Author Topic: Eleison Comments CDXXXVI (436) Nov. 22, 2015 A.D. (Read 21579 times)

Recusant Sede · « **Reply #30 on:** November 22, 2015, 04:53:20 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Once again we see +Williamson's excessive credulity for things like visions and miracles being his Achilles' heel. We do not draw theological conclusions from such things, not ever. It's very easy for the devil to create fake miracles and visions.

I for one do not believe that God would ever perform a Eucharistic miracle if the Mass itself were displeasing to Him because that could be construed as a tacit endorsement of the Mass. So if Bishop Williamson thinks this "miracle" is legit (along with Garbandal, Valtorta, Dawn Marie, and all the other crap he believes in), then he has no business rejecting the New Mass or doing anything else that he does.

I'm sorry, but when people cling so much to these types of phenomena, that's generally a sign of weak faith. We don't need any of this crap to confirm our faith, and we most certainly do not theologize based on it.

Great post!

covet truth · « **Reply #31 on:** November 22, 2015, 04:54:00 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: covet truth
Quote from: Ladislaus
Once again we see +Williamson's excessive credulity for things like visions and miracles being his Achilles' heel. We do not draw theological conclusions from such things, not ever. It's very easy for the devil to create fake miracles and visions.

I for one do not believe that God would ever perform a Eucharistic miracle if the Mass itself were displeasing to Him because that could be construed as a tacit endorsement of the Mass. So if Bishop Williamson thinks this "miracle" is legit (along with Garbandal, Valtorta, Dawn Marie, and all the other crap he believes in), then he has no business rejecting the New Mass or doing anything else that he does.

I'm sorry, but when people cling so much to these types of phenomena, that's generally a sign of weak faith. We don't need any of this crap to confirm our faith, and we most certainly do not theologize based on it.

Did you ever consider that this miracle wasn't necessarily for you who doesn't need to have his faith confirmed, but what about the priest who found the host; or the people involved in the process of analyzing it? What about Bergoglio who, maybe more than any of the others, Our Lord is manifesting Himself to show His Real Presence in this particular host? He can't deny the Truth of it even if he doesn't "believe" it. Our Lord's ways are not our ways. None of us can know, let alone judge, the reasons God chooses to make Himself known. It can give us hope for those who were chosen to see it that one day they will also come to believe it.

For those that saw it, what "mass" does it help them to believe in? What mass does it lead them to attend?

One can't discount the grace of God to lead them to the Truth. Where would any of us be without His grace that led us to Him, so unworthy thou we are?

2Vermont · « **Reply #32 on:** November 22, 2015, 05:30:00 PM »

Quote from: covet truth

Quote from: 2Vermont
Quote from: covet truth
Quote from: Ladislaus
Once again we see +Williamson's excessive credulity for things like visions and miracles being his Achilles' heel. We do not draw theological conclusions from such things, not ever. It's very easy for the devil to create fake miracles and visions.

I for one do not believe that God would ever perform a Eucharistic miracle if the Mass itself were displeasing to Him because that could be construed as a tacit endorsement of the Mass. So if Bishop Williamson thinks this "miracle" is legit (along with Garbandal, Valtorta, Dawn Marie, and all the other crap he believes in), then he has no business rejecting the New Mass or doing anything else that he does.

I'm sorry, but when people cling so much to these types of phenomena, that's generally a sign of weak faith. We don't need any of this crap to confirm our faith, and we most certainly do not theologize based on it.

Did you ever consider that this miracle wasn't necessarily for you who doesn't need to have his faith confirmed, but what about the priest who found the host; or the people involved in the process of analyzing it? What about Bergoglio who, maybe more than any of the others, Our Lord is manifesting Himself to show His Real Presence in this particular host? He can't deny the Truth of it even if he doesn't "believe" it. Our Lord's ways are not our ways. None of us can know, let alone judge, the reasons God chooses to make Himself known. It can give us hope for those who were chosen to see it that one day they will also come to believe it.

For those that saw it, what "mass" does it help them to believe in? What mass does it lead them to attend?

One can't discount the grace of God to lead them to the Truth. Where would any of us be without His grace that led us to Him, so unworthy thou we are?

You didn't answer my question. What mas does a supposed EM in the New "Mass" lead one?

covet truth · « **Reply #33 on:** November 22, 2015, 05:51:36 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

You didn't answer my question. What mas does a supposed EM in the New "Mass" lead one?

What I'm saying is that even if it brings them to EM or the N.O. it doesn't mean their journey stops there..Most all of those here began there, right? Most would still be there but for the grace of God. People are still coming from the N.O. Who are we to say God doesn't give the grace to those who seek it? Even in the N.O.

Motorede · « **Reply #34 on:** November 22, 2015, 08:17:59 PM »

True Mass, new mass, schismatic mass, satanic mass--it doesn't matter. If there is valid matter and form, and the celebrant is a valid priest and has the proper intention, then there is transubstantiation necessarily because all the Sacraments work ex opere operato. God must allow this to take effect because it is the way He designed the Sacraments and His veracity and holiness require that He obeys Himself.