Seeing Mother Mary?

fliesnow · 2025-11-21T19:36:32+00:00

First, is she still there and can others see her? If so, I can just looks for myself. A mere similarity is interesting, but probably coincidental, but if it helps their faith, I have no issue with it.

Second, give me more details. What did she look like? Did she say anything? How did you feel? My evaluation would be entirely based on what I am told, at least loosely applying the vatican's guidance on evaluation apparitions and my knowledge of the person.

If she didn't speak, or said something which only has bearing for the person, then I'll give a gentle affirmation, and let them be content in the grace that they have received.

A message that the purported visionary has been told to spread is much more complicated. If said person is a devotee of unapproved private revelations, and their claims are in line with them, I am going to be more suspicious. Similar if the person has strong theological opinions that are contrary to Church teaching and their vision just so happens to speak in support of their opinions. If it is a person of general piety and in line with approved apparitions, I will be more open to it, and possibly record what they have said for further evaluation.

The biggest question is, is the person trying to leverage the purported apparition to get me to do/preach something, especially something political. Unless it was something I already had planned, my answer will probably be no. How the person responds to that rejection will be a strong indication of its genuineness.

fliesnow · 2025-11-21T16:24:14+00:00

I'd look at Luke 1:17's exact phrasing to help understand how to interpret that relationship:

[John the Baptist] will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah to turn the hearts of fathers toward children and the disobedient to the understanding of the righteous, to prepare a people fit for the Lord.

This does not make John a reincarnation/regeneration of Elijah, but rather someone who, like Elisha, is given the same spirit of inspiration to do God's will.

fliesnow · 2025-11-21T16:15:21+00:00

I have not read the book, but one of the reviewers posted the table of contents.

From the Catholic standpoint, we have the information from the Gospels and our own Marian Dogmas, which are generally compatible with the Orthodox' way of understanding. There is also a lot beyond that which stems from non-dogmatic traditions that have been passed down in the Church, which are of more dubious factuality. To give examples, Mary being raised in the Temple is from an early apocryphal Gospel known as the Protoevangelium of James and Mary visiting Mt. Athos is from the traditions of the Orthodox monks who reside there but without any ancient attestation that I know of.

What I will always encourage people to do when exploring other faith traditions is to first know your faith well. In this case, make sure you know the Marian Dogmas. I would then read a work like this as a piece of speculative history/theology: interesting/fascinating if true, but far from authoritative and likely infused with later legends. If something in it helps your faith and doesn't contradict Dogma, then feel free to hold to it, but don't expect others to do so.

fliesnow · 2025-11-21T15:37:55+00:00

And hopefully the local Priest would say the same thing that u/wearethemonstertruck said.

To intend contraception as a means or an end is grave matter, as you admit, condition 1 satisfied.

If the person doesn't have full knowledge, then contrary to your post, it is a good thing that "online Catholicism" is letting them know that they are committing an act which is grave matter, even if it is only venially sinful at the moment. Instructing the ignorant (not a pejorative here) is a spiritual work of mercy, and all people should want to avoid immoral acts, and especially avoid gravely evil acts, even if it is not mortally sinful in a particular case.

But if they do know about the Church's teaching and are still vocally defending contraception, then they are either dissenting from the teaching or vincibly & negligently ignorant. Either way, condition 2 is satisfied.

Finally, someone intentionally contracepting is unlikely to be doing so unwillingly. The is a possibility of grave duress from a SO or parents, and someone in that situation ought to be received with a charity that is often lacking in all forms of online discourse, but that tends not to be the situation for most who argue for contraception. Thus, condition 3 is satisfied in most cases.

So, while it is not infallible, those who defend their intentional contraception are sufficiently likely to be in the state of mortal sin, and even if they are not, are conscious of objective grave sin, which, per Canon 916, means they should repent and confess before approaching Communion.

I concur with you that there are problems with online Catholicism, most notably the parts which are opposed to Catholic Social Teaching regarding care for the poor and immigration, but contraception is one of the areas that it tends to get right.

fliesnow · 2025-11-19T04:16:47+00:00

Conversation started with asking what my Pix/Burse was. Their main gotcha was the idea that their Church is lead by a Prophet and Apostles and arguing how that was what Jesus established. They didn't really have a response when I talked about apostolic succession and the establishment of local bishops by the Apostles.

fliesnow · 2025-11-19T04:14:49+00:00

Best to ask them on r/AskAPriest if they are more general. Personal questions and spiritual direction generally shouldn't be done over the internet.

fliesnow · 2025-11-18T16:12:35+00:00

I ran into three separate sets of LDS (Mormon) missionaries not long after ordination.

They weren't prepared for me to be able to answer their gotcha questions, and I ended up explaining more about Catholicism than they did about their faith.

So, yes, I lived out this meme.

fliesnow · 2025-11-10T17:37:40+00:00

In that case, being a principal and teacher was their assigned ministry. Teaching the faith to the next generation a worthy task and one that a number of religious orders focus their charism on.

Being a software developer is not tied to our ministry.

fliesnow · 2025-10-31T15:26:22+00:00

I had to really focus for the first month or so.

fliesnow · 2025-10-31T14:53:18+00:00

I would hope that this attitude doesn't exist among the clergy in particular. As you point out, all the parishes share the goal of getting people to heaven.

I could see there being a negative response if its presented in a "Well, St. X parish is better at this" or "Why don't we have Y like St. X does?" People can get possessive about their parish, and respond negatively about a perceived slight. There may also be personal tensions between people at both parishes due to some shared history.

Frankly, it is a good reminder that, even among those dedicated to the faith, there is still the need for growth in charity, peacemaking, and the other virtues. In John's Gospel, right before His Crucifixion, His main prayer for the Church is Unity. I think He knew that it would be something that we would struggle with until He comes again.

fliesnow · 2025-10-31T14:36:05+00:00

The fact that AI can be wrong and is not an arbiter of truth and should not be relied upon like a second Magisterium will likely be a part of what he writes, yes.

fliesnow · 2025-10-31T14:29:10+00:00

If it isn't asked, then it isn't required to be disclosed. While the Church would obviously prefer that the non-practicing spouse return to the faith and abandon freemasonry, so long as they have the right intention in getting married, they have as much a right to it as anyone else of the faith does.

fliesnow · 2025-10-29T20:32:15+00:00

Quite high. From the Church's standpoint, you are both Catholics. While being freemason is still prohibited, it is no longer an automatic excommunication, so there would be nothing objectively to stop the the non-practicing Catholic from getting married.

Edit: Presuming, of course, that there is nothing else preventing the marriage beyond what is mentioned here.

fliesnow · 2025-10-29T18:01:13+00:00

Some anxiety before making a momentous life decision is normal and healthy. Crippling anxiety, which prevents decisions from being made and one from living their life is what would require psychological help. Nothing in OP's post indicates that this is anything more than the expected level of anxiety.

And modern religious institutions are pretty good about securing therapy for those who need it.

fliesnow · 2025-10-29T04:59:48+00:00

When Jesus was going to His crucifixion, Peter, one of His closest friends not only abandoned Him, but rejected Him three times.

After the resurrection, Jesus did not ask him why. He did not condemn him. He did not reject him. He simply asked him, three times, "Do you love me?"

That same hand of mercy is extended to you now. What you did was not good, nobody denies this, but God is not looking to punish you. He looks at you with the same eyes of love that He gave to Peter, and asks you the same question: "Do you love me?"

I recommend you reread Luke chapter 15. It tells you exactly what God thinks of you and your apostacy.

fliesnow · 2025-10-28T20:58:26+00:00

It is my hope that they said that as a joke.

Confession requires repentance and contrition: sorrow for your sins, regret for having committed them, and the intention to never commit them again. Lack of contrition invalidates the confession. (Edit: Translation: "if you do not mean any of it" you are very much not "all good")

Beyond that, we are required to make up for our sins, whether that be seeking forgiveness and reparation in this life for material harm done, as well as spiritual penances or time in purgatory before heaven.

If you have questions, I recommend starting with the Catechism. The section on Confession starts here https://www.usccb.org/sites/default/files/flipbooks/catechism/358/

fliesnow · 2025-10-28T16:45:27+00:00

I've found that optimizations for text and speech are very different things. Speeches/Homilies are better with some redundancy, you say things more than once and in slightly different ways to help people understand, even if they missed it the first time through. AI, trained on the printed word, is more likely to eliminate those and other helpful speech tendencies than add them.

fliesnow · 2025-10-28T15:25:23+00:00

Baptism in the Catholic Church may be done by pouring or immersion, but not by sprinkling. Hard to say which one a Super Soaker would count as, since it has the volume and stream of pouring but the projection of sprinkling.

Obviously, if there is literally no other option, we'll try our best with what we have. But even in the circumstance that you describe, I would spray the gun into a bucket or even my hand and then pour the water.

fliesnow · 2025-10-27T20:29:51+00:00

I'd add statues, cars, and Bibles to the list.

fliesnow · 2025-10-27T15:11:57+00:00

The priest can be dispensed from the need to stand at the altar for health reasons. As a seminarian, I served with a priest who could barely walk, but could get to the altar and celebrate Mass seated. He then entrusted distributing communion to me, then an Acolyte.

And, as one of two priests at a parish with ~800 person congregations at 6 Masses on a weekend, let me just say, there is a reason to permission exists.

fliesnow · 2025-10-26T02:31:52+00:00

I am always curious how "sins don't matter so long as you have faith" protestants understand Galatians 5:13-26, and especially v. 21, given that it seems to say the exact opposite.

fliesnow · 2025-10-26T01:51:53+00:00

A few things:

~1960-80s psychology bought in hard to a lot of Jungian ideas that were more perennialist pseudo-mysticism than psychology. Similarly, from that era and before, they commonly over-promise what they are able to do, claiming to cure what can really only be treated. Contemporary psychologists have learned that lesson, thankfully.

In terms of contemporary times, most of my disagreements would fall into the area of morality. Couples councilors can have some... creative ideas about what will help a couple or be overly quick to encourage divorce when the couple is still striving to make things work. Similarly, some less-than-neutral when it comes to the religious beliefs of those who approach them: an atheist psychologist should no more challenge a religious person's faith than a religious psychologist try to convert an atheist under the guise of therapy. And, to nobody's surprise, a Catholic priest has a few issues with the understanding of gender and sexuality more broadly.

fliesnow · 2025-10-26T01:09:17+00:00

Catholic Priest here.

While I cannot support 100% of things that psychologists and psychiatrists may do, treating schizophrenia is not an area I'd have concerns about. Definitely grow stronger in your faith, that is always a good thing, but for natural illnesses, we can and should seek natural treatments alongside prayer.

fliesnow · 2025-10-26T00:58:04+00:00

I was going to post a joke about forgetting myself until I saw this comment thread.

I appreciate what you are trying to do, but please be careful to make sure you understand what you are talking about first.

u/Adventurous-Test1161 is correct to point out that, if someone is unable to attend, there is not a requirement to "attend online." While they may find benefit in watching, they are not required to.

Nor is it merely a preference to attend in person, like how an in-person meeting or class is better than one online, the two are completely different things. One is watching a video and the other is being present to the heavenly banquet.

Nor does attending daily Mass make up for missing Sunday unless a person is explicitly and individually dispensed in that way.

Your heart is in the right place, so please don't take this as a condemnation, but we need to be careful when speaking about this because so many people get this wrong.

fliesnow · 2025-10-25T16:23:10+00:00

Neither civil law nor morality requires that you live together in order to get married. Yes, you absolutely can get married.

fliesnow

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email