Seems an opportune time to copy/paste my response to Harper, from the last page, which you may have missed: Church rulings on private revelations must be obeyed, but need not necessarily be believed. (Imagine where we'd be if every Catholic simply decided to stop believing in St. Faustina's revelations simply because the CDF -- then called the Holy Office -- condemned them). If you deny that and instead insist that these CDF rulings somehow comprise actual Magisterium (that is to say; permanent and binding on conscience), then perhaps you should join this gentlemen in his crusade against the Divine Mercy Image and Divine Mercy Chaplet:http://www.novusordowatch.org/divine-mercy.pdf By "obeyed" I mean: If the Church says stop publicly promoting a given apparition, then stop publicly promoting it we must. But it does not follow that we must believe it false. It simply means that, if we remain convinced of its authenticity, we are called to prayer and perhaps legitimate private work on it (e.g. compiling a theological defense of it to submit to the Church). As private revelations are not matters of Catholic Faith, that also means, as a simple consequence, that juridical rulings on them are also not matters of Catholic Faith. I don't know anything about the Lipa apparitions or Vassula; I just wanted to make sure that the basic principles were laid down here.
Daniel, good you showed up. Gaudium et Spes no 37"For a monumental struggle against the powers of darkness pervades the whole history of man. The battle was joined from the very origins of the world and will continue until the last day, as the Lord has attested." Where is your era of peace?
Yes, we are seeing a sweeping diabolical disorientation, and Mark has called it out with more vigor than just about any out there. But when it comes to apparitions/revelations that might just be from God (i.e. lacking blatant heresy, having good fruits), Mark, like me and most, does not deem completely casting aside the admonitions of Sacred Scripture [e.g. Acts 5:34-39] to be what constitutes "real insight."
When did I say that the Era of Peace would be equivalent to a definitive end to the struggle against the powers of darkness before the last day?
What you mean is no era of peace can happen while a "monumental struggle" is ongoing. Sort of contradictory. So you dont agree with Fr Ianuzzi's theory at all?
SO no Kingdom of the Divine Will, a terrestial paradise, no illness, no sorrow. Doesnt sound like Gaudium et Spes agrees with you Mark or Father Ianuzzi
The monumental struggle will not end until the last day. That does not imply that it will be going on full-force every day, everywhere in the world, until then, like it is now. Now Bill, I'm not about to hijack this thread, nor am I going to get back into an Era of Peace debate with those who have already proven they are completely incapable of discussing the issue with even basic respect and charity. I already left this debate on motheofgod by way of this post: https://dsdoconnor.com/on-the-era-of-peace/. Further, I am not interested in being followed around by you like a horsefly on this forum, trying to foist debates onto threads that have nothing to do with them. So I am going to block you from my account (I say that only so you do not wonder why I am not responding to you), meaning I can no longer even see your posts. God bless you, be assured of my prayers for you, and please pray for me.
Well at least we know now that you cannot possibly adhere to Fr Ianuzzi's theory as he sees evil end for a thousand years (because he quotes Lactantius on it) or that there will be no sorrow or illness. In fact what is actually left of your era? Nothing at all.
From St John Paul general audience 20 August 1986: "As the end of the struggle gradually draws nearer, it becomes in a certain sense ever more violent, as Revelation, the last book of the New Testament, shows in a special emphasis (cf. Rv 12:7-9)" What I would point out here to those still influenced by these erronous beliefs in a coming millennium is that the Pope quotes Rev 12, which if the Book of Revelation is taken in a chronological sense (wrongly) occurs 8 chapters before the famous 20th in which Mark Daniel et al would have you believe is still to come as a glorious Kingdom of God on earth. and yet, the Pope says as the end of the struggle draws nearer it become more violent. He doesnt say it will end tomporarily for a symbolic 1000 years but it will actually get worse. I dont know how many official documents of the magisterium have to be shown to prove this error, but there are so many that show it up for what it is. The Pope also confirms the interpretation of the binding of satan at the Passion of Jesus-just as st Hildegard of Bingen was shown by God the Father: ""When a strong man, well armed, guards his palace, all his goods are secure. But if one stronger than he comes and overpowers him, he takes away the armor in which he trusted, and divides his spoils" (Lk 11:21-22). The words which Christ speaks about the tempter find their historical fulfillment in the cross and resurrection of the Redeemer. As we read in the Letter to the Hebrews, Christ became a sharer in human nature even to the cross "in order to reduce to powerlessness, by means of death, the one who has power over death, that is, the devil...and thus to free those who...were held in slavery" (Heb 2:14-15). This is the great certainty of the Christian faith - "the prince of this world has been judged" (Jn 16:11); "the Son of God has appeared, in order to destroy the works of the devil" (1 Jn 3:8), as St. John bears witness. It is therefore the crucified and risen Christ who has revealed himself as that "stronger one" who has overpowered "the strong man," the devil, and has cast him down from his throne."
I started this thread because I had just read about Lipa being 'nulled' by Cardinal Muller. I was heartbroken to have read this. And my concern for bringing the topic up was primarily because I think of the people in the Philippines and how they struggle. I think their Arch Bishop must love his people very much and want what is best for them, with God's help. Things like a reason to hope when the storms and floods destroy their homes and lively hoods. For there is much extreme poverty in that land. The thread has turned into a discourse for assault about things we can do nothing about. Like change the minds of the Hierarchy. I really wonder if they are not bombarded with new visionaries and locution claimants; and the last thing they want is another old problem like 'Lipa' resurrected to add to the mountain already facing them. We can't help what is in our hearts as far as visionaries or messengers are concerned. And I am very grateful to those who point out that if the Church silences these things; we are still permitted to hold the belief we have; but without their blessing we are not to promote anything pertaining to visions or locutions. That is all I really needed to hear. God bless all who contributed. We learn a lot from one another. I certainly learned from reading the posts.
yes , this discussion os about Lipa, rather than Divine Will, I don;t know how it got off base like this.
Bill, I feel you are being unfair. If you don't like Mark Mallett's articles, that is fine by me; but I do like them. They have been a great help to me in understanding many things I believed but did not understand. His articles certainly give me pause for thought. Why do you pump poison into what you perceive Mark to be saying; like the rest of us are idiots who can't figure it out for ourselves. As for the millennium, we have past it now by 16 years, are we to pretend it did not happen. We are here and now. I believe you may be trying to diss the view that we have been told there will be a Second Pentecost. I learned that in Ireland at primary school well over 60 years ago. We did not know when it might happen; but there are some like Mark who feels it could be part of the new era we are entering. Why not ? And there are those who speak about a Warning or Illumination; I hold the belief that describes a second Pentecost. Because if we are all enlightened, it would be an act of Mercy to end this terrible apostasy we are living these days. And remember the greater the Grace, the greater the responsibility we have in the sight of God. Some think this could be about to happen in the next 18 months; and are trying to warn people to get ready. Why do you feel you can treat them badly. They are sticking their necks out for the sake of their brethren. I am not talking about mdm, lttw, or vasula just to be clear. But Mark, Charlie and Janet K are ok to me.
Julia, First I wont take offense at your accusation that I am "pumping poison". If you think quoting papal documents and vatican II documents is pumping poison...well I dont need to say anymore. Concerning Mark Mallett, are you aware he has been banned by three bishops in different diocese in Canada? Let me be blunt with you. I think his teachings are dangerous because they distort the truth. It is clear that what he claims concerning the second coming is just not what you find in the teachings of the church-or even the fathers for that matter. A good case in point is his interpretation of this passage from St Cyril: "We do not preach only one coming of Christ, but a second as well, much more glorious than the first. The first coming was marked by patience; the second will bring the crown of a divine kingdom. " Okay so St Cyril is clear:two coming s of Jesus. And yet Mark Mallett somehow manages to claim Cyril is talking of a third coming:"St. Cyril delineates this “middle coming” of Christ when He will reign in His saints. He refers to it in the linear sense as a “second” coming." Julia, would you like to explain how a statement of a Father proclaiming only two comings manages to become 3? His placing of the Antichrist is all wrong as is his explanation that Revelation can be read chronologically-it cant. The problem is he makes people like you think he is an expert therefore his views must be correct. The Church has shown the millennium spoken of in Rev 20 is the era of the Church from the first Pentecost until Jesus returns in his glorious body. He is correct that we live in terrible times, but unfortunately his reliance on a series of visionaries that do not have approval means that he is actually doing people who believe him a diservice because instead of being watchful for the coming of Jesus at the end of time (as we are told to) he is saying now thats miles away because we have a glorious era coming soon. Julia, it is not going to happen until Jesus come s back. Read what the popes say, read what St Hildegard was shown, read what theologians say. This heresy is only confined to some marian devotees. Everywhere else in the church it was dealt with centuries ago; and its all because of a crazy reliance on people claiming to have messages from heaven. That is why I speak here. For the truth and only the truth. Ask yourself why those bishops banned him. That should tell you something about his teachings.
Padraig, Please read my post above. That explains where I am coming from. It is certainly not to annoy anyone, only to give the teaching as the Church tells it. Nothing more than that. I am sorry if people find my tone maybe a little forceful, but this is serious stuff wea re talking about.
The Holy Spirit is gentle as the breeze , Bill when He is most powerful. Oneoe of the things I notice in authentic Marian apparitions such as Lourdes and Fatima was that the apparition was preceded by a gentle breeze. In fact the Parish Priest at Lourdes was taken by this when told of it be Bernadette. This is a throwback to the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost. I think it is enough to make our point in most cases and leave it at that. People either accept or not. I foten walk away from people who too forcefully disagree or seem inclined to argue. Take this away in prayer. 1 Kings 19 11 “Go out and stand on the mountain,” the Lord replied. “I want you to see me when I pass by.” All at once, a strong wind shook the mountain and shattered the rocks. But the Lord was not in the wind. Next, there was an earthquake, but the Lord was not in the earthquake. 12 Then there was a fire, but the Lord was not in the fire. Finally, there was a gentle breeze, 13 and when Elijah heard it, he covered his face with his coat. He went out and stood at the entrance to the cave. The Lord asked, “Elijah, why are you here?”
If the Canadian bishops are against Mark that only helps validate Mark to me. Everyone one of the bishops in Canada rejected Pope Paul's encyclical on contraception and marital love. From what I have read since it hasn't gotten any better with the renegade Bishops there. Your on the wrong forum buddy if you think you will find more than one of two on here that will buy into your thinking in lieu of the thinking of Mark Mallett. His understanding is within the consensus of church thinking and he has quoted the popes writtings if you have ears to hear
