that otherwise would likely lead to drawing sedevacantist conclusions.

curioustrad · « **Reply #27 on:** October 20, 2014, 06:07:11 PM »

Quote from: Pete Vere

Quote from: curioustrad
"Appararition-ism" has always been a good way to explain what the apparent events cannot.

Along with Garabandal why is Bishop Williamson always falling for false apparitions ?

It allows him an alternate answer to the types of question that otherwise would likely lead to drawing sedevacantist conclusions.

Yes that is almost certainly the reason since as he said:

Quote

If Mary tells us how to save the Church,
All other means will leave us in the lurch.

It occurred to me last night that I had asked the Bishop some time ago about these "apparitions" and "revelations" and he told me then that he had been in favor and then against these apparitions together with his specific reasons why and why not.

The Bishop communicated them to me via e-mail so I have my question and his answer on file. I will be very interested to hear why he has changed his mind yet again.

Of course I am not going to pre-empt his next few EC installments but if necessary I will publish the communications to show the evolution in his own thought process for the record. Surprisingly the reasons he is now giving in favor, he gave against to me 2 years ago.

ultrarigorist · « **Reply #28 on:** October 20, 2014, 06:34:14 PM »

Quote from: curioustrad

Surprisingly the reasons he is now giving in favor, he gave against to me 2 years ago.

It's very unsettling that H.E. threw caution to the wind regarding these "apparitions", especially this one. The next few EC emails are sure to be anti-climatic, just a rerun of Dawn Marie's wavering ideas about "what would Our Blessed Mother Do". We all know the sick routine by now.

I'd like to read your correspondence after the EC comments have been published.

Charlotte NC Bill · « **Reply #29 on:** October 20, 2014, 08:14:58 PM »

This woman said she had an apparition experience. Whether anyone believes it or not is up to them...If someone I respect ( Williamson ) tells he believes her then that definitely moves me to examine it/her. But how is he spreading falsehoods? She certainly seems to believe herself. So you're free to believe her or not. We all KNOW that praying the Rosary for the Consecration is something Our Blessed Mother wants. So it's not a stretch to believe.....again, how does that opinion constitute "spreading falsehoods"? If you can't contain your contempt for a holy bishop then shut up. Don't you have some buttons that need to be re-sewn onto your kids' jacket or something? I mean can't some of you people find something remotely edifying to do/say/contribute?