Subjects:
1. Racism and Love.
2. Resurrection of the RC Church
3. Miracle or the Devils work?
4. Without God
5. Fatima and the Denial of the Spirit
My logic is based on older dictionaries and consequently statements such as "the age of a thing and the time it has been in existence are not necessarily the same" (Creation time and other things) is incomprehensible to today's academics.
In attempting to deal with the Biblio/helio/ geocentrism argument in the same context, I have been distracted by the current debate on racism. There seems to be a lot of confusion around the terms, racism, tolerance and love. One could throw in tribal nationalism, family loyalty and hate.
Racism, according to my dictionary is-"a doctrine or teaching, without scientific support, claiming racial differences in character or intelligence. to assert superiority of one race over another or others; to maintain the purity of a race or races." "any programme or practise of discrimination or segregation based on those beliefs. "
To ban a select group simply because they make you uncomfortable or for any cultural reason, simply does not fit the definition of racist.
This logic isn't accepted of course. If enough uni-professors and street protesters think that to have a personal dislike for a particular race is racist then a new edition of the dictionary will be rushed out making my copy obsolete. Look what happened to
" kill OM eta". After Whitlam was chastised for calling a kilo-metre a "killOMeta " the dictionaries were up-dated, ignoring the basic principle of the prefix and object of a word. This is not to be taken as an objection to colloquialism. But if dictionaries are updated in this way, then future historians reading one of my 1945 books could be forgiven for thinking that all the men were poofters because they were a gay bunch of lads.!
The so-called racists are accused of intolerance, tolerance being made synonymous with love; the embracing kissing kind. Actually to tolerate means to "put up with" something or someone you may not like for some reason which may be because of race or ethnic background. This toleration could be an act of Charity as demonstrated by St. Therese in her relationship with the "crabby old nun". (Story of a Soul) Despite her dislike the saint intensified her little acts of kindness to her Carmalite sister.
For most of my early life I did not know the real meaning of charity. Then I met the late Rev. Fr. Buckley, and thanks to his help and teaching I came to an understanding of the meaning of true love or charity as distinct from the generally accepted concept; the difference between an act of the will and an act of the heart or emotion. I recall a debate with a close family member taken in by this new age love born again Christian ideal. (See below origin of "charity" etc.)
I said," If you as a mother who could not swim seeing your child fall into the deep water, without thinking, dived into the river to attempt a rescue; this is natural or ordinary love. If a stranger walking by who could not swim, knowing the full risk, dived in to save the child; this is an act of charity or true love, an act of the will."
To dislike a people purely on race is not racist, and so long as this dislike is not translated into hate it cannot be a sin. If it is translated into intolerance it is still not racist but certainly uncharitable.
Finally, despite all this, every human being has an immortal soul each one equal before God, and judged ONLY by Himself.
How does the Church define "love".FR. MORRISON REPLIES First of all, the use of the noun "love" in translations is of relatively recent usage. In most venerable Catholic Bible in English translation, the Douay-Rheims (the equivalent of the King James Version for Protestants), the word "charity" is used, as in 1 John 4:16: "God is charity." Although "charity" has acquired a more restricted sense in recent English, it directly represents the Latin "charitas," which itself represents the Greek "agape." More on that below.
As defined by St. Thomas Aquinas and the Catholic theologians, charity is a supernatural, infused virtue, by which we love God above everything for His own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for God's sake.
Thus, charity is not something that is acquired by our own acts, but is divinely infused into the soul when one is in a state of sanctifying grace, a state of sinless (at least not mortally so) friendship with God.
Notice that it is not defined as a "feeling" toward someone, as the word "love" in English unfortunately connotes. Also notice that the object of charity is not primarily any human person, but God. Both of these erroneous notions are rife today in the Church, which seems to put social relationships above God.
No, the object of charity is first of all God Himself. It is only when this relationship is in order that the second, charity toward neighbor, is even possible. To make charity toward neighbor primary and God secondary is a perversion of the Christian religion. For example, see in Matthew 22:37-39 the stress that Christ Himself places on the former.
Now we can look at the nuances in the Greek that are inaccurately translated "love" in many modern translations.
agape (charitas) - a reverential, selfless love directed toward
God.
philia (amicitia) - a love of a friend, or even of a thing
(philosophia, love of wisdom).
eros (amor) - erotic love.
storge (pietas) - familial love.
Unfortunately, the English word "love" is much too broad to cover the nuances of the Greek adequately, and its use is very deceptive, as readers think of the modern connotations of the translated word, not the original.
How does God Himself define the word? St. John's Gospel (14:15) quotes Christ as giving this definition: "If you love me, keep my commandments." St. John later emphasizes the same interpretation when he writes in his Second Epistle (6): "And this is charity: that we walk according to His commandments."
So, here on earth, love is obedience to God's commandments. That turns on its head a lot of the error one currently hears about love meaning acceptance of incorrect, irrational, and immoral beliefs. Scripture gives quite the opposite definition!
Whilst this implies that the Church had died, it is meant in the Mystical Body sense; as Our Lord died on the cross and yet lived.
This book is a most detailed history of the events subsequent to the second Vatican Council as it relates to all sections of the Traditional Movement. He takes no sides with any group, and shows by a unique interpretation of the documents of V2 (missed by other analysts) where the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is today.
"It is now only the traditional Catholics who demonstrate the Indefectibility of the Church, as any older Catholic can see for himself. Let any lifelong Catholic, 50 years of age or older, visit any traditional Catholic parish, and study every detail of their belief and practice. What he will invariably find is exactly the Church he was brought up in. Such stability is absolutely impossible for "small schismatic groups" and the presence of it among traditional Catholics of all groups (sedevacantist, SSPX, indult, etc.) is proof positive that all of these parishes are standing fast to the Barque of Peter, where, alone can be found such stability fit to last until the end of the world, and thus preserving that "faith which was once and for all time delivered to the saints." (Jude 3)"
"Such Unity, Holiness, Catholicity, and Apostolicity which exist in such abundance among traditional Catholics of all stripes (and in the classical sense of what the Church has taught that those qualities mean) is simply not found in the Novus Ordo "Church of the People of God," where each parish is practically a "religion unto itself," holiness is practically unheard of, Catholicity is lacking, and the Apostolic mission to convert the world has been suborned by a false "ecumenism" which seeks merely to unite and pacify the world without bothering to convert it to the Gospel." Griff Ruby
It is impossible for me to give you any idea of the depth of research Mr. Ruby has done, save to print here with Mr. Ruby's kind permission, Appendix I The reader would need the complete works for detailed historical references.
MIRACLE OR THE WORK OF THE DEVIL? When Moses confronted the Pharaoh performing the miracles of God, the Pharaoh's magicians (ancient word for scientists) matched them. Therein lies the distinction. It has always been held that only God can work a miracle, but the devil uses science to do miraculous things. If one were to take any of a hundred things in common usage today back to the people of the middle ages, for example a Public Address system one would either be a miracle worker or burned at the stake. Here though we must be even more specific. A real miracle is opposed to nature, whereas there are in creation spirits and other forces of nature which are generally deemed supernatural but which are in reality not. If a man had no eyes but could actually see that could be considered a miracle. A ghost or apparition not necessarily so.
Television, spaceships etc. are seemingly miraculous things, and there is no doubt that science and its achievements has turned many people from spiritual things and God; not because there is anything intrinsically evil in science, but rather because the PRIDE of mankind made him superior to God .We were warned. "The Prince of this world is to come, and he and I have nothing in common." When it is claimed that the Virgin Mary appeared it is called an apparition. This implies it is not the Lady in person, but a projection, some super hologram; but this hologram unlike our feeble attempts can actually have substance, be visible and heard selectively, and with different appearance depending on who is the beholder.
Let us take the more recent (relatively speaking) amazing phenomenon that occurred at Fatima Portugal in October of 1917 and try all known science of today to see if one could duplicate the event. We can completely dispense with the idea that Hypnotism or allusion was involved, because it was observed by disinterested people within a 50-mile radius even out to sea.
.......First of all I will recapitulate the basic story as reported at the time. A vision of a young woman purported to be the Virgin Mary appeared to three young children offering a message to the world from God, that was obviously Catholic but yet not in any way complimentary of the Church, but rather critical. The Virgin promised months in advance to work a miracle on October 13th, to prove the authenticity of her message. Consequently a massive crowd of about 100,000 was present that day, including many that came to laugh, and the press to finish them off. It was raining, and the ground was quite muddy.
In the words of the Newspaper O Seculo, which only that morning had published "The great Joke-the biggest laugh yet", in the first publication after the event by the same author: "...Then we witness a spectacle unique and incredible for one who was not present... The sun resembles a a dull silver plate...It does nto warm, it does not dazzle. One would say that an eclipse had occurred. But now a loud shout is heard. "Miracle, Miracle! before the astonished eyes of this crowd, whose attitude takes backto Biblical times, and who, pale with fear and with heads bare, look at the azure sky, the sun trembles, the sun makes abrupt movements, never seen before,and outside all cosmic laws, the sun "begins to dance" AS THE PEASANTS SAY...Only one thing remains to be done, namely, for the scientists to explain from the height of their learning, the fantastic dance of the sun, which, today at Fatima, has drawn 'Hosanna' from the hearts of the faithful; and which, as trustworthy people assure me has impressed even Free-thinkers, as well others of no religious convictions who had come to this spot, henceforth celebrated." (Avelino d'Almeida)
When as a non-catholic I first heard of the story, my first reaction was that the all-powerful church secretly stored science and used this to trick the gullible into service. This couldn't stick because the message actually called for a revolution of prayer against an ever increasing sinful hierarchy .The Protestants couldn't have been behind it as they would never have promoted the Rosary and Marian devotion. The government of Portugal withdrew the army to let the crowds in just to have the last laugh when no miracle happened. They thought that would be the end of the matter. Later leaks from the church hierarchy about the contents of the third secret suppressed by the Vatican accumulated by researchers indicated a very deep crises coming in the Church, a pope being punished etc.
....... Now as it was reported that the mud on the ground the peoples clothes etc were all completely dried in the approximately 12 mins of the event. I know of no microwave or other heater capable of doing this without cooking the people. Such selective heating is scientifically impossible.
........Could the apparition be some super hologram? Mind we would be hard pressed to do that even today, but there may be a secret society that possesses all our hidden science, maybe aliens from the stars; but none of that gels with the messages. Remember and this is what supports the truly supernaturalism of the event, different people saw and heard different visions at one stage. A bit like three people seeing and hearing a different movie on the one TV set, without interference; or perhaps like at Pentecost when each person heard Peters sermon in his own tongue. Using ultra sonic mixing and highly directional speakers it is possible with today's technology to duplicate this. I could put a speech into a select space inside another's head if you wish and no one else would hear it. This would be rather complex to do in a large crowd even by today's standards, and even if this was done at Fatima in this way why, hasn't it been perpetuated?
The miracle of the falling sun, which didn't really, because the astronomers of the world reported no such incident. So it was a local event, something that would make proud, extending across over 100miles; terrifying the people on the ground, whilst the three kids saw something else; their own special cinemascope movie, with a message that neither corresponds with the intentions of the devil, aliens from space or any super scientists of earth.. "Get your act together, stop fooling around with your neighbours wife, dress modestly, avoid filthy books and movies come back to the gospels and pray, otherwise a terrible punishment, "entire nations will be wiped out", something like what seems to be just around the corner today, and one must admit the world hasn't taken any notice.
MARCH COMMENT
After reading Fr. Fahey's "Mystical Body of Christ and the reorganization of Society", I now realize why. I almost always knew about the MONEY TRICK, so well proven in Fr. Fahey's book "Money manipulators and social order" But why wasn't this accepted by others; and when accepted not acted upon? To steal is one thing, but to print money and lend it to many different people charging interest thereon and demanding property as security is monstrous. Why such blindness? Because without God nothing can succeed. That old stumbling block. And by "without God" I mean without His Catholic Church. Preposterous I hear the good Protestant call. No matter how well intentioned the politician is, unless he is armed with what only true Catholics have; a belief and fear of hell, PLUS the need and desire of regular confession, then he will eventually succumb to the weapons of the money power. Namely: Calumny, bribery, blackmail, threats of financial ruin, after he becomes indebted to a Bank. I do not say here that the Catholic will not succumb. I said that he and he alone is better armed against them. And then they use their final solution, assassination. Hence a true Catholic Government, not just an individual here or there is the only answer. Looking at today's world, taking any country, say Australia for example; where will we find 100 or so honest (even new order Catholic) men to give the reins of government? Reminds me of the time of Lot. He couldn't find even one.
If you deny the Spirit and like St. Thomas want material evidence, then read this book, check and verify the historical facts that are suppressed in the mainstream media. Give yourself a chance! PROVE TO YOURSELF THAT FATIMA DID NOT HAPPEN???
There have always been people who deny the Spirit, that they have a soul. Today's materialism however has reinforced that attitude more than ever before. "When we die we are dead dogs, nothing." This belief is so imbedded, that if one tries to offer any evidence to the contrary, one is violently opposed, "I will not listen!" This attitude originates in the source of all sin, PRIDE. "I will not serve."
But, there is something much more sinister than pride in the world today, and I can prove it. It is an active willful knowing opposition to God and his Church, with the most destructive branch infiltrated into the highest places of the Vatican.
I have just read "
FATIMA PRIEST"* the story of Fatima and Fr. Gruner's Apostolate to promote Our Ladies Message, and in particular the consecration of RUSSIA to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, by all the Bishops with the Pope at the SAME TIME. (Those with the imbedded pride will leave here) So where is my proof?
Fr. Gruner put it this way,".......For agnostics and atheists who deny any common premise from which we can build an understanding, my answer will never satisfy them other than to say to them that it costs really nothing to do the consecration. If nothing happens, nothing really is lost. If the great good of world peace follows then they should realise that it is only by the Divine intervention of God that it has come about." If I personally assume that any Catholic official or priest is contaminated by the new modernism desease, then they fit the description of agnostic, and I add to Fr. Gruner's statement.
Why has Mary's so simple request been prevented; sabotaged in so many small but important details? My response should convince any doubter who is prepared to follow the logic through, and has examined the historical records of Fatima presented in "Fatima Priest" and so many other publications.
People in high places in the Catholic Hierarchy with or without the collaboration of the Pope (it is not for us to judge) have actively opposed and prevented the above consecration, and persecuted or perverted any organisation promoting the TRUE story of Fatima.
WHY? It is because they KNOW what will result if the requests were fulfilled. Think about this: When the enemies of the Church allowed the 70,000 or so people to attend at the Cova on that BIG DAY, they said. "Let the poor disillusioned fools go, nothing will happen,
It will be a great victory for us, and THAT WILL BE THE END OF IT."
THEY ARE NOT ABOUT TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN. Otherwise why not let the thing happen. "THAT WILL BE THE END OF IT." Not all people who deny the Spirit deny the Supernatural. It's just a matter of which side they are on. They KNOW that if the CONSECRATION GOES AHEAD A MIRACLE IN MANY WAYS GREATER THAN THE MIRACLE OF THE SUN WILL OCCUR, and the world will universally come under the reign of Jesus and Mary. This is the same reason why they dare not TEMPT the SPIRIT in the matter of the INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. No Pope since Vatican II has invoked his infallibility POWERS to support the multitude of errors emanating from Vatican officials. They are determined to prevent Mary, and in so doing support Lucifer who gleefully awaits the consequences, "if my requests are ignored,....various nations will be INIHILATED.".
Then and only then can you of your OWN FREE WILL decide to choose the GOOD or go with THE NEW WORLD ORDER and it's NEW WORLD ORDER CHURCH.
You MUST make a choice, "He that is neither for me or against me. I will vomit him out of my mouth."
The links to The Fatima network and to the source of the book FATIMA PRIEST I really recommend. At this site you get so many resources, like The True Bible to download.