That is refreshing to know Kathy. Thanks. So by that rationale in modern society for now we have the abilities to keep people unsafe for society away from society!
Good stuff. Thanks for the information. As with practically everything theological, I am ashamed to say I have no idea who he is. But I didn't know who Padre Pio (sp?) was when Glenn asked. I don't know how to reconcile the Old Testament (1 Samuel 15) reference regarding murder, the Catholic Church's stance on it, Father Hardon's and what I received in the message. I keep thinking about the distinction I was given. That is, Those who knowingly choose to break this Commandment will need to repent and do so soon....as I said before, people don't usually mean to kill when fighting in self defense. The death penalty is a different story. Last night I received another message and He reassured me of something interesting. I was pretty brain dead and asleep when He called. When I transcribed it today, it gave me clarity about perhaps reconciling these differences between the catechism and what I heard. That messages was: Worry not about the shields of rhetoric. My Love is not as ephemeral as words. It is solid like rock that you may stand upon and know that it is I, your Lord God who you depend upon for grace, Love, joy and protection. I believe He wants me to accept that there will be differences in understanding things now and that I should not reject His words in favor of those of man's and how things have been interpreted. In this case, I don't feel it is necessary to get the okay from my spiritual adviser on whether I should object to the death penalty. However, I am not saying you as individuals should "go against the Church on this." I believe that the majority of the time it is dangerous to draw away from dogma or the catechism and it is not to be done lightly. I must go along with what He has told me. In the future, there will likely be things that are much tougher to decide - then I will be chewing on my adviser's ear and asking God for all sorts of confirmation and bricks. As for the Old Testament, I have no idea what to make of it. I think though the New Testament was supposed to be like Jesus' chance to usher in a time of Love amongst people as opposed to war and murder?? I don't know. I've tried to read the OT but it's way over my head. Too many names of sons of sons of sons of fathers of cousins and brothers and kings of kings and more sons and too many measurements for building churches and arks and altars.
Andy3, We all desire a perfect world where there is no evil, no wars, no killing and ultimately no sin. But this would be heaven. Earth has always been a place of evil and death. I wish there was no killing as well. However, if we as Christians just sat back, as those million in 1990 did in Rwanda, while those who hate Catholics were slaughtered, would we find peace then? There is then, just killing and unjust killing in this world. As scripture attests to, there is a time for the sword as horrible at it is, but we should be people of peace when possible. God used holy warriors throughout history to bring justice. He will again with the Great Catholic Monarch in not to distant future, as foretold by many saints and prophecies. God have mercy on the whole world.
GM4U, With you. As for the Old Testament, I have no idea what to make of it. I think though the New Testament was supposed to be like Jesus' chance to usher in a time of Love amongst people as opposed to war and murder?? I don't know. I've tried to read the OT but it's way over my head. Too many names of sons of sons of sons of fathers of cousins and brothers and kings of kings and more sons and too many measurements for building churches and arks and altars.
True. And the discussion we (i think) had regarding the issue of Syria falls into this area (as well as Nigeria and Darfur) - there is evil and darkness that create war. Catholics are slaughtered. Do we hold them up as martyrs and continue to use passive aggression or do we use violence to fight them? Passive aggression can be powerful (and painful) - see Tienanmen Square and the attention it brought to China. On the other hand, Hitler required violence to hedge violence. I am glad God has to deal with all of this. Of course, these are His rules so it probably far easier for Him. But like the originally words - "knowingly choose". That gives a little leeway for circumstances. Fatima, what is the Great Catholic Monarch?? Or if it is a prophecy by someone else, please don't describe it. Thanks. L PS: I am trying a blog on my website because this one is really engaging. I don't know if it will work or stay up, but it is sort of a thing that is helping me figure out about staying here. I have to say, you guys (and your discussions) are pretty persuasive!
Sometimes when there is reference in my Bible (footnotes) to go to (for example) Daniel 5, or whatever, I will go there and have no idea what the link is. I am not build for theology. But I do enjoy the insights here. I am learning a lot. I plan on researching Fr. Hardon. Take care. L
So the question is, can Christ and his church be at odds on this moral teaching? That is a good question. My thought is yes. But we must be very careful. I am receiving messages that are telling me things that are contrary to the church's thoughts (specifically that capital punishment is a sin regardless of the circumstances). There will be other messages that will make me question what I have heard but I do not encourage others to follow blindly.
[quote="GodsMessagesforUs, post: 46122, member: 3319" Fatima, what is the Great Catholic Monarch?? Or if it is a prophecy by someone else, please don't describe it. quote] From an earlier post on another topic: SteveD said: ↑ Quite a lot has been prophesied about the 'Great King' but it does little to narrow it down to an individual. It is said that (just a few facts from memory below to follow more later when I have had a chance to refresh my poor memory):1. He will have lead a fairly dissolute life as a young man and then undergo a profound conversion to Christ.2. He will be a descendant of the House of Bourbon (but because of the intermarriages of European royal families, that doesn't mean that he will be necessarily French, though he certainly could be - the Spanish royal family, for one are closely related to the Bourbons).3. He will have a limp (this will be given to him by God when he is made aware of his future role during a mystical experience.)4. One mystic says that he will be 'dark haired and hook nosed' - though he is the only one of many to give a physical description.5. He will wage war until he is 40 years old (as the war lasts about 4 years, he must be appointed at around age 36).6. He will live 'to a great age' and die in Jerusalem.Best guess right now is Archduke Ferdinand Zvonimir Habsburg of Austria. Otto von Habsburg's was Crown Prince of Austria (who died not long ago) has a son who is Archduke Karl of Austria. Ferdinand is Karl's oldest son. He has all the cridentials to meet this person. I think he is 15 or 16 years old right now. Saint Cataldus: "The Great Monarch will be in war till he is 40 years of age; a King of the House of Lily, he will assemble great armies and expel tyrants from his empire.... He will at length lay down his crown in Jerusalem." Ferdinand will be 40 in about 25 years. "There will rise a valiant monarch annointed by God. He will be Catholic, a descendant of Louis IX, a descendant of an ancient imperial German famiily (intermarriage of royal families), born in exile. He will rule supreme in temporal matters. The Pope will rule supreme in spiritual matters at the same time. Persucutions will cease and justice shall reign. Religion seems to be oppressed, but by the changes of entire kingdoms it will be made more firm". " He will root out false doctrines and destroy the rule of Moslemism. His dominion will extend from the East to the West. All nations will adorne God their Lord according to the Catholic teachings". (The Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser - 1658). Habsburg family tree includes ancestors, in various noble families, from England, France, Germany, Italy, and Austria "Through the rosary and the scapular I will one day save the world" BVM Fatima, Jan 28, 2013 Edit Delete Report #31[/quote][/quote]
Fatima, I guess I still hold out hope that it does not have to be only in heaven and it can happen here and now with enough faith and prayer. Didn't Mary say that we can have peace on earth if we only would do as she asked and consecrate Russia? That sounds like to me that we can achieve heaven here on earth and not just in heaven.
Be very careful here. The right of capital punishment is not a "thought" or a "church discipline", it is a matter of God's moral law as defined in scripture (which I posted the passage above) and constant teaching of the Church for 2000 years (as defined in the Catholic Catechism). Thus it can never change. Doctrine can be better understood, but can never change.
Any peace on earth is not the absence of sin. That would be heaven. As long as mortal man lives on earth and under the presence of the evil one, sin will always be present and manifested in dimention. The peace that comes from the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, is a unification of the Church, but not the absence of sin, as we are still fallen human nature. When Cain killed Able, the world was in peace, but the effects of original sin, which we all inherited from Cain and Able's parents still remains present in us all until we reach heaven.
Is it that the Church and Christ are at odds or could it be that while still the Mystical Body of Christ on earth, we have a human element in the Church and may be ignorant to full understandings? This is Not to say that the Church is wrong, especially on the basic tenants of the faith.
Be very careful in this. Church doctrine (teachings in the area of faith and morals) can not change, for they come from Christ. One can understand more fully a doctrine over time, but it can not change. If a puppy becomes a cat, that is change. If a puppy becomes a dog, it is development. Doctrine (ie. capital punishment) can develop, but not change as a human condition while on earth.
Is that from the Old Testament? I'm curious. Going back to the question of the New Testament and its "attitude" or whatever you'd like to call it - teachings, perhaps - I thought it was a time of Jesus when, in addition to His sacrifice, He was able to describe a better way of living or introduced new laws or reinterpret old laws that were meant to create a kinder world? The OT was war-like; the NT is peaceful. Another question - how does the catechism reconcile itself (again with regard to murder) when Jesus talks about the law, saying, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven." So what takes precedence - the OT's way, Jesus' way, or man's interpretation via the catechism? I mean, I guess I am asking, can the Catholic Catechism ever be wrong? Has there ever been an instance when it has erred? That quote is from Matthew Chapter 5 when Jesus is teaching about the law. I came across it because Monsignor Patrick asked me to read the Beatitudes and I just kept going.
I don't know. If I took God somewhat out of the equation and gave another reason why this exception is made, I might say it is used to assuage the guilt of using capital punishment at all. However, Fatima is right. In the Old Testament, God has people killing each other left and right. It is confusing to me. But I have to go with what God has told me. Again, I am not advocating that anyone take arms against the Catechism. I believe the Church, when it comes down to possible prophets (or whatever they call me) says that if the person in question has not been declared a fraud or fake, it is up to the reader/person to discern what they will take in faith with the guidance of the Catechism and using as a sort of litmus, what is probable and right.
An aside - forgive my idioms and sometimes poorly worded notes. When I said "thought" or "church discipline," it was a poor way of saying moral teaching. I get the change v. development idea - it's a great analogy. But again, I have to go with what I've been told. I am not advocating that anyone else do the same. In my mind, according to the New Testament and what I have heard from God directly, capital punishment is not an exception. It's weird to think about this. I am going to ask Monsignor Patrick about it.
It seems so obvious and trite but when given a choice between the teachings of the Church and Private Revelation we as good Catholics should choose the Teachings of the Church. This as true on the issue of Capital Punishment as on anything else. The Church has not ever said that Capital Punishment is wrong , on the other hand Linda's God is telling her that it wrong in all circumstances. That, effectively, the Church has bombed in this matter. This is not only heresy but grave heresy. Of a casual free wheeling, breezy type that leaves me almost (but not quite speechless) I am also concerned here that the Old Testament the Word of God is being so casually written off here as obtuse and over people's heads.
I wait , with trepidation to hear what teachings of the Church God will tell Linda next they have got wrong ...and having dumped the entire Old Testament what next is for the dump. I have a saying with seerers give them enough rope..... I am reaching just about the stage where enough rope has been given.
