"But yet the Son of Man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?" [Douay-Rheims] Lest we despair, I have to say that the Douay-Rheims translation seems a lot deeper than that of many other bibles. It reads to me that Our Lord didn't hold up much hope for us. That 'think you' says a multitude. Our situation is, on the face of it, dire. Only divine intervention can save us now. We will, I believe, get it. It won't be like in a fairy story or Disney film. Prepare for the Wrath of God and, even if only on the basis of 'no atheists in fox-holes', a consequent rekindling of Faith.
Dolours has invited me to comment! I really have not spent much time looking at this thread or the controversy about Fr Martin but I thought I should just go to the section of the video that Dolours specified. I was not able to find any comments by Fr Martin that indicated any kind of teaching or proposal that would lead to a change in Church teaching. The criticisms of Fr Martin seem to be based on the belief we should not do anything that showed any kind of acceptance or approval of LGBT people. For me, I actually hate the 'pushing' of the LGBT narrative which tries to tell us that there is equivalence between an LGBT relationship and one between a man and a woman. There is no equivalence and Pope Francis knows that as well as Fr Martin. But both relationships must be chaste! I am actually concerned that Fr Martin's approach can lead to gay Catholics thinking that a gay physical relationship is ok. But Fr Martin is not saying it is ok, he is saying we should treat gay people the same as anyone else. I find that difficult to do but that is my problem, not the gay person's problem. There is nothing that Pope Francis has said or done that conflicts with the Catholic catechism's words on the topic: 2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition. 2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
Cinema ModeOff Blood of St Januarius liquefies once again in Naples Cathedral fanpageit on Sept 19, 2017 The miracle of the liquefaction of the blood of St Januarius happened again at the Cathedral of Naples, Italy, on September 19, the saint ... gloria.tv2 hours ago Web
We all know what the teaching of the Church is. I doubt anyone on here has the least problem with it. If Martin is simply reiterating what is written in the Cathechism, why is he receiving so much opposition? Is Martin lecturing that homosexual tendencies are objectively disordered? Is that the theme of his book? Is he telling the 'rainbow' people that pride is a sin and that they should publicise the disorderliness of their orientation rather than present it as something to be proud of? Why are very respectable people claiming that Martin has declared that homosexual acts are not sinful? Are these people all liars, intent on character assassination of an innocent man? If so, what is their motivation? Are they simply nasty homophobes? Are those faithful homosexuals who criticise Martin's agenda also homophobic? Are you not being very naive?
These are nightmare scenarios any way we place them. A Pope who denies 2000 years of dogma to introduce pernicious novelties surely is no longer Pope. He has abdicated whether he means to or not. And the prelates he has appointed also I believe by promoting these novelties are on shaky ground. If. We have a canonist among us maybe we can get some light in this. Is there any kind of road map here? The Arian heresy? Wasn't that a huge percentage of clergy? If the schismatics own the buildings who cares. Peter and the early Christians met in caves and woods to hold Mass. the Church is where Jesus is and the faithful find Him there. God will cleanse His Temple and restore His Bride. This we know is a promise to "take to the bank" but in the meantime we are in for nasty weather. ("BadMoon Risin' ")
I should add emphasis here. A Pope-- not this Pope, please God. He hasn't done it as of yet and let's pray pray pray he doesn't.
Liberius was Pope during the Arian heresy and as far as I know he embraced Arianism but repented on his deathbed. Faithful Catholics at that time avoided him and resorted to celebrating Mass away from the Churches under his control. The Arians had the buildings but the people kept the faith. I think, though, that Arianism wasn't as widespread as what's happening under Pope Francis, possibly because of limits to their means of communication. In a way, Pope Francis is something of a cross between Liberius and Honorius 1 but I think that Honorius would be a more accurate match. He was condemned posthumously for permitting the faith to be subverted by enabling heresy to flourish. His excuse was that he would bring the heretics back into the fold of the Church. Isn't that what Pope Francis is doing? He condemns abortion when preaching to pro-life groups; praised an abortionist as a role model when speaking to secularists; invited population controllers to expound their views at Vatican conferences and appointed abortion supporters to Vatican Committees. He says that adultery is sinful yet didn't condemn Cardinal Cocopalmiero's absurd statement that it's what God would wish for the sake of the children. He issued an Apostolic Exhortation with wording sufficiently ambiguous to permit its interpretation contrary to settled Church teaching and refuses to respond to questions asking him to confirm that it can only be interpreted in line with Church teaching despite conflicting interpretations in various dioceses, some of which contradict the clear teaching of previous Popes. He said that gay marriage is wrong but promoted Fr. Martin who claims that we should see homosexuality as a blessing and attacks Bishops who won't permit people living openly in homosexual unions to participate in lay ministerial roles in parishes under their jurisdiction. There are plenty of examples of his ambiguities where the Deposit of Faith is concerned (Fatima has listed many on another thread). While nobody can judge the Pope (least of all us), the papal bull issued by a previous Pope on foot of the Council of Trent suggests that that particular Pope feared that a heretic could wangle his way onto St. Peter's seat and recommended ways to remove such a Pope. It's unlikely, however, that Pope Francis will be removed. Who would remove him? The Cardinals who voted for him? The Bishops who remain silent as the faith is attacked? The 100 Bishops he has appointed this year alone? No, this Pope hasn't done it yet. He is promoting men whose beliefs contradict previous Popes. That's why I asked can a pope be the False Prophet because the people Pope Francis promotes will elect the next Pope. Take note that in the video Fr. Martin said that there are some changes Pope Francis needs to introduce gradually. He said he had to be careful what he said. Why so? Fr. Martin was addressing the question of homosexual marriage and he said quite clearly that what Pope Francis is doing is equivalent to another Vatican Council. People like David need to be led by the nose gradually, first accepting de facto Catholic divorce and eventually a Catholic blessing of homosexual unions which won't be called marriage or a sacrament but will give Church approval to sodomy. Fr. Martin said that the Pope is using the Synods on the family to effect these changes. The next one is likely to reverse Church teaching on birth control and he has enough new men in place to not need the manipulaters he employed at the last Synod. He may well leave Catholic same sex marriage to his successor. By then people like David will believe that it was Divine will all along simply waiting for the Pope to find it hidden in the Gospel.
I am not caught up on this subject yet but I just came across the following article on this topic, http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/new...ow-a-cancer-within-the-us-church-says-bishop/ Attacks on Fr James Martin show a ‘cancer’ within the US Church, says bishop by Staff Reporter posted Tuesday, 19 Sep 2017 Bishop Robert W. McElroy of San Diego walks away after greeting Pope Francis during his general audience in Paul VI hall at the Vatican (CNS photo) Bishop McElroy accused critics of 'homophobia' and distorting Church teaching Much of the criticism of Fr James Martin and his book Building a Bridge is part of a “cancer of vilification” in the US Church, a bishop has claimed. Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego said the criticism was often based on “homophobia”, and also served as a “veiled attack” on Pope Francis. Two talks by Fr Martin were cancelled last week, while an address to Cafod in the UK was also postponed. Fr Martin said was as “a result of anger or fear over my book Building a Bridge,” although Cafod said their decision was due more to scheduling issues. In an article for America magazine, Bishop McElroy accused Fr Martin’s critics of a “campaign of distortion”, adding that a “cancer of vilification is seeping into the institutional life of the Church”. Fr Martin’s critics, he added, are driven by “homophobia” and have a distorted view of Catholic moral teaching. He also accused them of making a veiled attack on Pope Francis and his “campaign against judgmentalism”. The US Church, Bishop McElroy said, has a “long-standing bigotry” against members of the LGBT community. The attacks on Fr Martin’s book Building a Bridge show it is time for the Church to “purge itself” of this bigotry, he adds. The bishop also accused them of distorting Church teaching, saying that while Christians should model themselves on Christ, chastity is “not the central virtue in the Christian moral life”. “Many times, our discussions in the life of the church suggest that chastity has a singularly powerful role in determining our moral character or our relationship with God. It does not.” Finally, Bishop McElroy says many of those criticising Fr Martin are unable to forgive Pope Francis for “uttering that historic phrase on the plane: ‘Who am I to judge?’” “The controversy over Building a Bridge is really a debate about whether we are willing to banish judgmentalism from the life of the church,” the bishop adds. Fr Martin’s book and the reaction against it have received much attention. Cardinal Robert Sarah critiqued Building a Bridge in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, in which he said the Church must be clear about sexual morality, and praised same-sex attracted Catholics who live according to Church teaching. Mr Martin contends that his book does not challenge Church teaching. “It simply builds on the catechism and the Gospels,” he said.
It is amusing in a way that they keep calling people homophobes over and over and over. Do they not realize that most families in the US have at least one sodomite? In some cases more. Like mine. In fact, is it not the US which began exporting this all over the world to begin with? It is ridiculous. These are juvenile straw man arguments, meant to distract and create a media circus of worldly condemnation toward those that hold this as an abomination to God nothing more.
Fr Martin and his ilk are just so nice they do not like to offend. So they ignore the truth in favour of nicety. They equate Christian discipleship with the new virtue of nice! Diabolical nicety from the Church of Nice People.
Shame on that Bishop. I wouldn't let Fr. Martin within an ass's roar of anyone I cared about and would bar him from contact with seminarians. Having read that diatribe from Bishop McElroy, I would also avoid him like the plague. I had never heard any orthodox Catholic say that Jesus had to learn from us until Fr. Martin's tweet saying that Jesus learned from the Canaanite woman that his ministry was not just for the Jews but for all mankind. He presented it as a possibility in his Yale speech but as a fact on Twitter. The Haydock Bible Commentary gives some Catholic interpretations of the Bible passage (starting at Matthew verse 21) here: http://haydock1859.tripod.com/id33.html A little internet search produced an interpretation identical to Fr. Martin's. No surpriset that I found it on the HuffPost website, in a blog post dated October 9, 2011 by a Lutheran Minister named Barbara Kay Lundblad: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barba...pture-matthew-15-teaching-jesus_b_921497.html Here's an extract: Jesus was converted that day to a larger vision of the commonwealth of God. Jesus saw and heard a fuller revelation of God in the voice and in the face of the Canaanite woman. The woman’s truth is evident in the way Matthew tells this story. At the end of this chapter there is another feeding story. This time 4,000 men are fed — besides women and children — and there were seven baskets left over. Seven is the number of wholeness, completeness, a number encompassing the nations. Matthew has placed the story of Jesus and the Canaanite woman between these two feeding stories. The Canaanite woman taught Jesus that she and her daughter deserve more than crumbs. After this encounter Jesus went on to feed those who had not yet been fed. If Jesus could be changed, can we? Every generation sees some people as “other” and puts them under the table. Ms Lundblad is very well educated. Here's some background on her where you can also read her opinion on same sex unions. Best to say no more on that lest I upset the mercy brigade. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/author/barbara-kay-lundblad The best interpretation I have heard came from a Maronite Catholic Apologist in a video posted by Don on another thread. It's at point 42:30 on the video:
Attacks on Fr James Martin show a ‘cancer’ within the US Church, says bishop. The Bishop is right. But for the wrong reasons. There is a cancer in the Church, it is sometimes called the gay mafia. And because Fr James Martin seems to tap on the wound we all have to endure in the Mystical Body of Christ, he gets ouchies from those who are suffering in silence through all this; or more to the point some of those who are suffering and not prepared to do it in silence. IMO I don't have a problem with the Pope saying 'who am I to judge.' I do have a problem with prelates having gay orgies in the Vatican. Or is that homophobia on my part. I do have a problem with a prelate having a mural hoisted on a Cathedral wall of himself stark rollicking naked, and a bunch of other naked or semi naked persons in the mural one of which looks remarkably like bin laden. Or is that not showing appreciation of art. Who knows.
The day the "official Church" approves of sodomy is the day it ceases to be the official Church. Then it is "out" in all its rainbow finery as the Church of anti-Christ as Fulton Sheen warned. Then the battle is out in the open. And I would truly fear sulphur and brimstone from the heavens. Honestly I am amazed and filled with gratitude that God has not already done it.
Yes. We need to pray lots. Fasting is also in order. I've being going to adorations more often but I must be doing something wrong because I don't get messages from Heaven like all the holy people.
Hi Dolours The message from heaven for you is that you are doing exactly the right thing in going to Eucharistic Adoration more often. This is where Our Lord desires you to be. So it's not quite correct that you haven't received a message from heaven. We are all the time receiving messages from heaven, it's just we don't recognise that they are messages.
Thank you David. That gives me great comfort. I always believed that God talks to us through our conscience and that our personal relationship with Jesus comes through Baptism and the Sacraments so I was beginning to think that there's something wrong if I don't have a touchy feely kind of personal relationship or get special insights at adorations. I really like adorations. In one church they sometimes have benediction and sing the old Latin hymns that we learned in school but rarely hear nowadays.
