"Imprudent" would be to despise the prophetic word of the Spirit. Imprudent would be to close ones ears to what God is saying through his messengers and taking what is good and putting into practice. Imprudent would be to not pray for wisdom, understanding and knowledge of what God is revealing and wants us to come to understand in this moment. What is with your "approval" mindset? Where in scripture or church teaching is "approval" deemed necessary to the working of the Holy Spirit? A wise man recently wrote in his blog: "What are people going to do if an angel appears to them in the middle of the night saying, “It’s time to take your family to a refuge.” Will they reply, “That’s very nice. But until my bishop approves this message, I’ll stay here, thank you.” My Lord, if St. Joseph had waited for his dream to be approved by religious authorities, he might still be in Egypt!"
Many good people thought they were listening to the Spirit when they heeded the words of Locutions to the World and warned family members and stockpiled goods against imminent catastrophe. The website itself proclaimed the backing of a famed cleric and exorcist, who seemingly vouched for the revelations. But look what happened! We cannot assume any revelation is true on the basis of our feelings. There are many, many false prophets out there. After St. Bernadette's visions, legions of false visionaries rose up in France, demanding attention. How do we know what is real and what is false? Even esteemed priests and bishops have been wrong in the past and can be wrong now. The Church's approval process is meant to help, not hinder. And if the authorities get it wrong the first time -- as in the case of St. Faustina-- God will get his way in the long run. Faustina is a saint and Divine Mercy is a Feast. Jesus praised her for following the lead of her superiors; wasn't this a test for her and a lesson for us?
Yes we should always accept the rulings of the Church in this matter. I do so of course in the case of the Apparitions of Lipa. They have the power to make these decisions , given to them by God and they it is who will have to go before the Judgement Seat of God to explain themselves, not me, thank goodness. However this accpetance of the Rulings of the Church in these issues is not like throwing an electiric light switch. I cannot simply beleive something to be ture for amny years of much discernment and then after a Decree from ROme simply turn the light swtich off when a Ruling comes from Rome. The Spirit the Soul simply does not work like this. The Spirit is not a beauacratic entity a matter of rules and forms , it is a living breathing grace from God. In accpeting the Churches ruling on Lipa I woudl never now travel there or embark in organising pilgrimages. I would never publicaly try to promote the site and any retirictions they wish to place on or around it I would obey at once. But you kow an examply is the case of St Padre Pio who also went under a very strict ban from the Church. In fact a much , much stricter ban from Rome that the case of Lipa and from mcu hhiger quarters. I ahve eben following Padre Pio with deep belief and compassion from the sixties when I was a ikd. he was isntrumental in my conversion. Now when under the Church ban I would never ever have travelleld to San Giovanni and never in any way encouraged devotion to him or gone on pilgraimages in repsect of the boot from Rome very severely ebing put itno the poor old guy for most of his life. I repected that these monsignori sat in the Chair of Moses in these matters, not I, and I respected this. But I could not throw some light switch in my heart from light to dark and say as the did, 'Oh well this old guy is complete fraud, deluding and abosuing others' I knew the truth tha Padre Pio was a very ,very great saint. ut I went along with what they wanted. So with Lipa. I go along with what they rule as God has given them the place to do so. But I know in my heart that Lipa is true , just as I knwo in my heart that PAdre Pio was true and nothing they can say can change this. Poepls heart do not work like this. There is no magic light swtich in which I can switch of my knowledge of the turth. Were I can switch off the Light of the Most Holy Spirit. ..and thank God for this. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...gainst padre pio nothing supernatural&f=false
I agree very much with padraig's response to this. Another point to make is that the LttW messages and also the MDM ones were not uncovered by the Church authorities but by the devil shooting himself in foot as he generally does in the end. The track record of the Church authorities on these matters is poor to put it mildly. "How do we know what is real and what is false?" you ask . The Catechism answers the question - Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church. For the most part, the Church Magisterium does not provide specific guidance on contemporary prophecy. But I certainly agree that there are many messages out there that are not authentic, although most of those seem to me not harmful.
In terms of following unapproved apparitions, sometimes time is of the essence. Rowanda comes to mind. There was no time for official church approval before the machettes came out and prophecy was fulfilled. Some responded to our lady's call there and promoted the apparitions to their neighbors and I am sure some were waiting for some kind of approval. well, sometimes we don't have time to wait as this case pointed out. There were graces to be had and those were lost on those who waited. I agree with Padraig with his light switch analogy. if a ruling were to come out against Medjugorje, of course I would no longer read the messages or tell people about it, but I would continue to believe in it. It was THE vehicle for my conversion. I would still be living a life down that awful, sinful path I was on before our lady of Medjugorje set me straight. Even if condemned, I would still tell people (if asked) how I came back to the faith (through my Medjugorje experience), and I would still promote the 5 stones of Medjugorje to anyone who would listen. If you don't know what the 5 stones are, you have not researched Medjujorje and are in no position to condemn it. I find that most people who are against Medjugorje do not even know what the 5 stones are and what a typical pilgrimage there consists of.
I personally did not find Bill's posts faith edifying. I found them very sarcastic and uncharitable. I also found it odd that he kept baiting Daniel, Peter, and Mark into a "debate" on a topic he was not willing to honestly debate since he was already deeply entrenched in his position. He was kind of like an internet stawker in that sense. The last kicker was the fact he used a roaming IP address. That is not normal. You use this type of set-up when you are a hacker or criminal or a spammer. That is a huge red flag for me.
What Potatosack said. Also, returning under a new name after getting banned is totally uncool. And, the thing is, in certain areas Bill made some good points. Unfortunately, he seems to be one of those people who has to be right no matter the cost. His way of steamrolling over anyone who disagrees with him, telling them to go join a protestant church (I'm paraphrasing) and distasteful remarks like that, offsets any good he might have done.
Also, Our Lady of Kibeho warned strongly against sexual sin, and against a chastisement to come. This was BEFORE the outbreak of AIDS in that very region!
If only Kibheo was approved before the 1 million were butchered within 90 day's. But they were given 12 years to repent and get their faith in order, but most did not heed the warning they were given to repent or else. No one can say that God did not warn the world of of everything that is transpiring now and will digress to much worse within the very near future. But, few have ears to hear.
This is a section of a new report from Spirit Daily: Archbishop Takes Sharp Issue With Vatican Over Lipa The archbishop who last year approved apparitions of Mary in the Filipino area known as Lipa to a Carmelite nun in the 1940s -- an approval that has now been "nullified" by a Vatican Congregation -- told Spirit Daily Monday (6/7/16) that he maintains belief in the apparitions, has a personal devotion to it, has had no direct communication with the Cardinal, Gerhard Muller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who nixed it, and may appeal directly to the Pope, whom he does not believe is aware of the Cardinal Muller's action. The archbishop, Ramon C. Arguelles of Lipa , had declared the apparitions "worthy of belief" on September 12, 2016, and stated that the events were indeed supernatural, strongly encouraging devotion to "Our Lady, Mediatrix of Grace," as she called herself there. As we reported at the time, "Unless overturned by Rome, the apparition is thus 'Church-approved.'" That reversal occurred on December 11, 2015 -- though Archbishop Arguelles was not made aware of it until two weeks ago. The archbishop says a bishop in the Philippines Conference of Bishops informed him on May 28 that the Congregation had nullified his approval and that he had received the official document on May 31 from the nation's papal nunciature in Manila. (We strictly abide by such determinations.) Asked if he had yet responded to the surprising nullification, the archbishop said, "No, because I was sent nothing directly," but added he may attempt to take the issue up with the Holy Father "if I can reach him." The Vatican document (see below)argued that a contentious negative ruling made in 1951 against the apparitions held sway because it was "confirmed" by the Holy Father, at the time was Pius XII. For more than half a century now, the matter has been the focus of terrific dispute, with four of the six bishops involved with the original negative document in 1951 later recanting (and despite what they signed, expressing belief in the apparitions) and Cardinal Santos of Manila authorizing promulgation of the devotion. Arguelles says two Filipino bishops outright ignored the commission's negative ruling, allowing faithful to continue visiting the shrine. In 2010, however -- to make matters still more convoluted -- the Vatican "affirmed"that the apparitions were "not supernatural": that unusual forces had been "excluded. This was under Benedict XVI. The Lipa archbishop has conceded that the latest ruling by Cardinal Muller , who also has indicated opposition to Medjugorje, holds sway and as a matter of "obedience" released what he was given by the nuncio on May 31. "I did not respond and I have no intention," he says. "The document was not addressed to me but was meant for me and implied I was disobedient and I am not disobedient. I think there is a lot of antagonism to whatever is Marian and I am very hurt by that. I don't know if the Holy Father Pope Francis knows about this. I think this is completely contrary to what he believes." When asked if he would halt people from visiting the shrine, Archbishop Arguelles said, "No, no not at all. You don't stop people from believing and loving the Blessed Mother. No, no, no. They can tell me to keep silence, but they cannot force me to say it's not true, as one bishop of Lipa once said." "I don't think Pope Francis knows what's going on," saysArguelles. "I don't think he knows about the letter." Arguelles said he may attempt at contact the Holy Father, "but I don't know if I can reach him, especially if some people around him know I am approaching him. I don't know if I'm capable of getting to him." He said he did give Pope Francis a Rosary from the site's devotion, known as Our Lady Mary Mediatrix of All Grace, when the Holy Father visited the Philippines last year. "This is a place of our continual prayer for you," he told the Supreme Pontiff just before the Pope left Manila to return home. "Things are still happening there, at Lipa, things that be can't be explained and the Blessed Mother has plans for us," he claims. Asked why he thinks it took so long for Muller's document to reach him, the archbishop replied, "Your guess is as good as mine. It's strange. There are so many strange things in the whole thing, so I believe even more that Lipa phenomena are true. There are too many testimonies. This is also my experience. I sometimes pray hard for the Church in Europe." He laments "all these beautiful things that [he believes] Heaven is doing" in the area of Lipa. Arguelles, a bishop since 1994, says he prayed at Lipa as a seminarian and young priest "spent solitude" there, and then "even as bishop -- I pray in Carmel. It's part of my life. And I am thinking I became archbishop of this place for a reason." http://www.spiritdaily.com/interviewarchbishop.htm
[/quote] This simply keeps getting stranger... Referring back to what I wrote earlier about the allegations that the 1951 investigation was seriously mishandled, it is clear from Archbishop Arguelles's latest remarks that no new information has appeared to negate his contention that several of the bishops concerned made notarial declarations retracting their negative position on Lipa. So the obvious question is how the CDF can be upholding the 1951 decree as definitive given all the information that is now public knowledge suggesting that it has no moral value. Posing this question, it should be emphasized, is a separate matter from that of whether the 1948 apparitions were authentic or not. Related, of course, but logically separate. One passage that really raised my eyebrows was this remark of Abp Arguelles: "I don't think Pope Francis knows what's going on," says Arguelles. "I don't think he knows about the letter." Arguelles said he may attempt at contact the Holy Father, "but I don't know if I can reach him, especially if some people around him know I am approaching him. I don't know if I'm capable of getting to him." Think about the implications of what is being said here...
Tis the state of the organizational church today and for so many decades prior: "I don't think Pope Francis knows what's going on," saysArguelles. "I don't think he knows about the letter." Arguelles said he may attempt at contact the Holy Father, "but I don't know if I can reach him, especially if some people around him know I am approaching him. I don't know if I'm capable of getting to him." Hopefully if the Bishop does go forward in order to inform Pope Francis he will record the entire history and request a true commission that would involve him as local authority as well as all of the "discovery" that has been deliberately rejected for some reason that completely nullifies that much earlier quick decision from 1951. You have to wonder why any authority with any desire for respect for his decisions would publicly advertise his neglect of all of the facts in this long history. It really makes one look incompetent if not heartless.
This simply keeps getting stranger... Referring back to what I wrote earlier about the allegations that the 1951 investigation was seriously mishandled, it is clear from Archbishop Arguelles's latest remarks that no new information has appeared to negate his contention that several of the bishops concerned made notarial declarations retracting their negative position on Lipa. So the obvious question is how the CDF can be upholding the 1951 decree as definitive given all the information that is now public knowledge suggesting that it has no moral value. Posing this question, it should be emphasized, is a separate matter from that of whether the 1948 apparitions were authentic or not. Related, of course, but logically separate. One passage that really raised my eyebrows was this remark of Abp Arguelles: "I don't think Pope Francis knows what's going on," says Arguelles. "I don't think he knows about the letter." Arguelles said he may attempt at contact the Holy Father, "but I don't know if I can reach him, especially if some people around him know I am approaching him. I don't know if I'm capable of getting to him." Think about the implications of what is being said here...[/quote] While I was writing my own comment before yours was printed, Peter, after seeing yours it looks like we both had our attention alerted to the same passage in this report!
That is a very strange statement from a Bishop. There are enough Francis-appointed members of the Curia to put the Archbishop in contact with the Pope if he can't just pick up the phone and ring him.
It does indeed seem strange. Just thinking of it in terms of the operation of a large organization, I suspect the good Archbishop got way out ahead of his bosses at the home office with his declaration, which was unexpected. As I noted before, the Vatican had asserted jurisdiction over the Lipa events many years ago. Why didn't Arguelles write to the CDF or to Pope Francis before he took the very unusual step of publicly taking back jurisdiction and making a formal announcement? He got slapped down in a lightning response from Rome (a few months is fast) and he hurt his "cause" which could have been better served by discussion. As a matter of prudence, courtesy or CYA that should have been done. And to keep it going by granting interviews, well, that just seems very imprudent. I have no comment on the deeper conspiracy theories some may be proposing, but I certainly see a problem in process.
Francis maintains his sanity and focus by (intentionally and by his own open admission -- I am not accusing him of anything here) severely limiting the channels of information that are capable of reaching him. This applies even to Bishops, Archbishops, and Cardinals.
I expect that the Pope is in regular contact with Cardinal Schonborn and one or two other Cardinals in his inner circle. If I wanted to speak to the Pope, Cardinal Muller is the last person I would contact. If I'm aware that Cardinals Schonborn, Kasper or the South American Cardinal whose name escapes me but who is reputed to have ghost written much of Amoris Laetitia are favourites of the Pope, then the Archbishop cannot be unaware of it. Do you think that the Arbishop could be venting a little spleen at the Prefect of the CDF? Incidentally, I'm not giving an opinion on the authenticity of the apparition because I don't know enough about it and prefer to wait for definitive rulings from the Church where all supposed apparitions are concerned.
Perhaps I am worng but I would suspect Liberals would at once and at a very deep level be viscerally hostile to any Marina Apparition . If the Holy Father can only be contacted by going through this Liberal coterie with which he appears to be surrounded then forget about it.
Although , come to think of it, Archbishop Schonborn is a big fan of Medugorje. Just goes to show that you can't put people in boxes too much.
How do you know that? Cardinal Schonborn is a diplomat, quite capable of giving all sides the impression that he is in full agreement with them without actually saying so.
