Author Topic: Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014  (Read 28139 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adolphus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 467
  • Reputation: +467/-6
  • Gender: Male
Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
« on: October 25, 2014, 03:10:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • MODERATOR NOTE: When upvoting/downvoting posts, you are saying "I want to see more posts like this" or "I want to see less posts like this".

    NOT

    "This post makes me feel happy" and "This post makes me feel sad"

    Or, to put it more simply,

    PLEASE DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER

    Or no one will want to post "bad news" or controversial articles/posts on CathInfo, out of fear for their reputation score!

    If I see someone get "crucified" for posting something like an Eleison Comments (which is historically VERY popular, and usually nets you some good upvotes) I will personally go in and remove the downvotes, and give them a little extra Rep points to restore justice.

    Thank you.

    INSIDE STORY – II

    October 25, 2014
    Number CCCLXXX (380)
     
    ”The best-laid plans of men gang aft agley”* –
    When Heaven speaks, we humans need to obey.

    When the idea of a Rosary Crusade for the Consecration of Russia was first put to Bishop Fellay in June of 2006, he did not yet know that the idea was in fact a directive from Our Lady – the messenger had been too shy to tell him. So he did not knowingly go against Heaven’s will when on returning to Switzerland after his meeting with the messenger, he decided to take up the idea of a Crusade, but to apply it primarily to the liberation of the Tridentine Mass, leaving Russia’s Consecration among the secondary intentions. So, as Our Lady told her messenger, while she would bless the first Crusade as a sign that the messages were really from her, it would not be to confirm that the liberation of the Mass was what she really wanted. The true answer to the crisis of Church and world lay in Russia’s Consecration, as would soon be made very clear to the Bishop.

    So, given the backing of Our Lady, the first Crusade was an unexpected success, both in the number of rosaries prayed by the people, and in Pope Benedict XVI’s fulfilment of Bishop Fellay’s long-standing wish by the declaration in his Motu Proprio of July 2007, that the Tridentine Mass had never been abrogated.

    However, already in August of 2006, Our Lady had directed her messenger to send to Bishop Fellay a letter in which he was this time fully informed of all the details of her original request, including that it came from Heaven. To this letter the Bishop had responded positively, saying that he would use the boost from the first Crusade to launch the second, and that it would be best if he himself took the matter in hand. But one year later, soon after the Motu Proprio until the end of 2007, Our Lady directed the messenger to write to him, again and again, to remind him of her wish for a second Crusade that would be properly dedicated to the Consecration of Russia.

    Still Bishop Fellay hesitated to commit himself, so in early 2008 Our Lady came back even more insistently with the same request for the Crusade to be dedicated to the Consecration. The problem was that Bishop Fellay had long been working on his own plan to solve the Church crisis by a reconciliation between the Society of St Pius X and Rome, and Our Lady’s request did not fit in with that plan. Therefore the more progress he seemed to be making with the Romans towards reconciliation, the more difficult it was becoming for him to keep his promise of doing what she asked, because he knew that what she asked would upset the Romans. Indeed . . .

    It was at about this time that the messenger, being unaware of why the Bishop was continuing to stall over Our Lady’s request, asked her if the reason was that the Bishop was not sure that the request was indeed coming from Our Lady. “No,” came the simple answer, as Our Lady lowered her head and shook it gently from side to side, “that is not why.” Our Lady did not say what the real reason was, she only said that it was not because the Bishop did not believe that it was herself making the request.

    We approach the climax of the drama. Drama it was. In early 2008 the Blessed Virgin’s message concerning the Consecration of Russia was becoming urgent, as she knew that the Bishop was seriously thinking of making use of the second Crusade for his own purposes. This time he wanted to use it to achieve the second of the pre-conditions for discussions with Rome – the lifting of the so-called excommunications of the four SSPX bishops in 1988.

    Kyrie eleison.

    (*Famous line from a poem by the Scot, Robbie Burns (1759–1796), meaning “go often wrong.”)

    Offline Green Scapular

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 192
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #1 on: October 25, 2014, 03:26:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    When the idea of a Rosary Crusade for the Consecration of Russia was first put to Bishop Fellay in June of 2006, he did not yet know that the idea was in fact a directive from Our Lady – the messenger had been too shy to tell him.


    Dawn Marie was " too shy"?!  HAHAHAHA!

    No, knowing what she is like, it would make more sense that, after seeing the success of the First Rosary Crusade, she wanted to control the next one and so invented a vision (that she failed to mention before) retroactively.  


    Offline Adolphus

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 467
    • Reputation: +467/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #2 on: October 25, 2014, 03:38:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    So, given the backing of Our Lady, the first Crusade was an unexpected success, both in the number of rosaries prayed by the people, and in Pope Benedict XVI’s fulfilment of Bishop Fellay’s long-standing wish by the declaration in his Motu Proprio of July 2007, that the Tridentine Mass had never been abrogated.

    The first crusade was a success?

    Quote
    Along the same lines, the Chapter asks me to communicate to you the following ambitious project: The Society has the intention of presenting a spiritual bouquet of a million Rosaries to the Sovereign Pontiff for the end of the month of October, month of the Rosary.

     These Rosaries will be recited for the following intentions:

    1. To obtain from Heaven for Pope Benedict XVI the strength required to completely free up the Mass of all time, called the Tridentine Mass.

    2. For the return of the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

    3. For the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.


    1. Was the Mass of all time completely freed?  No, it was not.  It was rather humiliated by being compared to the bastard rite of Paul VI and left as a second-category mass (extraordinary mass)

    2. Has the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ returned yet?  No, it has not.

    3. Has the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary arrived yet?  No, it has not.

    What was the success?

    Offline Adolphus

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 467
    • Reputation: +467/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #3 on: October 25, 2014, 03:53:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    This time he wanted to use it to achieve the second of the pre-conditions for discussions with Rome – the lifting of the so-called excommunications of the four SSPX bishops in 1988.


    I wonder why His Excellency writes "the so-called excommunications" if he signed a letter in which such excommunications were recognized to be effective during 20 years.

    Offline awkwardcustomer

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 457
    • Reputation: +151/-10
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #4 on: October 25, 2014, 04:06:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The best-laid plans of mice and men
    Gang aft agley,
    And leave us naught but grief and pain.
    For promised joy.

    From:
    'To a Mouse'  
    On turning her up in her nest with the plough, November 1785.

    Robert Burns is apologising to the mouse for destroying her nest and lamenting her fate, given that she won't have time to build another one before winter comes.



    Offline Nishant

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2126
    • Reputation: +1362/-80
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #5 on: October 25, 2014, 04:10:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • There is no need to repeat what has been more than sufficiently stated on the other thread - but again, an apparition is not deemed acceptable by default, rather for an alleged apparition to be accepted as authentically supernatural, and deemed worthy of credence by the Catholic Church, the standard of proof is high.

    First, there often is some sort of supernatural confirmation that the message is indeed from heaven, and not owing to something within the power of nature, or to human beings deceiving or being deceived. Think of, for example, the Tilma that Our Lady of Guadalupe gave St. Juan Diego, that even to this day completely astounds secularist scientists, and was instrumental in the Bishop recognizing it truly was from Heaven. Second, and no less important, the "seers" must distinguish themselves by an exemplary life, and the practice of virtue in the highest degree, usually in such a way as is admitted by opponents, and which leads other souls to conversion to God. Saints who received genuine apparitions routinely demonstrated the greatest piety in their personal lives, beside announcing some miraculous act performed by Heaven, as even their opponents admitted. Not only did 70,000 eyewitnesses see the Miracle of the Sun as announced by the three saintly Fatima children, but even the Marxist press did not deny the piety and sincerity of the children, and moreover the miracle happened at exactly the prophesied time, astounded the godless skeptics present, and led to the conversion of several faithless men.

    Personally, while I do not pass judgment on the personal motives of the seer and do not need to, I think all Catholics can easily have moral certitude that these particular "apparitions" are not from the Blessed Virgin, in the same way we can have that same certitude concerning many other recent alleged "apparitions". No apparition is presumed supernatural until proven otherwise, quite the contrary. It is a capital mistake for His Excellency Bishop Williamson to give to these messages anywhere near the same credence Catholics have always given to the approved apparitions. When Heaven speaks, men need to obey, certainly. When someone misspeaks in the name of Heaven, in Heaven's name, do not obey them.
    "Never will anyone who says his Rosary every day become a formal heretic ... This is a statement I would sign in my blood." St. Montfort, Secret of the Rosary. I support the FSSP, the SSPX and other priests who work for the restoration of doctrinal orthodoxy and liturgical orthopraxis in the Church. I accept Vatican II if interpreted in the light of Tradition and canonisations as an infallible declaration that a person is in Heaven. Sedevacantism is schismatic and Ecclesiavacantism is heretical.

    Offline RomanCatholic1953

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6702
    • Reputation: +2346/-63
    • Gender: Male
    • I will not respond to any posts from Poche.
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #6 on: October 25, 2014, 04:34:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What a disapointment.

    Offline curioustrad

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 427
    • Reputation: +364/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #7 on: October 25, 2014, 04:40:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: RomanCatholic1953
    What a disapointment.


    More than that !

    None of what the Bishop writes so far (parts 1 and 2 ) is not already known.

    Question: Why is he now publicly supporting it ?  

    Question: What is the real motive for "going public" ?

    Fr. Cekada once wrote: "We learned to ask ourselves what Fr. Williamson wasn't saying rather than what he was saying to find the real truth behind what he was saying."


    Offline bernadette

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 430
    • Reputation: +592/-144
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #8 on: October 25, 2014, 04:49:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bishop Williamson must be short of things to do...

    Offline curioustrad

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 427
    • Reputation: +364/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #9 on: October 25, 2014, 05:04:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: bernadette
    Bishop Williamson must be short of things to do...


    And that is the curious thing (because he shouldn't be): These "revelations" speak of an English prelate who is unknown and without power who will bring these messages to fulfillment. Yet, if +W is this "prelate" why does he always refuse the mantle of leading the resistance ?

    Why do we have ECs ad nauseam telling us he has no canonical mission from the Church, he cannot lead, he needs the Pope to tell him what to do (video talk in Post Falls in March this year - and another in Spanish in Brazil around the same time) ?

    If he really believes the revelations and thinks they apply to him - why isn't he out calling for Rosary crusades - he did push +Fellay in EC column after column and got the push...

    Again what's the real reason he now espouses these events publicly after 8 years since they started and after telling me 2 years ago he didn't believe in them any more ?

    Curiously also - don't you find it strange that DM was prepared to write +Fellay asking for the first crusade but wasn't prepared to tell him the why and the wherefore i.e. the circumstances ? I mean if she believes she is seeing Our Lady then why not be like Juan Diego and tell "+ Zumarraga" up front what is going on even if he does laugh at you ?

    Everything about this story has my alarm bells ringing.

    Offline Marlelar

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3475
    • Reputation: +1811/-231
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #10 on: October 25, 2014, 05:04:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I missed the boat on this one, who is Dawn Marie and why is she not shy?  I've not read about her before.

    Marsha


    Offline stgobnait

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1346
    • Reputation: +941/-56
    • Gender: Female
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #11 on: October 25, 2014, 05:10:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • me too. im not sure why..... but i think we should be glad we missed this particular boat.....

    Offline Adolphus

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 467
    • Reputation: +467/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #12 on: October 25, 2014, 05:37:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    In June of 2006 the messenger gave the message in person to Bishop Fellay. He discussed it with her, but did not yet know that it was in fact a directive from the Mother of God. And so on his way back to Switzerland he took a first important decision.



    When the idea of a Rosary Crusade for the Consecration of Russia was first put to Bishop Fellay in June of 2006, he did not yet know that the idea was in fact a directive from Our Lady – the messenger had been too shy to tell him.


    It is not clear to me why Bp. Fellay gave so much importance to a suggestion coming from a laywoman, as His Excellency must receive many others, when he was not aware such suggestion was due to a heavenly request…


    Offline ultrarigorist

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 477
    • Reputation: +801/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #13 on: October 25, 2014, 05:57:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Marlelar
    I missed the boat on this one, who is Dawn Marie and why is she not shy?  I've not read about her before.
    Marsha


    Here is one of her Cathinfo accounts for your perusal:
    http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?a=search&id=2549&min=10&num=10

    This was probably hers as well:
    http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=search&id=2747

    I'm pretty sure she had ANOTHER account here too, but have forgotten its handle. Perhaps Matthew or his better half know...

    Anyway, she did most of her tro posting on Angelqueen and IA, some on ABL.

    Offline ultrarigorist

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 477
    • Reputation: +801/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Eleison comments 380 October 25, 2014
    « Reply #14 on: October 25, 2014, 06:00:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Nishant
    There is no need to repeat what has been more than sufficiently stated on the other thread - but again, an apparition is not deemed acceptable by default, rather for an alleged apparition to be accepted as authentically supernatural, and deemed worthy of credence by the Catholic Church, the standard of proof is high.

    First, there often is some sort of supernatural confirmation that the message is indeed from heaven, and not owing to something within the power of nature, or to human beings deceiving or being deceived. Think of, for example, the Tilma that Our Lady of Guadalupe gave St. Juan Diego, that even to this day completely astounds secularist scientists, and was instrumental in the Bishop recognizing it truly was from Heaven. Second, and no less important, the "seers" must distinguish themselves by an exemplary life, and the practice of virtue in the highest degree, usually in such a way as is admitted by opponents, and which leads other souls to conversion to God. Saints who received genuine apparitions routinely demonstrated the greatest piety in their personal lives, beside announcing some miraculous act performed by Heaven, as even their opponents admitted. Not only did 70,000 eyewitnesses see the Miracle of the Sun as announced by the three saintly Fatima children, but even the Marxist press did not deny the piety and sincerity of the children, and moreover the miracle happened at exactly the prophesied time, astounded the godless skeptics present, and led to the conversion of several faithless men.

    Personally, while I do not pass judgment on the personal motives of the seer and do not need to, I think all Catholics can easily have moral certitude that these particular "apparitions" are not from the Blessed Virgin, in the same way we can have that same certitude concerning many other recent alleged "apparitions". No apparition is presumed supernatural until proven otherwise, quite the contrary. It is a capital mistake for His Excellency Bishop Williamson to give to these messages anywhere near the same credence Catholics have always given to the approved apparitions. When Heaven speaks, men need to obey, certainly. When someone misspeaks in the name of Heaven, in Heaven's name, do not obey them.

    Yea, that what he said!^^^

    I think I'll unsubscribe from EC, there's really not much point anymore.


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16