Friday, July 12, 2013

A Response to Kelly Bowring

So, here is a link to an article which appeared on a website, catholicmom.com:

http://catholicmom.com/2013/07/09/the-great-battle-has-begun/


The article details an exchange with Dr. Kelly Bowring, who defends Maria Divine Mercy as he responds to points posed to him by Cheryl Dickow.  Bowring claims that it is not heresy to claim as Maria Divine Mercy does that Pope Francis is not the pope.  He also does not accurately represent Maria Divine Mercy's promotion of an idea condemned by the Church called millenarianism.

Here is a response of mine to Bowring's points:


It is indeed heresy to teach that the pope is not the pope.  The First Vatican Council taught in its dogmatic constitution on the Church of Christ, Pastor Aeternus:

"Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema."  (Chapter III, Paragraph 5)


Furthermore, Bowring dances around what Maria Divine Mercy actually says about millenarianism.  The entry on Maria Divine Mercy's website for May 28, 2012 states: "Know that the 1,000 years referred to in the book of Revelation means just that."  Apparently oblivious to the book of Revelation's use of metaphorical language, Maria Divine Mercy continues: "If it was meant to be something different then it would have given a different time."  As if the book of Revelation in its complex imagery would not present something as something else with an apparently paradoxical meaning; tell that the the lion who is a lamb (Rev. 5:5,6), and to the robes which are white upon being washed in red blood (Rev. 7:14).  And, then, conveniently unclear about the contents of the referred to "beliefs", Maria Divine Mercy states: "My Church, the Catholic Church, has not declared their beliefs because they have not done this yet."  This is false; the Catechism of the Catholic Church no. 676 states: "The Church has rejected even modified forms of the falsification of the kingdom to come known as millenarianism".  Bowring correctly writes: "But, in the Book of Revelation (20:1), it does speak of an end-time thousand year period of peace. This period of “a thousand years” is symbolic, biblical language for a long period, but not necessarily a literal thousand year period of time."  However, Bowring then misrepresents what Maria Divine Mercy says about the subject when he continues: "The messages of MDM concur as much and thus on this point remain in good standing."


The messages of MDM do not concur as much and thus do not remain in good standing.  Maria Divine Mercy presents "the 1,000 years referred to in the book of Revelation" as meaning "just that", stating that, "if it was meant to be something different then it would have given a different time".  And, her message from March 22, 2012 states: "So many chose to ignore the truth contained in the Holy Bible.  How can you deny, for example, the existence of the 1,000 years of the New Heaven and Earth?"

Maria Divine Mercy presents the 1,000 years as being an actual 1,000-year time period, not a metaphorical one.  She thus promotes millenarianism, which idea has been condemned by the Church, as evidenced in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph no. 676, cited above.

Maria Divine Mercy  has often applied the label "False Prophet" to Pope Francis (see messages from January 21, 2012; April 12, 2012; May 26, 2012; July 10, 2012; February 17, 2013; and February 18, 2013; among other instances) but she has made, and continues to make, false prophecies herself.  Nothing came of her prophecy about the supposed "sacrilege" that the pope was to have committed during Holy Week (message from March 14, 2013); her prophecy about the "pompous splendor" with which Benedict's successor was to sit on the Throne of Peter (February 18, 2013) does not correspond to the consistent simplicity and poverty of Pope Francis; and the prophecies about how Benedict was to have been in danger of being exiled from Rome (March 20, 2012), and, once being exiled, was still to have guided Jesus' true followers from his "place of exile" (March 29, 2013, see also February 19, 2013 and March 13, 2013) are so far from reality that one wonders whether whether anyone really believes such things in all seriousness.


Francis regularly receives counsel from Benedict himself (see article here), and when they have made their rare public appearances together, they do so as a united front (as when they recently together consecrated the Vatican to the protection of St. Michael the Archangel).  One week ago, Pope Francis published his first encyclical, Lumen Fidei, the text of which is almost entirely written by Benedict, as Francis himself attests in paragraph no. 7 of the document.  One wonders how exactly a supposed "false prophet" would make so widely known the "true pope's", Benedict's writings.  Are we inexplicably seeing a false prophet disseminate a true pope's teachings, or could it be that the present pope and the former pope are working together harmoniously?

6 comments:

  1. Bowring is mistaken too in saying that the faithful is allowed to have devotion or even spread the words of private revelations before the Church has approved.

    Here is what the Church teaches:

    "When Ecclesiastical Authority is informed of a presumed apparition or revelation, it will be its responsibility:

    a) first, to judge the fact according to positive and negative criteria (cf. infra, no. I);

    b) then, if this examination results in a favorable conclusion, to PERMIT some public manifestation of cult or of devotion, overseeing this with great prudence (equivalent to the formula, “for now, nothing stands in the way”) (pro nunc nihil obstare).

    c) finally, in light of time passed and of experience, with special regard to the fecundity of spiritual fruit generated from this new devotion, to express a judgment regarding the authenticity and supernatural character if the case so merits."

    Source:
    http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19780225_norme-apparizioni_en.html

    The followers of MDM need to waste less time reading her messages and read more of the documents of the Church, after all is to Her that Christ entrusted His teaching.

    I suggest, the First Vatican Council and the Cathechism of S. Pius X that says:

    9 Q: State distinctly what is necessary to be a member of the Church?

    A: To be a member of the Church it is necessary to be baptized, to believe and profess the teaching of Jesus Christ, to participate in the same Sacraments, and to acknowledge the POPE and the other lawful pastors of the Church.

    Why do you say that the Roman Pontiff is supreme Pastor of the Church?

    A: Because Jesus Christ said to St. Peter, the first Pope: "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and I will give to thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatsoever thee shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in Heaven, and whatsoever the shallot loose on earth shall be loosed also in Heaven." And again: "Feed My lambs, feed My sheep."

    12 Q: The many societies of persons who are baptized but who do not acknowledge the Roman Pontiff as their Head do not, then, belong to the Church of Jesus Christ?

    A: No, those who do not acknowledge the Roman Pontiff as their Head do NOT belong to the Church of Jesus Christ.

    Source:
    http://www.cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/pius/pcreed09.htm

    ReplyDelete
  2. So good to see that there are more of us in the same battle! Here is our response to Dr. Bowring: http://mariadivinemercytrueorfalse.blogspot.com/2013/07/reply-to-dr-kelly-bowring.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. Is it not ultimately up to Jesus the Christ to decide who constitutes His Church? Therefore who is man to decide otherwise; as only He who is God Most High can possibly truly know the condition of a man's heart?

    For any man to put himself in the position of making such a decision, is putting himself above God. Isn't that what satan is trying to do?

    Just some food for thought.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "IF A PROPHET PRESUMES TO SPEAK IN MY NAME AN ORACLE THAT I HAVE NOT COMMANDED HIM TO SPEAK . . . HE SHALL DIE" Deuteronomy18

    The prophecy during Holy Week never happened. There was no insult to Jesus, no desecration, no abomination unless one is of the school that the entire Catholic liturgy, in which the faithful eat and drink the Body and Blood of Christ, is itself an abomination. M-DM said she was almost an agnostic. Only someone who does not believe in God could be so fearless as to presume to speak in His Name. It strains credulity to believe this woman has returned to her Catholic roots and is sincere. It is an outrage God tolerates in His patience and for His purpose.

    Lord have mercy on us and on the whole world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The prophesy during the Holy Week has happened.
      According to the Liturgical Rules, only adult male's feet can be washed.
      But during the Holy Week, Pope washed the feet of three women, of whom two were muslims! Have a look at the feet he washed. Some has tattoos of spiders on their legs!
      So, something is wrong when the lawmaker itself shows an example by breaking the laws!

      Delete
    2. Tony E Seastian, MDM herself revealed that the "abomination" did not take place on Holy Thursday, as her message from that day (March 28, 2013) stated: "The time for the abomination is very near." Then one of the three messages from the next day, Good Friday, states: "Today I was betrayed." So, the messages themselves indicate that the "abomination" took place on Good Friday, not on Holy Thursday.

      Delete

+
Your comment is awaiting moderation.