You are correct Jerry! (and so is Janet) I think I read through the posts the first time and thought Josephite was asking where the quotes from the sister Lucy letter were from. I am guessing she thought that the later Quito quotes were a part of the letter? In any case some Quito quotes were thrown in there at the end.
Apologies Janet! The conversation read differently when I read it the first time. See my above post to Jerry.
Sorry Josephite if I was confusing you there. Apparently I was the confused one I hope it is straightened now.
Janet, you quoted something as 'proof' when you totally took it out of context and tried to deceive others. Do you deny it?
From the same canon lawyer you have referred to, is this later article: https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/...ation-and-civil-marriage-suggest-a-direction/ A quote from there: "That said, I see no way to avoid the conclusion that a crisis (in the Greek sense of that word) over marriage is unfolding in the Church, and it is a crisis that will, I suggest, come to a head over matrimonial discipline and law." In the conclusion of the article, he says: "To conclude, and prescinding from what other questions might face the Church under Francis, I think the marriage crisis that he is occasioning is going to come down to whether Church teaching on marriage, which everyone professes to honor, will be concretely and effectively protected in Church law, or, whether the canonical categories treating marriage doctrine become so distorted (or simply disregarded) as essentially to abandon marriage and married life to the realm of personal opinion and individual conscience. History has always favored the former; disaster lurks behind the latter.
JACINTA OF FATIMA THE SAINT - TEN YEAR OLD MYSTIC Tempered and moulded by extraordinary penance and sacrifice, 10-year-old Jacinta proved to be precocious and prophetic in her vision of things. She had many private apparitions and countless revelations. Such was her supernatural illumination and holy wisdom that Mother Godinho, the directress of the Lisbon orphanage where Jacinta stayed prior to her death in the hospital, could only asked in awe and wonder, “Who taught you all these things?” The following statements uttered by Jacinta showed her depth of soul in face of the moral decay ravishing the world: The sins which cause most souls to go to Hell are the sins of the flesh. To be pure of body is to keep chastity. To be pure in soul is not to commit sins, not look at what one should not see, not to steal, never to lie, always to tell the truth however hard it may be. Fashions that will greatly offend Our Lord will appear. People who serve God should not follow fashions. The Church has no fashions. Our Lord is always the same. Doctors do not have the light to cure the sick because they do not have love of God Priests should only occupy themselves with the affairs of the Church. Priests should be pure, very pure. The disobedience of priests and religious to their superiors and to the Holy Father greatly offends Our Lord. To be a woman religious, it is necessary to be very pure in soul and body. Many marriages are not good; they do not please Our Lord, and they are not of God. Confession is a sacrament of mercy. Therefore, one must approach the confessional with confidence and joy. My godmother, pray much for those who govern! Woe to those who persecute the religion of Our Lord. If the government left the Church in peace and gave freedom to the holy Faith, it would be blessed by God. Wars are nothing but punishments for the sins of the world. Our Lady can no longer hold back the arm of her beloved Son from the world. It is necessary to do penance. If people change their ways, Our Lord will still spare the world; but if they do not, the chastisement will come. Read and reflect. Out of the mouths of babes ----
I would appreciate it if you would stop the accusations. If someone makes a mistake..they are not necessarily trying to deceive someone. Just take a look at the names you all call me..and then I get asked if I pray before I post! We should be able to discuss without the name calling..when that happens satan has been invited in. ☹
If you had simply made a mistake, why did you not admit so? Then others reading your posts would be aware that you had written something that could lead people into error. I haven't called you any names. Look back at my posts.
I didn't say I had made a mistake Sg, but I could have. You always need to check first. As for name calling what did you mean by saying that I....".tried to deceive others.?" No deception was intended. In fact you should have posted it, seeing as this is what the discussion is all about.
Can anyone who receives visits from angels and the Blessed Mother many times NOT also receive an interior illumination and an infusion of the sanctifying graces of the Holy Spirit? Can anyone prepared for a specific mission as Jacinta was -- to witness the message of Fatima -- NOT also receive the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit needed to accomplish that mission? Can anyone who receives these gifts FAIL to display them in their actions and their writings? St. Jacinta should be a model by which we judge alleged mystics (Edited to Add) and also those who claim a mandate to lead us or instruct us. They should all share common traits and witness, through word and deed, their infused graces. (An EWTN article on the gifts, here: https://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/GIFTS.TXT)
Bro Al is correct in his observation that SO MUCH here and in other Posts/Threads is just PURE DISTRACTION with a large Dollop of BS! ... distraction from matters, clear & present, that need our attention ........... like Planet Earth Exploding-n-Imploding at the same time!! VDH gives us a good Wake-Up Call here: "A Hard Rain Is Going to Fall" http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440252/barack-obamas-peace-efforts-may-be-vain-if-deterrence-lost Catholics got a choice alright ...like everyone else these days ...... dither and fuss ... or Get Your **** Together!! I just read a report of five people gunned down in a Mall near Seattle (Liberal Democrat Gun Free Zone) RIP Victims!! The Perp is described as being Hispanic ... I'm betting he be Mohammed from Pakistan What are YOU doing to Get Ready ......... TODAY!!??? GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!
Discussion on this thread is as animated as on any thread. But behind some of the comments is a disturbing sense of underlying anger and a need to hit back that goes well beyond free discussion, and does not include facts. (I will link to this on the "Hate" thread also): SPITE Since this thread is about CHOICES CATHOLICS FACE, let's look at the ENDGAME when disagreements threaten schism, when attacks become personal, when HATE (is) RUNNING RAMPANT. Wrath (Latin, ira) can be defined as uncontrolled feelings of anger, rage, and even hatred, often revealing itself in the wish to seek vengeance. Wrath, in its purest form, presents with injury, violence, and hate that may provoke feuds that can go on for centuries. Wrath may persist long after the person who did another a grievous wrong is dead. Feelings of wrath can manifest in different ways, including impatience, hateful misanthropy, revenge, and self-destructive behavior, such as drug abuse or suicide. "People who fly into a rage always make a bad landing." — Will Rogers According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the neutral act of anger becomes the sin of wrath when it's directed against an innocent person, when it's unduly strong or long-lasting, or when it desires excessive punishment. "If anger reaches the point of a deliberate desire to kill or seriously wound a neighbor, it is gravely against charity; it is a mortal sin." (CCC 2302) Hatred is the sin of desiring that someone else may suffer misfortune or evil, and is a mortal sin when one desires grave harm. (CCC 2302-03) People feel angry when they sense that they or someone they care about has been offended, when they are certain about the nature and cause of the angering event, when they are certain someone else is responsible, and when they feel they can still influence the situation or cope with it. Dante described vengeance as "love of justice perverted to revenge and spite". In accordance with Henry Edward, angry people are "slaves to themselves". Wrath is the only sin not necessarily associated with selfishness or self-interest, although one can of course be wrathful for selfish reasons, such as jealousy (closely related to the sin of envy). From Wikipedia's discussion of the Seven Deadly Sins.
I am flabbergasted! You are twisting and turning your words around, Janet. You said the following when I put forth that you were being deceitful in posting para 3 of the CDF document, (which you took out of context) as proof for your argument: Then when I asked why you didn't simply admit to making the mistake, you reply with this: So, did you or did you not make a mistake? You also claimed that I called you names: But when I denied doing that, your response was: How can that be construed as name calling? And then this statement of yours: What does that even mean? What are you saying I should have posted?
Sg.. you should not jump to conclusions. I posted the paragraph because it was important to the discussion. So how can that be deemed deceit when you knew exactly where it came from? And yes Sg..calling me deceitful is name calling and distracts from the discussion. Let us press on....☺
I don't know what game you are playing. It is plain for all to see that in my post (#116 on this thread) I didn't miss out your words. I did not jump to a conclusion. You refused to acknowledge that you had posted para 3 taken out of context, even when garabandal and Frodo pointed it out.(their posts quoted below) As for name calling, let me give here its definition according to Merriam-Webster dictionary: 'the act of using offensive names to insult someone' and, according to the Cambridge dictionary: 'the act of insulting someone by calling them rude names'. So, I maintain that I did not do any name calling. I am not going to say any more. It's time for me to shake the dust off my feet and move on. You are not after the truth.
I did not jump to a conclusion. You refused to acknowledge that you had posted para 3 taken out of context, even when garabandal and Frodo pointed it out.(their posts quoted below) Rather than me jumping to a conclusion..I am going to take you on your word that you are just not trying to take away my peace. I didn't refuse to acknowledge anything. I might not always post in the correct way in here but I do remember posting something along the lines that we needed to see that paragraph..seeing as it was part of the discussion. When I said you missed out my words... I honestly couldn't see my words. Not that it was a problem I just thought you had forgotten to add them. They are back in now! That's strange...Maybe gremlins in the works? "So, I maintain that I did not do any name calling." You called me deceitful..I forgive you anyway.
