So in other words, if I stand up publicly and rebuke the pope, that would cause a spiritual scandal, because that would cause other Catholics to lose their respect for the pontiff, which is a scandal. That would be the sin of a scandal. Scandal is an occasion of spiritual ruin. So, in a family, if a teenage son or whatever disrespects his father, it teaches the younger children to also disrespect their father. Obviously, you’re a father. You understand that. My six-year-old’s already teaching his four-year-old brother how to misbehave. It happens. This quote is from the Crisis Magazine article just posted by Padraig. Important part of the message.....
She sure is. Winsome. Speaking of cats---Brian how is Gracie? You haven't said much about her lately? Is she jealous of the motorcycles?
Pope Francis refused to answer the Dubia of the four cardinals. In my opinion that is a scandal. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
She’s out in the garage with me, knocking over all the stuff on my workbenches or trying to jump up in my lap while I’m working. Or crying forlornly if I won’t pick her up.
No, HeavenlyHosts, by saying that "to stand up publicly and rebuke the pope...would cause a spiritual scandal," you are directly contradicting Canon 212.3, which says that we (the laity) have "the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors" our concerns about the direction of the Church. If this is a "right" granted to us and a "duty" imposed on us by Church law, it cannot possibly be a sin, when it is done properly. However, it would surely be a sin to convince Catholics to follow an Antipope promoting schism, heresy, and apostasy from the perennial Teaching of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church (CCC 675). That would be a true scandal and a manifest sin. In the face of obvious destruction of perennial Church teaching by Jorge Mario BerGOGlio, why tell everyone to "respect" that man? Anyone who will do the research will be able to see that it is at least plausible that Benedict XVI is still the Vicar of Christ. I believe that he resigned as the diocesan Bishop of Rome, and that he is currently "emeritus" Bishop of the diocese of Rome. But he retains the "plenitudo potestatis" as the Vicar of Christ, as he shows in his current signature "Benedictus PP XVI (PP stands for plenitudo potestatis.)" You can understand his intention by reading what he said at his Last General Audience: The "always" is also a "for ever" – there can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this. I do not return to private life, to a life of travel, meetings, receptions, conferences, and so on. I am not abandoning the cross, but remaining in a new way at the side of the crucified Lord. So we need to respect Benedict XVI, until his death. And the teachings of Benedict XVI are diametrically opposed to those of Jorge Mario BerGOGlio. So we must choose to follow one or the other. The end time prophecies discussed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (675-677) are happening before our eyes. We are to "watch" that we are not deceived. It is our job as Catholics to choose the side of Jesus and His faithful Vicar, not the side of Antichrist, the hireling. We are called to follow and proclaim the Truth, not to simply "pray, pay, and obey." This is the final test for all Catholics alive today.
So an obscure website tried to link the messages to MDM. And that’s supposed to keep us from evaluating the prescient, possibly positively prophetic, elements of this one, which exists independently of and has no known association with MDM otherwise? We are well aware of the failed prophecies and Church condemnation of MDM: https://www.ncregister.com/blog/9-things-you-need-to-know-about-maria-divine-mercy I would certainly, honestly welcome a similar explication of the failed prophecies or Church condemnation of the messages under discussion. I’ll happily delete any references to them with a mea culpa for being so gullible. But I’m not willing to ignore them due to guilt by association with spurious sources. Maybe if we have any Italian speaking forum members they can help us with an investigation.
With all due respect, when I came across the MDM comparison, it became too much for me ~ I'll happily PM the link to you though. More comfortable with that than posting it on a public forum. You are loved!!!
MDM claims to have started receiving messages in November 2010. Giuseppe Auricchia supposedly received messages between 1988 and 2012. Since he predates MDM by 20 years, we can safely say that, at best, MDM used her imagination (or worse) and Giuseppe‘s messages as source material. So any supposed connection between Giuseppe and MDM can be disregarded out of hand. Bugnolo posted about him in 2019, 30 years later. Again, that too can be disregarded out of hand. That’s why I said logic and reason have to dictate our discernment of these things. I’m sorry I didn’t go to the effort to explain the reality about the dates involved here (as they seemed so basic to the debate and clear cut as to be unnecessary) before criticizing the critiques of Giuseppe here.
To be accused of gaslighting when basic facts, logic and reasoning are behind your assertions is infuriating, as it presupposes malice on the part of the accused. If it happens again the poster will be banned from that thread. If it persists that poster will be banned, period.
I will respectfully withdraw. Logic has never been one of my strengths, though I do try. God bless...
For anyone interested, here is the link to the "official website" of Giuseppe Auricchia (translated from the original Italian). The messages are from Madonna del Pino: https://www-madonnadelpino-altervis...l=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp Apparently he has quite a following. His messages (available on the site) span 22 years, starting in 1990.
Miracle Hunter has the apparitions listed as false, although there is no link to the decision: http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/unapproved_apparitions/index.html This Italian website, which seems to be sympathetic, also reports that the bishop gave a negative opinion. http://www.madonnadelpino.altervista.org/curia.html Personally, I wouldn't be too quick to turn to contemporary private revelations for guidance in these times. It is extremely likely you will stumble across false messages in this dark age in which we live in. We have been already warned at Fatima, etc. We who are aware see what is going on. Time to step up prayer and penance. Help those you can. Offer up the rest. Be at peace.
I don't know. Every single time I feel like I have a good grasp of happenings, something inevitably comes along and takes all I have learned and tosses it out the window and I have to start from home plate again. I know the magisterium and the catechism and I'll let that guide me. I have no problem telling some of my priests and my bishop that they are in error if needed. My bishop was one of those signaturees of that "God is on your side" letter. He is an ultra-modernist. I have challenged him directly, but politely before. I have no problem doing it again. Fr. Mark Goring had a video at the beginning of this synod, urging people to write to their bishops to urge them to stick to church tradition, so we did. And what did we get back from Bp. Biegler...? A letter in business-ese basically telling us to sit down and shut up, that the synod wasn't for "addressing grievances". Apparently they only want to hear from those whose opinions are in line with theirs. This synod is a big steaming pile of something. Funny thing is, I actually like my bishop, he's personable. But if I get going on all of the stuff he has driven me nuts on, I'll never stop.
