Author Topic: The Seer Responds to Bishop Fellay (Read 19302 times)

Centroamerica · « **Reply #120 on:** November 06, 2015, 02:41:17 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: Centroamerica
That's fine, Matthew, but your number 1 poster and spewer of heresy (and friend from the seminary?) seems to give the impression that it must absolutely be rejected at the risk of eternal salvation. He even make a proclamation declaring it a fake.

This attitude is along the same lines of Pfeifferville.

1. He's not the "number one poster".
2. I know of no heresies he's uttered.
3. He has never said it must be rejected for the sake of salvation, that I'm aware of. Could you point me to the offending post?
4. He's only an online acquaintance. I've never met him IRL. His seminary time pre-dated mine by several years.

This is a troublesome post for me. This post seems to indicate that Matthew is in agreement with Ladislaus's non-Catholic and heretical positions of which an entire subforum here hosts.

Mod edit:
No, I'm not a Feeneyite. Ladislaus admits of Baptism of Desire/Blood as long as you don't get into the "implicit faith" thing. I don't think he's consciously heretical of anything. His opinions seem to be within the bounds of the Faith, as far as I can tell. Speaking of which, I'm not going to get into the Feeneyism debate. I believe with St. Thomas Aquinas about Baptism of Blood/Desire.

holyfamily · « **Reply #121 on:** November 06, 2015, 03:00:47 PM »

Is the seer currently under the care of a spiritual director, and was the subject of this thread, "The Letter" approved and written under a priests' guidance, and approved to be posted on the internet site nonpossumus? If so, who is the priest and why isn't he publicly attached to The Letter? If not, then we have yet another example of the seer acting on her own. If she was authentic she would be in complete submission to her priest on all these matters.

Another question, who is "we" and "us"? In The Letter, the seer several times refers to the plural when speaking of her visions. Below one example, and other places throughout the letter she uses "we", is she referring to her spiritual director, or who?
"To this I have no answer because none of us know what is being referred to here. We see no citing of any letter dated October 26th.
This part remains a mystery----perhaps a clarification would be helpful. We can think of nothing pertaining to a letter of October 26th".

holyfamily · « **Reply #122 on:** November 06, 2015, 03:29:34 PM »

Concerning Fr. Faure believing/not believing the seer receiving messages from Heaven. In Sept of last year he did not believe or support, and voiced those concerns strongly to Bp. Williamson. People are free to ask Bp. Williamson or Fr. Faure. If Fr. Faure changed his mind recently then he did.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #123 on:** November 06, 2015, 04:58:09 PM »

You do know he is a bishop right?

And what you state is a bold-faced Sharon.

holyfamily · « **Reply #124 on:** November 06, 2015, 05:10:19 PM »

I referred to him as Father because at that time he had not yet been consecrated a bishop. No different when we are speaking of a pope before he became pope it is proper to call him Cardinal, Bishop, or Father.