ANTONIO YAGüE ALERT: Warning Astro Visualized - CONFIRMED

I know you weren't saying prophecy doesn't exist after the time of the Apostles. I just had to throw that in at the end for anyone else who might read the thread in the future

 

Would some expert here give us the ungarbled truth:
1) Does a private revelation/apparition that is approved by the Church become part of The deposit of Faith? I recall it does not.
2) Does it make a difference if the major "Human Player" is canonized a Saint?
I only wonder about this as my Go-To Devotion is The Divine Mercy/St Faustina. In said devotion it is written that The Lord reaches out to all souls at death and for some unknown time after for "confused souls". This is a great comfort to me in my old age as I watch many friends and family pass-on.

GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!

 

Not an "expert" but I recall:

1. No.
2. No.
St. Faustina did indeed say there was mercy at death, and for a time after. Her statement about time after is not Church doctrine.

 

1) No Crewdog. The Deposit of the Faith is set "in stone". It is made up of Apostolic Tradition (or Sacred Oral Tradition) and the Sacred Scriptures. That's it. Nothing can now be added to it.
2) Private revelation can be given to anyone (though it is often given to the saints). Certainly I would put my stock much more into a devotion or prayer which was approved by the Church and given to a saint. I'm not sure if this answers your question or not.

 

Approved private revelation/apparition does not become part of the Deposit of Faith.
No, it makes no difference if the person is canonised.

I wasn't aware of St. Faustina saying that Our Lord reaches out to confused souls after death. In my youth when people had more faith, it was the done thing to say an act of contrition into the ear of a person who died suddenly, say in an accident. My memory could be faulty, but I think there were two reasons for this: (1) that there could be some hope that the person was merely on the brink of death and might hear the words and say the prayer internally; (2) there was a belief that the soul lingered in the body for a while - I don't know for how long but I think it was in the region of two or three hours. I though it was just a local custom but perhaps there was more to it because it would kind of fit with what St. Faustina said.

 

Dear friends,

Does anyone know where we are now with Mr. Yague's hypothesis, has he made changes to his assumptions? Does he still believe that there is another star out there hidden by the sun?

Thank you,

 

In their pride many people here are total fools! Your pride makes you blind! Your religious knowledge is embryonic and you want to teach the others:
According to Church teaching, there are 6 or 7 sins against the Holy Spirit (http://saintsworks.net/forums/index.php?topic=191.0)
1. Presumption of God's mercy.
2. Despair.
3. Impugning the known truth.
4. Envy at another's spiritual good.
5. Obstinacy in sin.
6. Final impenitence.

And the spirit, demon, saying throught your mounths was already judged. Why you accept his teaching?
Excuse me, you are absolutely fools! Your pride makes your blind! Read the Gospel!
Truly I tell you, people can be forgiven all their sins and every slander they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin.”He said this because they were saying, “He has an impure spirit.”

Fools! If you say, that some true prophet/seer has Satanic origin, you HAVE THE SIN AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT. And if such prophet is from God and you deny him, you have the same sin.
You should remain silent and repent! But instead you preach here the impure spirits to cover truth!
Fools! You wait for the Warning, but 3/4 of Christians will deny Christ after it. Repent, repent, repent. Be silent and pray!

 

Yes, but they all can cause a lack of heeding the call to penance, which is what I understood the sin to be, specifically. What are we arguing about, anyway?

 

“Listen to another parable: There was a Landowner - God- who planted a vineyard - Church. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers -Christians- and moved to another place. When the harvest time approached, He sent his servants - His Mother and others seers - to the tenants to collect his fruit. The tenants seized His servants; they beat one - by their thoughts-, killed another - in their souls or in souls of their neighbors-, and stoned a third- by their words. Then He sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way. Last of all, He sent His Son to them. ‘They will respect my son,-because they call themselves Christians-’ He said.
“But when the tenants saw the Son - in the illumination of conscience during the Warning-, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill Him and take His inheritance.’ So they took him - in Eucharist - and threw Him out of the vineyard - removed the Sacrifice - and killed him - in the souls of Christians.
“Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes -to last judgement -, what will He do to those tenants?”
“He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and He will rent the vineyard to other tenants, who will give Him His share of the crop at harvest time.”

 

When God sends a prophet, the prophet should claim penance. If someone kills this prophet in minds of others people, he prevents God"s Will and prevents the penance of others. And such sin is greater, because our aim is to save souls.

 

Hmmm, I've never read that parable that way before, interesting...

 

All parables are timeless. They were not said only for Pharisees, but for all believers. Because Pharisees=believers. Not all Pharisees were bad, eg. st. Paul, st. Joseph of Arimathea, st. Nicodemus, st. Stephen, Gamaliel, Hillel, and they became even saints.

 

How do you know who is a true prophet, LittleVoice?

 

Very good question.
I do not know, therefore I can spread prophets I like and which according to my opinion are not in contradiction with Catholic doctrine. But I cannnot force nobody to believe in this prophet. And I must defend him. Therefore it is very subjective.
On the other side I must be silent and I cannot judge prophets I do not know. If I know them and according to my opinion are in contradiction with Doctrine, I have to wait for official Church condemnation, but I must remain silent. Because if I spoke against some prophet, there is 50% probability of the sin against the Holy Spirit, and I do not need problems in my personal judgement. I wonder, why here people like fools publicly encourage people to ignore prophets. It is foolish to fight against the Holy Spirit or Impure Spirit. They are stronger like people.

 

I think your response here, LV, is rather strong but good. When I see the continuing responses from last night, I see the rigidity that Pope Francis so often preaches against.

There are several references to the Deposit of Faith. Authentic prophecy never questions the Deposit of Faith so it is irrelevant to bring that into the discussion. The unspoken thinking in these responses is saying, "we don't need prophecy", we have everything we need!

By the way, LV, I think your spiritual insights are far more valuable than your pseudo astronomical posts I'm amazed that there are so many people interested in all that stuff.

 

Pseudo astronomical posts Very well said

 

David,
Is it "rigid" to reject a prophet whose messages have received a negative ruling from the CDF? Condemnation by a local bishop? Whose judgment -- other than one's own--should be followed?

 

Ah, the wonderful phrase, "negative ruling"! It can mean so many things to so many people. "Condemnation by a local bishop" is another good phrase its significance being interpreted in different ways by different people. I seem to recall Pope John Paul II's spokesman referring to such a 'condemnation' about Medjugorje as "the bishop's personal opinion".

 

Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. They went out from us - apostles or bishops as we say today-, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.
To condemn false prophet who is claiming lies is very necessary and true bishops are led by Holy Spirit.

 

And yet bishops clearly condemn some seers, as in Maureen Sweeney Kyle, John Leary, Veronica Leuken, and place restrictions on others. Ought you honor those decisions as a matter of obedience?