The Consecration: Russia vs. The World: Yes or No?
#11
(01-11-2016, 12:18 PM)Leonhard Wrote: I thought Lucy said that it had been fulfilled. What's the kerfuffle about?  ???

I suppose the kerfuffle is that we were a bit disappointed in the claimed triumph of the IH.

Also, consider that to consecrate a new Church the bishop does not consecrate all the buildings in the diocese, or all new Churches in the diocese (even though that could save the bishops' precious time).

Reply
#12
(01-11-2016, 12:58 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote: I suppose the kerfuffle is that we were a bit disappointed in the claimed triumph of the IH.

Also, consider that to consecrate a new Church the bishop does not consecrate all the buildings in the diocese, or all new Churches in the diocese (even though that could save the bishops' precious time).

I try to be a maximalist, I'll accept as many visions as are approved to be true, and also try to see how their promises could be fulfilled. With regard to the promises of Fatima, I'm no expert, it also called for all Catholics to do penance, and acts of reperations (nobody seems to complain that this has not happened). So maybe once we get all of the Catholic Church to pray dialy rosaries it will happen?

Or the conversion of Russia could be from the error of communism, which did happen, and the avoidance of nuclear war... which also happened.

*shrug*

Eh.
Reply
#13
(01-11-2016, 12:18 PM)Leonhard Wrote: I thought Lucy said that it had been fulfilled. What's the kerfuffle about?  ???

Ah...but which Lucy?  The real one, the impostor, or this one [Image: 859cc0f9a2a6eca8a11f5af76936d249.jpg]??  :LOL:
Reply
#14
:LOL:
Reply
#15
Well, she said that it had been accepted.  Accepted isn't the same as fulfilled. It could mean that the consecration that was done provided for many graces, but not to the extent of which was promised as it was done in an incomplete sense.
Reply
#16
(01-12-2016, 05:32 PM)GangGreen Wrote: Well, she said that it had been accepted.  Accepted isn't the same as fulfilled. It could mean that the consecration that was done provided for many graces, but not to the extent of which was promised as it was done in an incomplete sense.

Have you considered that the response of the laity was just too little? I mean its not as if all, or even a tenth of all Catholics are praying a daily rosary to make reperations against her immaculate heart.
Reply
#17
(12-25-2015, 02:27 PM)TheologyInfinite Wrote: Francis is going to do it.

We all need to write our Bishops, go see them at the Cathedrals.  They offer the Mass on Sunday's.  Get in your cars on Sunday, drive to the Cathedral and simply say, "We need to offer kind support to Francis to Consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary."

Francis is the only pope who would ever have been able to do it.  He has an extremely forceful and powerfully persuasive personality AND he REALLY believes that it's possible for Mary to appear to three children a hundred years ago and give them revelations about geopolitical realities with which Heaven is concerned.

His piety is folk piety.  Not the lipservice paid to the faith by intellectual high rollers in their university offices.
Reply
#18
(01-13-2016, 12:52 PM)Joseph11 Wrote:
(12-25-2015, 02:27 PM)TheologyInfinite Wrote: Francis is going to do it.

We all need to write our Bishops, go see them at the Cathedrals.  They offer the Mass on Sunday's.  Get in your cars on Sunday, drive to the Cathedral and simply say, "We need to offer kind support to Francis to Consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary."

Francis is the only pope who would ever have been able to do it.  He has an extremely forceful and powerfully persuasive personality AND he REALLY believes that it's possible for Mary to appear to three children a hundred years ago and give them revelations about geopolitical realities with which Heaven is concerned.

His piety is folk piety.  Not the lipservice paid to the faith by intellectual high rollers in their university offices.

Hmmm, you're right, he is pious in a folksy way which I find refreshing. Whether he cares about Fatima or not is another thing altogether though.

While I'm not a Fatimist, I've read enough about it to be convinced that the arguments against the consecration specifically of Russia being done are more likely than that they have.

On the other hand there has been a spectacular Orthodox revival in Russia that would have seemed unthinkable even 40 years ago. Who knows what to make of things really.

The way I see it there's no harm to be done by just doing the consecration as asked. I'm not sure the Russians would even take offense, as they have a devotion to the Theotokos as great as any Roman Catholics. The worst that could happen is nothing really.

These days Russia is about as refreshing a place as any. I find Putin to be mysterious but refreshing. He's a man's man who doesn't mince words the way so many western politicians do.

Reply
#19
(01-13-2016, 01:18 AM)Leonhard Wrote:
(01-12-2016, 05:32 PM)GangGreen Wrote: Well, she said that it had been accepted.  Accepted isn't the same as fulfilled. It could mean that the consecration that was done provided for many graces, but not to the extent of which was promised as it was done in an incomplete sense.

Have you considered that the response of the laity was just too little? I mean its not as if all, or even a tenth of all Catholics are praying a daily rosary to make reperations against her immaculate heart.

Sure, it's possible. but who knows? There is part of me that wonders what 2017 holds though. 100 years. If we are to follow the example of France when commanded to consecrate to the Sacred Heart, we know how bad things can turn out.

It does make me wonder what the significance of France and Russia are though. We once knew France to be the Eldest Daughter of the Church. Russia is more or less the seat of Orthodoxy (largest group by population). France was to be consecrated to the Sacred Heart, Russia to the Immaculate Heart. Interesting mysteries.
Reply
#20
(01-13-2016, 02:30 PM)GangGreen Wrote:
(01-13-2016, 01:18 AM)Leonhard Wrote:
(01-12-2016, 05:32 PM)GangGreen Wrote: Well, she said that it had been accepted.  Accepted isn't the same as fulfilled. It could mean that the consecration that was done provided for many graces, but not to the extent of which was promised as it was done in an incomplete sense.

Have you considered that the response of the laity was just too little? I mean its not as if all, or even a tenth of all Catholics are praying a daily rosary to make reperations against her immaculate heart.

France at its best was the eldest daughter of the Church, and privy to all sorts of sacred mysteries and saints, everything from St. Vincent of Lerins to Lourdes, the Sacred Heart and St. Bernard. At her worst she ushered in the modern era with the French Revolution.

Russia is the same for the East. At its best it was a land of saints, piety and mystery; at its worst it ushered in the communist nightmare, legalized abortion etc.

Somehow the two are like the crown jewels of the West( France) and the East( Russia), and Fatima perhaps ties them together.

Mysterious indeed.

Sure, it's possible. but who knows? There is part of me that wonders what 2017 holds though. 100 years. If we are to follow the example of France when commanded to consecrate to the Sacred Heart, we know how bad things can turn out.

It does make me wonder what the significance of France and Russia are though. We once knew France to be the Eldest Daughter of the Church. Russia is more or less the seat of Orthodoxy (largest group by population). France was to be consecrated to the Sacred Heart, Russia to the Immaculate Heart. Interesting mysteries.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)