Errors in Amoris Laetitia. Are there any?

A recent article was released last week by the Register entitled “Catholic Scholars Appeal to Pope Francis to Repudiate ‘Errors’ in Amoris Laetitia.” This article detailed how certain theologians, prelates, and clergy have appealed to pope Francis to “repudiate” the “erroneous propositions” contained within the recent encyclical. While the appeal itself did not surprise me, what did surprise me was the premise behind their argument, namely; that the encyclical contains “a number of statements that can be understood in a sense that is contrary to Catholic faith and morals.”

Notice, if you will, the argument being proposed: Erroneous propositions exist because it contains statements that can be interpreted in a way that is contrary to the faith. The logic here is very simple: Because a statement “can be understood” to be erroneous (i.e., one interpretation, among many, is false), then it is, and it must be repudiated.

I wonder how this reasoning appears to you, the reader.

Imagine if we approached reading all Magisterial documents in this way.
If only one bad interpretation exists, then we must reject the passage outright as erroneous.
Imagine if we interpreted Scripture in this way? How many people have arrived at bad interpretations of Scripture? Does this mean we should reject those passages outright?

I wonder what you think about this.

Does this logic begin with a presumption of innocence, or a presumption of guilt?
Does it prefer the most favorable interpretation first, rather than the worst?
Is it a charitable (i.e., Catholic) method of interpretation?
Does it even attempt to place the statement in the context of the tradition of the Church, or does it usurp it from its context?
Does it acknowledge the parts where pope Francis [repeatedly] states his intent not to change Church teaching, or the fact that he bases much of his arguments on direct quotes from pope John Paul II?

I would like to hear from you, as I am rather confounded at the path of logic.

10

18 Responses

  1. Kevin Walters
    Kevin Walters at |

    On Divine Mercy Sunday 28th April 2019 during the 3 pm Mass at St Anne’s Cathedral, Bishop Marcus Stock of the Diocese of Leeds dedicated a new Divine Mercy Icon. This new ‘Icon’ has now replaced the present ‘painting’ one by Adolf Hyla (Second version) with the inscription “Jesus I trust in Thee” which has been on display for several years. This new Icon bears no resemblance to the official (Blasphemous) Divine Mercy Image.

    I am hopefully that this is an initial acknowledgement that the True Divine Mercy Painting requested by Our Lord Himself in its brokenness, will now be accepted and venerated, while preparing the birth of a Church that will be truthful with herself. A church that proceeds and leads in humility, openly acknowledging her failings before God and all of her children and in doing so, permit her children to do the same.
    Please continue with my post/s below

    kevin your brother
    In Christ

    Reply
  2. Kevin Walters
    Kevin Walters at |

    Quote “Many people are wondering how to handle the current crisis in the Church, what they can do in practical terms, in a situation that seems increasingly apocalyptic and completely out of their hands”

    Our Lord Himself has given The Laity the means to confront an ongoing manifestation of evil within the church, by calling the elite to account, for collusion with the breaking of the Second Commandment. So why do they not do so?

    I need to pose a question that incorporates the Second Commandment, which if you agree with me, will give the Church the practical means to confront the present situation that emanates from spiritual corruption.

    “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain”

    For nearly twenty years, I have been stating that the present different Divine Mercy Image (s) been presented to the laity for veneration are blasphemous, (See some of my previous posts below) as the ‘One’ true Image is an Image of Broken Man, hopefully this condensed version of what I have been propagating, will now meet with approval, as it goes to the heart of the matter, which is, duplicity in the use of the Word (Will) of God.

    “Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription. “Jesus I trust in thee”. I desire that this picture be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the world”

    His Will was manifest by the actions of Sr Faustina, as she immediately accepted, and acted upon It, with singular pure intent, to paint/draw the said picture. The Church states that Private Revelation is only binding on those who receive it, assuming of course that they are of sound mind, and have accepted within their heart, that they have received a message from God, requesting them to do something, as the recipient would feel obliged to fulfil that request, and in the case of Sr Faustina, she acted immediately to His request.

    Logic says that if the given Revelation was accepted and endorsed by the Church, which it was, then the acknowledged request attributed to God, contained within it, would oblige the Church also to accept that request.

    The Church fulfilled her obligation to God’s request, by promising that the said Image would be presented to the faithful for veneration throughout the (Churches of the) World, with the inscription “Jesus I trust in thee” So Yes, we now have a picture in God’s house on earth with this inscription, but it is not the painting/picture/image requested by God.

    — Catechism of the Catholic Church 2147
    Promises made to others (In this case the faithful) in God’s name engage the divine honor, fidelity, truthfulness, and authority. They must be respected in justice. To be unfaithful to them is to misuse God’s name and in some way to make God out to be a liar. (1 John 1:10)

    “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain”

    Actual words attributed to God by the Church that contain a request which the Church has endorsed and acted upon, must not be misused, distorted or twisted in ways that impugn the character of God, and then be used by man for his own ends, to do so, would be to say that God was made for man, not man for God, in effect the elite within the Church would be conspiring with the Devil.

    The elite within Church need to make a Public Act of Contrition for this infringement of the Second Commandment and replace the blasphemous image(s) with the ‘One’ and only true image requested by God, which is an Image of Broken Man.

    To understand the fullness of this Revelation to Sr. Faustina we need to view the request made by our Lord, as seen on the spiritual plane. We can assume that her attempt to paint the picture would be very childlike, in effect a distorted/broken reflection of the vision she saw. This reflection is a self-reflection of herself but also a reflection of all of us before God, that is one of been flawed and sinful.

    So the true image if viewed ‘honestly’ confronts the ego, impelling one to proclaim in humility “Jesus I trust in thee” Trust in God is not just about words, rather it is a movement of the heart, that induces a shared relationship with Him, and underpinning this relationship, is our humility before Him.

    God’s Word (Will) is Inviolate it cannot contradict Itself if it does it cannot be from God. A ‘direct’ request was made to the then Sr Faustina to “ Paint a picture according to the vision you see” only she can ‘see’ and paint (Fulfil the task given) the picture, to say otherwise, would be to say that God did not know what he was doing.

    Does anyone disagree with what I am saying ?

    kevin your brother
    In Christ

    Reply
    1. Jurek from Melbourne
      Jurek from Melbourne at |

      Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription. “Jesus I trust in thee”. I desire that this picture be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the world”
      http://www.catholicethos.ne
      Thank you Kevin you made my day. After the Mass today I spoke with Cheryl and told her.
      – On Good Friday I spoke with my neighbour Vince an Italian, I am going to Holy Cross church for novena to Divine Mercy. He asked me what is this? So I explained it:
      – in 1931 on 22 February Jesus appeared to st. Faustina and asked her to paint the image, then to expose that image in the chapel and in the whole world. Bl. Mary said “to her I gave birth to Jesus, you are to prepare for His 2nd coming. 10 years ago after many obstacles from previous priests I managed to hang picture from Germany on the confessional door. We live in this time now. I encountered merciful Jesus just 21 years ago. Since then D.M. touches my heart frequently. To much to tell. Go and you will see it.
      – i do not go to church now,
      – I saw you in the past,
      – but not any more, all that pedofilia…
      In the evening I went to Holy Cross. Fr Christopher from Poland said:
      – Today I only would mention about the image of D.M. On 22 February 1931 Jesus appeared to sister Faustina and asked to paint the picture from the image she saw. Expose it in the chapel and in the whole world. I will tell more on Divine Mercy Sunday.

      Reply
    2. Jurek from Melbourne
      Jurek from Melbourne at |

      Many different versions of this image have been painted, but our Lord made it clear that the painting itself is not what is important. When St. Faustina first saw the original image that was being painted under her direction, she wept in disappointment and complained to Jesus: “Who will paint You as beautiful as You are?” (313).

      In answer, she heard these words: “Not in the beauty of the color, nor of the brush lies the greatness of this image, but in My grace” (313).

      So, no matter which version of the image we prefer, we can be assured that it is a vehicle of God’s grace if it is revered with trust in His mercy.

      Reply
      1. Kevin Walters
        Kevin Walters at |

        Thank you Jurek for your comment
        Unfortunately you appear to have misunderstood what I am actual saying, you need to read my post again with related posts below, to fully understand what I am saying;

        ”God’s Word (Will) is Inviolate it cannot contradict Itself if it does it cannot be from God. A ‘direct’ request was made to the then Sr Faustina to “ Paint a picture according to the vision you see” only she can ‘see’ and paint (Fulfil the task given) the picture, to say otherwise, would be to say that God did not know what he was doing”

        Also from one of my post below
        “Her diaries reflect a particular culture and type of devotion at a particular time in the Church but are more in keeping with those who would propagate such devotions. We need to look at her spiritual advisor Fr Michal Sopocko who appears to have overseen her diaries and commissioned the first fraudulent image of Divine Mercy, and in doing so violated her trust in God”

        In these circumstances it is quite possible that these words were given in regards to her flawed original effort
        “Not in the beauty of the color, nor in the brush lies the greatness of this image, but in my grace.”

        So yes if you in good faith (not knowing that the image was not the one commanded by God), as you say “it would a vehicle of God’s grace” as God looks at our intent, if good, it will bear the graces of good fruit. But if you fully accept it is not the one commanded by God, to venerate it, would put your soul at risk.

        I hope this helps, thank you for your interest, take care
        Sincerely
        kevin your brother
        In Chris

        Reply
        1. Jurek from Melbourne
          Jurek from Melbourne at |

          In answer, she heard these words: “Not in the beauty of the color, nor of the brush lies the greatness of this image, but in My grace” (313).
          Thanks Kevin, I am afraid you do not accept/believe Jesus answer, that’s your problem, not mine.

          Reply
          1. Kevin Walters
            Kevin Walters at |

            Thank you Jurek for your comment
            From the original information given to the laity in England 1998/9, the first request given to Sr. Faustina

            “Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription. “Jesus I trust in thee”. I desire that this picture be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the world”
            This apparition of Jesus King of Mercy repeated itself several times” Why?

            Fr Michal Sopocko who intervened at this point would have known of this ‘reinforcement of the original request’ But he perused his own agenda, in requesting Sr. Faustina to ask for further information and then proceeded to oversee her diaries.
            He then commissioned the first fraudulent image of Divine Mercy, while posing and demonstrating to the artist, the stance of Jesus ‘he’ wanted, within the painting, and in doing so violated her trust in God”

            kevin your brother
            In Christ

          2. Bradley Thomas
            Bradley Thomas at |

            I don’t know your intentions Kevin, but I personally think you are a bit off based here and a bit stuck in your own conclusions. You continue to reiterate these same phrases of “reinforcement of the original request” and “God’s Word is inviolate and cannot contradict itself.” You’ll have to take much more time to clarify what you are intending to imply…I saw somewhere else on here you told someone that your earlier post is “self explanatory.” I have to be honest here and say your explanation is not self explanatory. You may have it worked out in your own head, but you’ll have to help me out here. It is almost like your treading into the waters where no one can have their own personal revelations as a movement of the Holy Spirit. Are you trying to call Sr. Faustina a fraud of some kind? Or the grace of Our Lord through that image a fraud? Or Fr. Sopoka a fraud? I’m a school teacher and I have to say that if your making accusations like this, you need to express yourself very clearly here.

    3. Kevin Walters
      Kevin Walters at |

      @ (Bradley Thomas July 23, 2019 at 6:12 pm)
      Thank you Bradley for your comment

      “It is almost like your treading into the waters where no one can have their own personal revelations as a movement of the Holy Spirit”

      No I am definitely not saying that, as I have stated above on May 4, 2019 at 8:30 pm
      “ The Church states that Private Revelation is only binding on those who receive it, assuming of course that they are of sound mind, and have accepted within their heart, that they have received a message from God, requesting them to do something, as the recipient would feel obliged to fulfil that request, and in the case of Sr Faustina, she acted immediately to His request”

      The point been made is that in the case of the given ‘first’ revelation to Sr. Faustina which she ‘faithfully’ acted upon immediately, is that it contained a command which incorporates the direct use God’s Holy Name, which is sacrosanct, to deviate in any way from this original command given by Jesus to her is sinful, as it calls into question the Divine prerogative as stated in

      — Catechism of the Catholic Church 2147
      Promises made to others (In this case the faithful) in God’s name engage the divine honor, fidelity, truthfulness, and authority. They must be respected in justice. To be unfaithful to them is to misuse God’s name and in some way to make God out to be a liar. (1 John 1:10)

      “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain”

      Actual words attributed to God by the Church that contain a request which the Church has endorsed and acted upon, must not be misused, distorted or twisted in ways that impugn the character of God, and then be used by man for his own ends, to do so, would be to say that God was made for man, not man for God, in effect the elite within the Church would be conspiring with the Devil.

      I do not think that I can put it more ‘clearly’
      Perhaps you could confront directly the points that I have made in this comment, while explaining to me how God’s Word (Will) attributed to His Holy Name, Jesus Christ, has not been misused, as it clearly shows that the leadership of the Church have been unfaithful to them, as they call into question the Authenticity of His Divine Will (Word) As the Church must not attribute Words to His Holy name, which contradict themselves, “ for to do so is to misuse God’s name and in some way to make God out to be a liar”.

      kevin your brother
      In Christ

      Reply
  3. Brian Ulmen
    Brian Ulmen at |

    “Is God’s word endorsed by the church inviolate?” I understand that this is a leading question, but it would help me see where you’re going with it if you could add some commas. Where are you placing the focus of the question?

    Reply
    1. Kevin Walters
      Kevin Walters at |

      Thank you Brian for your comment I have made a long post above, which is self-explanatory.
      kevin your brother
      In Christ

      Reply
  4. JMC
    JMC at |

    In your question, does the word “inviolate” refer to the Church, or to its endorsement of the Word? In either case, the Church itself, as an institution, the Bride of Christ, remains inviolate, even though the men within it are not. The word of God itself, because of its Source, is inviolate, though in too many cases, the supposed “endorsement” of it is far from it. There are a few precious instances, however, where both the man who gives the endorsement, and the endorsement itself, are indeed inviolate. If you have one of those for a pastor, rejoice and give thanks to God; the rest of us need to spend more time on our knees begging God for more like them.

    Reply
  5. THOMAS
    THOMAS at |

    I was wondering what your view is , after the recent elevation to the Acta Apostolicae Sedis , a letter written by Pope Francis to Argentine Bishops on his interpretation of Amoris Laetitia ?

    Reply
  6. Kevin Walters
    Kevin Walters at |

    Extract from the post below;
    “For clarity to the above post I will quote extracts of comments from another participant, on another site”.

    This should read;
    For clarity to the post “below” I will quote extracts of comments from another participant, on another site”.

    Reply
  7. Kevin Walters
    Kevin Walters at |

    For clarity to the above post I will quote extracts of comments from another participant, on another site.

    Michael said; I agree with this statement of yours. It sounds real and true….

    “We can assume that her attempt to paint the image would be very childlike in
    effect a distorted/broken reflection of the vision she saw. This
    reflection is a self-reflection of herself but also a reflection of all
    of us before God, that is one of been flawed and sinful.”

    Questions to you:

    —Where did you find out about the existence of the distorted/broken image, where can one be located?
    —Is Faustina really a saint in your opinion?
    —Why would the Church try to misrepresent her?
    —All of this undermines the credibility of the Church even further don’t you think?

    My response to Michael;

    Initially information given to the laity in the late nineties stated

    “At first she tried to paint/sketch it herself, she was no artist and failed after man trials (Attempts), someone was found who could and did paint it”
    As with all insightful information of this nature relating to such occurrences, it is fair to assume that these attempts with many of her personal possessions would be kept by her religious order.

    “Is Faustina really a saint in your opinion?”

    She was uneducated coming from a very poor family with only three year’s very basic education. She was very innocent and trusting we can deduce this because after her first vision she immediately attempted to paint Jesus herself and for this reason I believe her vision was genuine and received in total trust. This simple trust is often seen in many of our saints.

    “Why would the Church try to misrepresent her?”

    Initially Pius XII put her writings on the Index of Prohibited Books also it has been said that her writings would still be gathering dust in a Vatican Archive, where Pope John XXIII sent them, if she were not Polish. I can only assume that they knew that God’s Word (Will) is inviolate and that they would have had to accept her original distorted picture in its simplicity and then venerate it throughout the whole church, this creates many problems in relation to how the church perceives herself in relationship to the forgiveness of sin (The Sacrament of absolution) also it includes the self-image of the priesthood, my post in the links (above) given draw attention to this.

    “All of this undermines the credibility of the Church even further don’t you think?”

    Yes and no as the revelation given to Sister Faustina calls for the leadership of the church to give account for themselves before God and mankind, if this were to happen these words by her would be fulfilled

    “The time will come when this work, which God so commands (will be) as though in complete ruin, and suddenly the action of God will come upon the scene with great power which will bear witness to the truth. It will be as a new splendour for the church, though it has been dormant in it from long ago”.

    My Post above, poses this question to the elite within the church (and all of us).

    Is an act of humility too much to ask?

    kevin your brother
    In Christ

    Reply
  8. Kevin Walters
    Kevin Walters at |

    Is an act of humility too much to ask?
    I have read
    “At this moment in time the church has two sails that are blowing in the opposite direction causing great discord within the Church. On the Right: an extreme conservative wind wanting to blow our boat back to the becalming out-of-date swamp of pre-1962. On the Left: an extreme liberal wind wanting to blow our boat into rapids where faith and morals are thrown overboard”.
    But we can go forward in UNITY OF PURPOSE by hoisting a third sail one of Humility, the true (only) sail that the Holy Spirit blows upon, bringing arrogance to its knees and folly does not have to be appeased.

    Is the true Divine Mercy Image an Image of Broken man?

    Pope Francis says we need be a Church of mercy and so we do, but more importantly we need to be a humble Church, as Gods Mercy received in humility guarantees spiritual growth, which wells up into eternal life.
    I agree with the four cardinals in that this statement from Veritatis Splendor “conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object” as God’s Word (Will) is inviolate. Individual we can only stand before His Divine Mercy in humility as we can never justify sin.
    I all so agree with this statement by Pope Francis “the Eucharist ‘is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak”. It’s the sick and supplicant who need the doctor, not the well and the righteous”.
    How can the two statements be reconciled “With God all things are possible” as only God can square the circle.
    Throughout history God has made His Will know to mankind through his Saints, Spiritual leaders and Prophets. And at crucial times His Will has be revealed in a way that that cannot be misunderstood by His people.
    God’s Word (Will) given to Sister Faustina
    “Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription: “Jesus, I Trust in Thee.”
    The Divine Mercy Image that the Church displays today is an affront to God, instigated by nationalistic pride and those who would pacify the powerful it has nothing to do with Trust.

    As The true Divine Mercy Image is an Image of Broken Man

    “Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription: “Jesus, I Trust in Thee.” “I desire that this picture be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the whole world”

    Sr. Faustina acted immediately in singular (pure) intent; no one else can paint this picture, as no one else can SEE what she saw. The picture she painted, sketched, (no matter how badly) must be venerated and no other, to do so knowing it is not the painting commanded by God (His Word is inviolate) is to commit blasphemy.
    The Church acknowledges that Sr Faustina received a direct visual and verbal request to “paint an Image according to the vision you see” God’s Word is Inviolate this is our most fundamental belief and sits at the base of all the Sacraments. His Word is not open for debate it cannot contradict itself and must not be touched by man, it is impossible for it to be God’s Word (Will) and not His Word (Will) at the same time.
    For clarity the church teaches that divine revelation ended with the apostles.
    The visual and verbal request given by God to Sr. Faustina may not be an additional revelation but it is a communiqué endorsed by the Church that incorporates the direct Word (Will) of God and for that reason it is binding on the Church in that the true image painted by Sr. Faustina (one of Broken Man) must be venerated and no other.
    Sister Faustina was very poorly educated and it is fair to assume that if her superiors had accepted her painting as they should have done (they would have known that Gods Word is inviolate) she would have also. Earthly hands violated Gods Word to fit their own earthly vision of goodness as they could not accept the reality that they were been asked by God to show human weakness.
    Any revelations after the first revelation now must be considered suspect, as from that time onwards earthly hands were distorting the Word (Will) of God.
    Sister Faustina was uneducated coming from a very poor family with only three year’s very basic education. Hers were the humblest tasks in the convent. She was very innocent and trusting we can deduce this because after her first vision she immediately attempted to paint Jesus herself and for this reason I believe her vision was genuine and received in total trust.

    Her diaries reflect a particular culture and type of devotion at a particular time in the Church but are more in keeping with those who would propagate such devotions. We need to look at her spiritual advisor Fr Michal Sopocko who appears to have overseen her diaries and commissioned the first fraudulent image of Divine Mercy, and in doing so violated her trust in God.

    The Church has acknowledged that the Word (Will) of God had been given to her, its actions confirm this, we have a picture in God’s House, with the words “Jesus I trust In thee” But the picture is not the one commanded by God, it is a worldly image of goodness, it pertains to the senses and is made in man’s own image, it has nothing to do with Trust.
    The present Divine Mercy Image is a self-serving IMAGE of Clericalism, definition of CLERICALISM: a policy of maintaining or increasing the power of a religious hierarchy. Their actions show that they did not trust in His mercy and were only concerned with a worldly image of goodness, the very same problem which has led to the cover up of the on-going child abuse scandal and refusal to acknowledge its historical culture within the Church emanating from Rome.
    The original picture by Sister Faustina in its brokenness relates to spiritual beauty (goodness) as it pertains to humility. The pure (humble) in heart shall see God The True Divine Mercy image calls for the leadership of the Church to give account for themselves, before God and mankind while at the same time healing so many past and on-going injustices.

    To do this the elite within the Church need to act out these instructions given by Jesus Christ to His Church

    “I desire that this picture be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the world “

    Commencing in Rome by recapturing (Staging) the original ceremony by displaying the present self-serving blasphemous Divine Mercy Image an image of Clericalism, then remove (Destroy) it publicly and re-place it with the true image an Image of Broken Man and in humility venerate it in a symbolic way that cannot be misunderstood by mankind, then re-enact this action with the help of the bishops throughout the whole Church (World).
    If this were to happen a Transfiguration would occur within the Church at this moment in time that would resurrect the true face of Jesus Christ, a face that reflects Truth and humility before all those she is called to serve in love and compassion. From this base one of humility before God the Church can proceed to tackle many of her on-going problems/dilemmas as it would permit the Church to give access to the Sacrament of Holy Communion (Spiritual Food) to all baptised Catholics who for whatever reason apart from the sin against the Holy Spirit, who presently cannot receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation the means to do so.
    As an example; To those in second relationships, permit them to partake in Holy Communion in making a public acknowledgement of their need of God’s Divine Mercy just prior to receiving the Eucharist by venerating the true Image of Divine Mercy an image of Broken Man, saying these words from the heart publicly

    “Jesus I Trust in You”
    Then as the recipient approaches the priest for communion after his /her public confession the priest could say (or words to the effect of) “Welcome to the path/way of salvation/confession/reconciliation receive The body of Christ” in doing so acknowledging the on-going commencement to receiving the full sacrament of Reconciliation, by doing so His outward sign of inward grace His Divine Mercy is manifest at that moment in time as having been given by God Himself to the recipient before His Church (People/Faithful) full absolution has not given by the Church as they dwell in His Divine Mercy as he/she returns to his/her sinful situation (Entanglement with evil) but a journey of HOPE in that spiritual growth has commenced, this must be clearly understood by the laity in regards to the indissolubility of marriage.
    The need for the teaching on birth control in Humanae Vitae can also be strengthened by encouraging the laity who practices it, to acknowledge it openly before the Church in accepting their own human frailty, before partaking of the bread of life in Venerating The True Image of Divine Mercy an image of broken man, a reflection of themselves before God in the Eucharist. In acknowledging their dependence on His Mercy they give glory to our Father in heaven in bearing witness to the Truth, teaching others by their example to serve the Truth and walk in humility before our Creator and in doing so encourage all to confront that which enslaves mankind, our own sinfulness.
    “Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription. “Jesus I trust in thee”. I desire that this picture be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the world “
    This is a missionary call instigated by our Lord to the whole Church to Evangelizing through the action of Humility, a disarming action in its honesty, that embrace all in its simplicity, as we encounter our brothers and sisters who stand and seek direction at the crossroads (Difficulties) of life.

    kevin your brother
    In Christ

    Reply
    1. Kevin Walters
      Kevin Walters at |

      Addition to my post above: We all walk in our fallen nature, but the manifestation of evil intent in the present Divine Mercy Image does not stem from ‘human weakness’, it stems from spiritual Pride, and this Pride is of the devil. The refusal by the elite within the Church to answer this question Is God’s Word (Will) endorsed by the Church Inviolate is to renounce their own authority. As their on-going collusion of silence, demonstrates a leadership dressed in their own self-serving garb rather than the humble mantle of Jesus Christ. Humility is the Key, but will our leaders bend the knee.

      The dialogue below gives clarity to my on-going unanswered question “Is God’s word endorsed by the church inviolate?”

      Thank you for your comment samton909.
      You say “The phrase “Is God’s word endorsed by the church inviolate?” has no discernible meaning”

      I have had similar (Avoidance) responses, from others too, the most recent one, from Stev Skojec the Editor of OnePeterFive See the link for verification.

      https://onepeterfive.com/members-of-feminist-group-in-favor-of-female-cardinals-invited-to-youth-synod-preparations/

      My response: Thank you for your response Steve

      You say that you do not understand semantics to these words Is God’s Word (Will) endorsed by the Church Inviolate? Did not the contextual information given in many of my posts, help you understand. Yes! I am interested in the answer that I receive and possible some others will be also, as the answer will reflect the integrity of many of those who participate on this site. As for ”the kind of answer I was hoping for, in a place like this” is one that would bear witness to the Truth.

      I made the post below (see attached link) on this site over three months ago; which was marked with a credit by • Fr. Peter Morello, a respected poster on this site, while saying “Good assessment Kevin”

      The Post
      “It could be said that the true divine Mercy Image (Message) of Broken Man is a ‘direct divine intervention’ by Christ Himself, as our Lord Himself has placed before these men of power, the elite within the church, who in their own hubris ensnared themselves, by crystalizing their own hypocrisy before God and the whole church, in such a way that cannot be misunderstood by all.
      In endorsing a communiqué that incorporates the direct Word (Will) of God and then using that communiqué, they shamelessly made God in their image, a self-serving image of clericalism.
      Because of this willful act, our most fundamental belief that God’s Word is inviolate, has been breached by those who profess to defend that belief, their accumulated silence on this matter compounds their guilt before God and mankind.
      “For clarity” the church teaches that divine revelation ended with the apostles. The visual and verbal request given by our Lord to Sr. Faustina may not be an additional revelation but it is a communiqué endorsed by the Church that incorporates the direct Word (Will) of God and for that reason it is binding on the Church, in that the true image painted by Sr. Faustina (one of Broken Man) must be venerated and no other”
      (Link to be found via the given link above)

      Do you think that Fr. Peter Morello misunderstood what I was saying?
      I received no reply from Stev:

      Many do not respond to my question “Is God’s word endorsed by the church inviolate? And they do this, rather than feign ignorance to the question posed… As to answer this question honestly, they would have to confront the reality, that the elite within leadership of the Church, have committed blasphemy and in their on-going refusal to correct this matter have renounced trust in the Holy Spirit. Credibility needs to be restored, as presently we can truly say and See via the present blasphemous Divine Mercy Image, that the smoke of Satan burns within the Vatican.

      kevin your brother
      In Christ

      Reply

Leave a Reply

three × five =