Bishop Fellay Repeats False Message from our Lady
#11
(11-15-2012, 01:40 PM)James02 Wrote: He's a man of high intelligence and his sermons have a refreshing clarity compared to what comes out of Rome.

Where as, let us look at Rome.  In a year, Catholics will have to decide whether to go without a medical plan, or pay for abortions and contraception.  What did Rome do?

[Image: ObamaPope.jpg]

And your man of great intelligence would no doubt say in reference to the picture you posted..."Look! There's the Anti-Christ himself shaking the hand of Obama!

Yes, such refreshing clarity of thought, such astuteness from the ultimate whiner. Even Martin Luther did not go that far. At least I don't think so.
Reply
#12
Quote: And your man of great intelligence would no doubt say in reference to the picture you posted..."Look! There's the Anti-Christ himself shaking the hand of Obama! 

No, I say there is a picture of a Pope failing his flock.  Who now have to pay the price.  And that is what +Fellay is addressing when he blames Rome.
Reply
#13
(11-15-2012, 01:50 PM)James02 Wrote:
Quote: And your man of great intelligence would no doubt say in reference to the picture you posted..."Look! There's the Anti-Christ himself shaking the hand of Obama! 

No, I say there is a picture of a Pope failing his flock.  Who now have to pay the price.  And that is what +Fellay is addressing when he blames Rome.

That's what you would say.

That not what Bishop Fellay would say, though. He doesn't just blame Rome. He references that Rome is the seat of the Anti-Christ. Of course he doesn't say it outright. He infers it. Kind of like a Vatican ll document.
Reply
#14
Here are the original secrets (at the bottom of the page):

http://www.sspxasia.com/Newsletters/2003...alette.htm

The one problem that jumps out with even the authentic ones that needs explaining is the predictions that the events described were to take place before the year 2000 or before 1950 (twice 50 years from the original message). The twice-50 number seems like it could be interpreteed as being symbolic, but the year 2000 one seems a little more difficult.

The one with Rome being the steat of the Antichrist is the same one James02 is quoting, and that is the later one put on the index.

To me, the later one seems like a pretty obvious attempt by an overzealous person trying to sensationalize the secrets and use them to pove the evilness of that time period.  For example, between the original secrets and the appearance of the one on the index, Rome was invaded, the papacy driven out, and the Liberal regime of the excommunicated Victor Emmanuel II was established there in its place--thus Rome losing the faith and becoming the seat of the Antichrist.  Masonic Lodges were also established (the churches of the evil spirits).  The evil spirits transporting people could refer to the regime's national railroad system, a portion of which was taken from the Papal States with the invasion of Rome (also, the railroad had previously been banned in the Papal States by Gregory XVI ,due to how it was being used to further the Liberal Italian unification cause--it's being built there was one of Bl. Pius IX's early concessions to the Liberals).

The descriptions of bad books, convents, and clerical life also fits the time period.  St. Anthony Mary Claret's autobiography gives good insight on this time period.  In it, he notes how Catholic communities were being corrupted by bad books brought in the boat-load (cf. pars. 549, 718, etc.).  Likewise, his whole minsitry was to go around preaching because the priests were bad in so many places and the convents were a mess.  For example, this is what he was told when he went to Madrid:

814. Madrid, April 15, 1864. A very pious and zealous lady told me, "There is a great deal of ignorance among the clergy. A great number of country parishes would be better off if the people had no priest at all, and just said the rosary together, rather than having to listen to the Mass of a stupid and immoral priest who does nothing but scandalize them."

Same with convents:

711. Those who have dealt with nuns know that in a community in which common life is not
observed there can be no real perfection. Instead of describing the resultant sad state of affairs myself, I would like to let a novice in one such convent describe it in her own words as she does in a letter she wrote to me, dated December 18, 1862.

712. "I find myself here in this convent. For the love of God and the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ I beg you to take me out of this hell I'm in. It's not a convent, it's a tenement. There's no peace here; it's just one big maze. There's nothing here to please me. If our bishop knew what goes on in this convent, he would have closed it down long ago. I am about ready to make my profession, and I'll be a nun fit for hell. I can't trust anyone. My only hope is that through you, your Excellency, I will find some remedy and salvation for my soul. Since you are Her Majesty's confessor, you should counsel her to make a royal decree forbidding any novice to make her profession in any convent in which common life is not observed.

"Dear Sir, I'm not telling you the half of it. What a sad life it is! It's like a death: all I can do is suffer and hold my tongue. I hope that your Excellency will be able to remedy it somehow before the day of my profession comes. Everyone who lives in individualistic convents is going through the same thing I am. God only knows what goes on in convents like this. Help me quickly--time is running out; my profession is coming soon and I'll be caught beyond remedy in the deepest compromise."
http://www.alabamacatholicresources.com/...y%20of.pdf

Reply
#15
(11-15-2012, 12:25 PM)Old Salt Wrote: Correct,
That particular part of the "message" was never given Church aprobation.

It was approved by the local ordinary and the Church has since said nothing official about it.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with quoting it at this point.
Reply
#16
(11-15-2012, 01:30 PM)Meg Wrote:
(11-15-2012, 01:28 PM)James02 Wrote:
Quote: He always seems to blame Rome when when things don't work out.
Are you saying Rome deserves no blame for these last 50 years??

No.

But Bishop Fellay is a dork. There. I said it.

No, worse than a dork.

If you must criticize Bishop Fellay  (although this seems unjustified to me) perhaps you could find more respectful words to express your opinions.
Reply
#17
(11-15-2012, 01:58 PM)Walty Wrote:
(11-15-2012, 12:25 PM)Old Salt Wrote: Correct,
That particular part of the "message" was never given Church aprobation.

It was approved by the local ordinary and the Church has since said nothing official about it.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with quoting it at this point.

Remember, though, +Fellay is "worse than a dork."
Reply
#18
(11-15-2012, 02:03 PM)Phillipus Iacobus Wrote:
(11-15-2012, 01:58 PM)Walty Wrote:
(11-15-2012, 12:25 PM)Old Salt Wrote: Correct,
That particular part of the "message" was never given Church aprobation.

It was approved by the local ordinary and the Church has since said nothing official about it.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with quoting it at this point.

Remember, though, +Fellay is "worse than a dork."

Exactly. I toned it down from what I was REALLY thinking. 'Dork' is putting it mildly, IMHO.
Reply
#19
Quote:  He references that Rome is the seat of the Anti-Christ. Of course he doesn't say it outright. He infers it.

Did you read his sermon?  He is telling the faithful that times are very bad, and will get worse.  But they still have a duty to remain faithful, draw close to Our Lady, and win souls.

I do not find any implication that he views the Pope as the anti-christ.  Again, why would he talk to him, or continue to talk to him if he felt that way?
Reply
#20
(11-15-2012, 02:05 PM)Meg Wrote:
(11-15-2012, 02:03 PM)Phillipus Iacobus Wrote:
(11-15-2012, 01:58 PM)Walty Wrote:
(11-15-2012, 12:25 PM)Old Salt Wrote: Correct,
That particular part of the "message" was never given Church aprobation.

It was approved by the local ordinary and the Church has since said nothing official about it.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with quoting it at this point.

Remember, though, +Fellay is "worse than a dork."

Exactly. I toned it down from what I was REALLY thinking. 'Dork' is putting it mildly, IMHO.

How is your personal feeling toward Bishop Fellay relevant?  ???
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)