Introductory commentary by Fr. Brian W. Harrison, O.S.
Owing to a lack of clarity and specificity in Chapter 8 of Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia (AL), mutually contradictory views are circulating as to what it means for Catholics living publicly in objectively sinful relationships. Has the present Holy Father broken with his predecessors, who never permitted any of these folks to receive Holy Communion? Some say Yes, some say No. The distinguished German Catholic philosopher Robert Spaemann, a friend of Pope Benedict XVI, has not hesitated to affirm in a recent interview that with the promulgation of AL, “chaos [has been] raised to a principle by the stroke of a pen”, and that “the consequences are already foreseeable: uncertainty and confusion, from the bishops’ conferences to the small parishes in the middle of nowhere.”
This critical situation invites further reflection on the message of Our Lady of Fatima, as we begin this Friday (May 13, 2016), the 100th year since her first appearance to the Portuguese shepherd children. Back in 1980 the one surviving visionary, Sister Lucy, wrote an important letter to Monsignor (now Cardinal) Carlo Caffarra. After Pope John Paul asked him to begin a new Pontifical Institute for studies on marriage and the family, Caffarra wrote to Sister Lucy, simply requesting her prayers for this venture. He has recently made known his surprise at receiving “a very long letter with her signature. . . . In it we find written: ‘The final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Don’t be afraid, because anyone who works for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be contended and opposed in every way, for this is the decisive issue.’ And then she concluded: ‘however, Our Lady has already crushed its head.’”
This reassurance is encouraging, because fifteen years after Sister Lucia wrote that letter, Cardinal Luigi Ciappi (1909-1996), personal theological adviser to five popes, made a stunning disclosure about that part of the Fatima secret that the Vatican has never released (and which is evidently referenced by the enigmatic word “etc.” in the published part of Our Lady’s message). His Eminence, one of the few persons who had seen the complete secret, wrote in a 1995 letter to Professor Baumgartner of Salzburg: “In the Third Secret it is predicted, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”
Such a shocking prophecy would explain why Sister Lucy herself confessed to being traumatized by it, why Pope John XXIII decided not to publish it on schedule in 1960, and why Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani of the Holy Office, in answer to a reporter’s question, stated acidly that the Third Secret had been relegated “to the bottom of the Vatican archives – and that’s where it deserves to stay!” (A priest who as a young man was living in Rome in 1960 has told me he distinctly recalls reading these words of the cardinal in a newspaper report.) As the Church’s top doctrinal watchdog, Ottaviani might well have judged that such an appalling message might unsettle the faith of many Catholics in the See of Peter, the ‘Rock’ on whom Christ built his Church.
The foregoing observations should help to set in their context the following testimony from Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, whom I have been privileged to know for about twenty years. It provides clear corroboration of what Cardinal Ciappi said about the secret, but was made known to her and her late husband, the renowned philosopher Dietrich von Hildebrand, a full thirty years before Ciappi wrote his letter to the Austrian professor. In a private email at the beginning of May Dr. von Hildebrand told me about this 1965 conversation in Florence. I asked her whether she would allow this to be made known to a wider audience, and after consulting with her spiritual director, she replied that he had given her permission to do so. (Msgr. Mario Boehm, whose testimony she records here, was a leading member of the editorial staff of the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano during the 1930s and 1940s, when the editor-in-chief was Count Giuseppe Dalla Torre. Boehm retained high-level contacts in Rome after his retirement.)
Dr. von Hildebrand added that it would be good for this account to be accompanied here by that of another similar conversation she and her husband had in the 1960s with the former communist agent Bella Dodd. I personally find these testimonies linked to the Fatima message deeply consoling at this time of increasing confusion and profoundly disturbing change emanating from the highest levels of Church authority. For they indicate that Heaven has not only foreseen this great crisis, but has forewarned us, in order to reassure Catholics that, whatever may happen in the immediate future, Christ is still the unassailable Head of his Church, and that the Immaculate Heart of his most holy Mother, Queen of the Holy Rosary, who to Satan is as “terrible as an army set in battle array”, will triumph in the end.
Dr. von Hildebrand, in her 90s, now finds some difficulty in writing by computer, so I have slightly edited her original email for greater clarity. She has approved the following version and graciously given her permission for it to be posted on the OnePeterFive website:
(email to Fr. Brian Harrison dated May 6, 2016):
Dear Father,
I think the following two conversations, which I recall very well from the 1960s, are of particular interest now, in these deeply troubled times half a century later. For they apparently corroborate Cardinal Ciappi’s testimony that part of Our Lady’s Fatima secret was the shocking prediction that the great apostasy in the Church would begin “at the top.”
The first conversation was In June 1965. We were in Florence in the house where my husband was born, and where I spent my first sabbatical. My husband invited a priest named Msgr. Mario Boehm, whom he had met in Rome shortly after his conversion, and who had been one of the top editors of L’Osservatore Romano for many years. The topic of Fatima came up. My husband raised the question, “Why was the third secret of Fatima not revealed?” For the Holy Virgin had said it should be shared with the faithful in 1960.
Don Mario: It was not revealed because of its content. My husband: What was so fearful about it? Msgr. Boehm (as a well-trained Italian) did not say that he had read it, but intimated that the content was fearful: “infiltration of the Church to the very top”. It shattered us but confirmed my husband’s fear that the way Vatican II was interpreted was going to expose the Church to terrible dangers. Alas, this fear was well founded.
The second conversation is one with Bella Dodd that I have already spoken about on previous occasions. We met her in the Fall of 1965 and she visited us here at New Rochelle, NY, where I still live, either in 1966 or 1967. She had been an ardent communist from her student days at Hunter College – a hotbed of communism. (That is why I was systematically persecuted there, as recounted in my book, Memoirs of a Happy Failure.) Bella had sown the seeds of this diabolical philosophy at Hunter, but converted in 1952 under the guidance of Archbishop Fulton Sheen. Let me repeat the conversation between her and my husband:
DvH: I fear the Church has been infiltrated.
Bella: You fear it, dear Professor; I know it! When I was an ardent communist I was working in close contact with four cardinals in the Vatican working for us; and they are still very active today.
DvH: Who are they? My nephew Dieter Sattler is a German stationed at the Holy See.
But Bella, who was under the spiritual guidance of Archbishop Sheen, declined to give him this information.
The only recourse we have now is prayer, and the firm conviction that the gates of hell shall not prevail. St. Matthew ch. XXIV has warned us.
In union of ardent prayers.
I am, dear Father, respectfully yours in Christ,
Alice von Hildebrand
Thank you Steve, 1P5, you’re right, this does bring comfort.
Strange times when an essay like this is described as bringing comfort, but alas I agree with you entirely. Dark shapes are moving in the deep and every day brings new outrages. Alice’s letter is very welcome.
Ann Barnhardt has often said that truth is comforting just because it IS TRUTH.
When the whole world is being roiled and tossed by a storm of lies, the solid rock of truth is what keeps you sane. When the whole world is running around shouting that 2+2=5, you rejoice when you run into another person who is not afraid to say that 2+2=4.
Huh…something in this tickles the mind. Is it possible this testimony could have some remote relevance to recent events??? It’s all sooooooooooooooo puzzling.
I’m sure this testimony has a lot of relevance to recent events. It seems the messages of Fatima, Akita, Our Lady of Good Success, and others all plainly point to the events of our times. The only cure we have now is the proper consecration of Russia. This isn’t just my opinion – Our Lady said it will happen, but it will be late (presumably when things get so bad that the world can’t take it anymore). Only then will a period of peace be granted to the world by God.
In all the discussions of Fatima: Why no mention that Mary promised in August and September that St. Joseph and the Child Jesus would also come in October, with the miracle, to give peace to the world? Is it possible that there are church officials who do not want people to turn to St. Joseph as the head of the family, honored by Mary and Jesus that way for thirty years and therefore revealing that God’s eternal, changeless divine will is to perfectly honor St. Joseph, in heaven, as the head of the family?
What I have heard is that while the crowd was witnessing the Sun miracle, the children saw visions of St. Joseph and the Child Jesus.
“The great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”
Is Francis the anti-pope of history?
You want fear, here is a fearful prediction. Francis will call a third Vatican council…..it will be bishop against bishop etc. and will be the culmination of the great apostasy.
Watch this space…..
If Francis were an anti-pope, then, by definition, the apostasy wouldn’t begin at the top of the Church since he wouldn’t actually be the top of the Church. Right?
The practical reality of the situation is that he is at the top of the church running things. The fact that Lucy’s prophecy did not use the word ‘Pope’ could also be a hint.
A hint of what? ‘At the top’ of the Church sits the pope.
A hint that the one at the top is not actually a real Pope. Another hint being the Bishop in white being forced to flee Rome. Again, another odd and indirect expression. Or hint if you prefer, that all is not as it seems on the surface.
It is only those holding the highest offices within the Vatican that know the truth and they are not talking. They are Modernists working to an agenda to get rid of God and as PF didn’t mention God or Jesus or Mary once during his addresses to Congress, UN or EU, or made an appeal to end IS genocide in ME, or condemned abortion & LGBT laws as contrary to the Christian faith but only concentrated on climate change & the environment you have to question his legitimacy as Vicar of Christ.
oh boy is that ever to the point.
Exactly. Carrying out the wishes of his Father. The Father of lies. Satan AntiChrust Obama. We have time to prepare. None of us know the Hour but Christ is preparing His Remnant. Arguing over petty things is a waste of precious time. Be in the Truth. Listen to the Holy Spirit. He is not of Confusion. He is the Holy Spirit sent for God to live within us and give us wisdom and understanding . If you listen and live out your true faith in Christ then why argue over TRUTH? YOU ALREADY KNOW THE TRUTH. You want to deny what is happening right before your eyes. Be on your knees. Repent and ask Father to forgive you and ask God to lead you to what HE is calling you to do. Be ready and prepared. We As Catholics and Christians are going to be needed to give up some things for CHRIST. THis was taught by Pope John. He lived through the NAZIS IN HIS BELOVED POLAND. THERE WAS GREAT PERSECUTION. DO YOU THINK WE WILL BE ABOVE WHAT HE OR WE
WHAT CHRIST ENDURED?? THESE ARE HARSH WORDS. BUT WE MUST BE READY. ASK GOD TO HELP YOU PREPARE. JESUS CHRIST IS VICTORIOUS OVER SATAN. BUT THERE WILL BE A GREAT WAR. ARE YOU READY? WE ALL ARE CALLED TO BE IN THIS WITH CHRIST. We ALL HAVE A PLACE. Those THAT ARE FOLLOWERS OF ALLAH ARE THREATENING and murdering Christians. We have a leader that is soft on that and very harsh toward CHRISTIANS. ARE YOU LISTENING?. HARSh toward Israel and soft on Iran. Pope Paul suffered under NAZISM AND DEATH OF HIS PEOPLE IN POLAND . are you asleep? DO YOU NOT SEE THE SIGNS???
A wonderful lady appeared to children. What more do you need to BELIEVE. Jesus is Real. We are In a Great War and the END OF THINGS AS WE HAVE KNOWN THEM ARE CHANGING AND WE MUST DO OUR PART IN SERVING AND LIVING AND PREPARING OURSELVES AND OTHERS FOR CHRIST’S RETURN. AMEN AND AMEN
There is no ‘new light” in what Dr. AvH revealed. Such stories have been circulating in the Philippines since the early 1960’s, when Church authorities failed to obey the Blessed Mother’s desire to have the Third Secret revealed.
The Ven. Catherine Emmerich pretty much prophesized it, too. So did Akita, Padre Pio, and even Malachi Martin.
What is new to me, is your [Pilgrim 74’s] hint that Sister Lucy ‘DID NOT USE THE WORD ‘POPE’. That fact had been largely overlooked by those interested in Fatima.
Thank you so very, very much for this, Pilgrim 74! You may really have something new there! Is there something else you might know that we don’t? Please tell us.
Thanks again and God bless you.
There is plenty more to say but i don’t think this forum is the place to say it. But thank you for your kind words 🙂
It does not matter whether PF is an ‘antipope’ or a true pope. He is an apostate pope and therefore has lost his authority. Anyone with their eyes open can see that he is rampaging through the Church, destroying what is sacred as he goes along. Every single day brings new scandalous information. Now he is ‘looking into the possibility of having deaconesses’ in the Church. This is the first step towards women’s ordination into the priesthood. It will be well when the schism is enacted formally so we can stop listening to the tripe and drivel this evil man produces.
As much as I agree with you that the Pope may be leaning towards apostasy, neither you nor anyone can determine whether he has lost his authority or not. Only God can decide that.
And so long as God allows him with all his errors to remain, then God grants him this authority.
No, I am quoting canon law. This is how a pope can lose his authority. Also, this is the opinion of the likes of Thomas Aquinas, Deitrich von Hildebgrand, and St. Robert Bellarmie. You need to do a little research to find out that it is canonical law that a prelate loses his authority when he teaches error. And as far as Bergoglio is concerned, he is not ‘leaning toward apostasy’ he is already over that line. AL is a heretical document.
Ok.
1)Tell me which canon it is.
2) Who gets to decide whether the Pope has lost authority.
3) Who tells the Pope that his authority is lost
No, you look up the canon that refutes what I am saying here. You will not find it.
That’s rather dumb 3221.
YOU said: “I am quoting canon law”.
But when I asked you which particular canon law (after all you said you are quoting it) you tell me to look up the cannon that refutes you?
Sorry but that is just totally stupid because I never appealed to canon law. YOU did.
But now it seems you don’t even know which particular canon law you are supposed to be quoting?
If you say you are quoting canon law, you must at least know which canon law it is. Unless you are bluffing or lying.
I do not know which canon it is right off the bat, but I looked it up and read it in canon law when this discussion came up before. I then took the time to look it up. What is stupid is your judgment that Bergoglio is only ‘leaning toward heresy’ when the facts are otherwise. You do the work if you are so sure you can judge as you have. I am not doing it again.
Look up Aquinas on obedience and von Hiddebrand on the same.
Oh come on, 3221. You said you are quoting from canon law
If so, you have to know what canon it is. But now you say you don’t know right off the bat. If this is the case, you were lying.
And here you continue to lie because you say that you looked it up which means you either:
1) found it (in which case you would know which canon it is) or
2) you did not find it (in which case you are still lying).
Okay, suppose you did find it. If so, it would be more than easy for you to find it again as you would have a vague idea of the number.
So why can’t you find it now? I have asked you twice and in that time it would have been very easy for you to find it but still no answer from you.
So if you want to stop my accusation of liar, all you have to do is give me the canon law which you just said you took the time to look up.
And please don’t send me on a merry goose chase because you can’t support your own claims.
Does it follow that if I say that I cannot remember the canon right off the bat that I am lying? Why would you assume that? I looked up the canon last year. I am not doing it again. If you are not willing to take the 15 minutes that I did last year then stop your yapping. You just want to debate. This last post of yours gives evidence of your same quality of logic that is indicated when you state that Bergoglio is ‘leaning towards apostasy’.
This is not a college class where I am writing a paper that has to have references. It is a chat room on the web. I am not doing your homework. I am stating what I know. Close your mind to what you could easily find out if you wanted to.. You are the one refuting me. You look it up. See ifu can prove me wrong. You cannot.
Simple.
If you looked up the canon and was able to find it last year, how come you cannot find it now?
This topic is very important to you so if you did find it then, you will find it now. At the very least, to smugly tell me how right you are.
And yet, several posts later, all you can say is you looked it up but cannot supply proof that it is there.
Well hellooo, the onus is on you because you are the one claiming that it is there.
Well of course I want to debate. I challenge your claim. Since you made the claim the onus is on you to prove it. But you can’t.
Well dumb as dumb can be. It is NOT MY homework BUT YOURS.
YOU ARE THE ONE WHO MADE THE CLAIM. SO THE BURDEN OF PROOF RESTS ON YOU.
You are getting more hilarious by each sentence. Indeed this is not a college class where you have to give references. But IF YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE ANY CREDIBILITY, YOU HAVE TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS WITH FACTS!
Truth of the matter is, there is nothing in the canon that says one can determine when the Pope has lost authority. NOTHING. That is why you cannot find it now and you did not find it then. You are therefore lying.
I can prove you wrong because there is nothing in the canon. The sad fact of your position IS YOU CANNOT PROVE YOURSELF RIGHT.
Your inability to reason well is actually very shocking and it explains why you think Bergoglio is only ‘teetering on apostasy’. Or, is it a reading comprehension problem that you have? I did not tell you that’ I cannot find the canon’, now did I? I said that I was not going to take the 15 minutes that it would take to find it, and that the onus was on you to prove me wrong. Read back and you will see that this is what I said. To repeat, it is not that I’ cannot find the canon’, it is that I am not going to take the 15 minutes to look it up as you would like me to do.
In addition, where did I tell you that ‘the topic is important to me’? How does that relate to me finding the topic then and/or now? The point is I looked it up last year and know that what I said is true and therefore shared the information. The onus is not on me to provide resource for it. I know what I said is factual. You are saying I am wrong. Prove it. When someone challenges what another says is false, he or she who does the challenging must provide proof that what was said is false. .
We are done here.
My inability to reason well.
Hellooooo. Reality check. You are the one who is making claims but can’t support it with facts.
And yes, 3221, you cannot find the cannon. Because if you can, you would have done it already. It just aint there.
As to where did you tell me that the topic is important to you: well, the fact that you bothered “to look it up” before means that it must be important to you.
Liar. You looked it up and did not find it. If you could find it last year, it would still be there now because Canon law has not changed.
You know it is not there and yet here you are still lying through your teeth.
Dumb 3221. Dumb. I DON’T have to prove it. YOU HAVE TO PROVE IT because YOU ARE THE ONE MAKING A CLAIM.
Seriously, how is that so hard to understand?
I would like to point out to you that ‘canon’ as in canon law has no double n in the middle. For your clarity, it is ‘canon’ and not ‘cannon’. If you looked up ‘cannon law’ perhaps that is why you could not find it.
Because I know that you will not be able to locate anything otherwise, I will tell you that Catholic Apologetics has a section on Abuse of Ecclesiastical Abuse of Power.This section quotes the canons and gives the interpretations of Aquinas and Deithrich von Hildebrand, as well as St. Robert Bellarmie and other renowned theologians. Try to keep up.
Ha ha. Is that all you can nit pick in my post?
Well, since IT IS YOU WHO COULD NOT FIND IT, then what sort of spelling are you typing into google? lol
And please DONT REPEAT THE LINE about not saying that you could not find it. Because at the end of the day, you can’t find it because after so many posts you are still unable to cite the specific canon law.
If it is as easy to find as you claim, you would have given it by now if only to rub it in my face.
But so many posts later, the best you can try is take issue with the spelling and bring up different tangents.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. But what has that got to do with the FACT that you cannot support your own arguments with FACTS?
What has that got to do with the FACT that you can’t even provide proof for your claims?
And yes I know about Bellarmine’s position but that still is not canon law is it?
So care to try again?
Great.
So tell me, did they cite a particular canon law as to how we can remedy this abuse? Did they say that the Pope loses authority when he abuses power and when he makes heretical pronouncements?
If so, feel free to tell us what they say and CITE THE SPECIFIC CANON LAW they cite.
In the meantime, I have cited Canon 1404. Feel free to cite a canon that overrides that.
Oh, since you are unable to prove your case, how about we ask a canonist?
http://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2013/01/31/pope-removed-from-office/
Canon law contains no juridical process whereby a pope can lose his authority. If you believe it does, you’re mistaken.
If this were so, canonists would already be pursuing it. The fact is that the Church has thus far left us ill-equipped to deal with a pope like Francis from a procedural standpoint, which is why we’re forced to fall back on the hypotheses of Bellarmine and Suarez in such discussions.
According to Canon Law, would not Bergoglio fall under Canon 2314, wherein it states that ‘All apostates from the Christian Faith and all heretics are ipso facto excommunicated? Bellermine refers to this thinking and interpretation of the early Church Fathers. Anyone of us, including a pope, is first a Christian and must hold to the fullness of the Faith. Von Hildebrand urges the understanding that we are to be obedient to the fullness of the Faith, and he states that any prelate, including a pope, who errs in teaching the Faith in its fullness, loses his authority. Regarding Canon Law, it is a matter of interpretation, and soon it will be necessary to interpret it according to these giants of the Church.
As Supreme legislator of the Church, the Roman Pontiff may not be judged by any ecclesiastical authority except his own successor. While he may well have excommunicated himself, we do not know this, because no one in a position to say so has done this.
This is why the thought of Bellarmine and Suarez on this matter was speculative; they posited that a council could declare that a pope was a manifest, obdurate heretic who had removed himself from the faith, and thus, his office, but they postulated the unlikelihood of this (and there was some disagreement between them about how this would play out.)
We do not have a procedure for dealing with a heretic pope. We do not have a procedure for establishing that a pope is a heretic in the first place. We’re in uncharted territory here, and Canon law does not cover it.
Meanwhile, with the tiniest bit of effort, here is what I found about the Pope’s authority in Canon law
Can. 1404 The First See is judged by no one.
Oh and by the way, the onus is on you to prove yourself right and not for me to prove you wrong. You have not provided one tiny bit of proof to support your claim. You should read up on a thing called burden of proof.
It matters not that you quote canon law. The ability to read and think from canon law does not give anyone authority to make such pronouncements and to act upon them as if there is no valid pope.
There are several expert theologians from centuries ago who grappled with the issue of an apostate pope and what can be done about it on a practical level. St. Robert Bellarmine was one, St. Cajetan was another, and there are two more well-known (but forgotten by me) theologians highly regarded as the Church’s greatest authorities on the subject. Their beginning point was that they had to contend with something established in Church law somewhere (sorry, you’ll have to research this yourself) that no man can judge the pope.
Now, that doesn’t stop a pope from being removed, but it was compelling reading for me to see how they still managed to theorize a process for the removal of a sitting pope who commits heresy while honoring the prohibition against men judging the pope. It does involve an ecclesial process which fulfills God’s will, but it is still a process with authority.
Which brings me to my conclusive point that there is ZERO AUTHORITY for you – and me – to exercise any such judgment of any pope. Of course, I see what you see, but that changes nothing because of our lack of authority to draw a substantive conclusion that the pope is no longer pope. There is and cannot be any such thing as automatic removal from office just because papal heresy may be obvious to many.
Pope Francis remains pope in fact unless removed by an ecclesial commission or God Himself removes him – NOT you, me, or ANYONE.
I don’t like that much; he’s been here far too long and has inflicted much too much damage, but it’s not my call – or yours.
My conversations in this thread are not about whether Bergoglio is officially the pope. It does not matter because he is not someone I would follow because he is clearly apostate. He is to be resisted. Whether or not he is an authentic pope is not the issue. It is not my place or anyone’s place who is writing on this thread to say whether or not he is officially the pope. That is not the point. My obedience is to the fullness of the Faith. I look to this bishop of Rome for no guidance whatsoever because his teaching is poison, and that is clear. He is destroying the Church and is to be resisted. I do not respect his so-called teaching authority because it is poisoned. In reality, he has lost it. Again, I am not talking canonically in saying this, but as far as listening to what he is saying I will not, because,due to his apostate stands he has forfeited his authority.
PS
Don’t get to bent out of shape about the whole authority thing. It’s perfectly fine and healthy for ordinary Catholics to have an opinion. I doubt anyone seriously thinks the little comments here will lead to the pope being removed from office hahaha..
Isn’t that the most stupid thing you have ever uttered.
If according to you, I (who have no interest at stake in finding it) could easily find it if I wanted to, then how come YOU (who have every interest in finding it because your credibility rests on it) CANNOT? Do you presume me better than you at finding things?
If it is that easily found, then pray tell why you haven’t found it again? Why instead of finding it, you reply with these absurdities 3 days later?
The humble servants. Those that are willing to risk EVERYTHING for CHRIST. DOES anyone remember what the goal is? The goal is serving CHRIST. Bringing Salvation to the world. The great Catholic Missionaries that were murdered and martyred for their faith. WHEN LOOKED AT CHRIST THROUGH THAT LENS PEOPLE RUN FOR THE HILLS. THIS IS REALITY.
when in our lifetime has their been crucifixion s and beheadings??
So how exactly is that supposed to answer my questions:
1)Tell me which canon it is.
2) Who gets to decide whether the Pope has lost authority.
3) Who tells the Pope that his authority is lost
In the Middle East.
Please check out True or False Pope?A Refutation of Sedevacantism and Other Errors by John Salza and Robert Siscoe http://www.trueorfalsepope.com. This book is essential reading for all Catholics.
https://onepeterfive.wpengine.com/comment-policy/
Why are you making this reference regarding my post? Try to be direct.
he is over the line…for a while
It matters not that you quote canon law. The ability to read and think from canon law does not give anyone authority to make such pronouncements and to act upon them as if there is no valid pope.
There are several expert theologians from centuries ago who grappled with the issue of an apostate pope and what can be done about it on a practical level. St. Robert Bellarmine was one, St. Cajetan was another, and there are two more well-known (but forgotten by me) theologians highly regarded as the Church’s greatest authorities on the subject. Their beginning point was that they had to contend with something established in Church law somewhere (sorry, you’ll have to research this yourself) that no man can judge the pope.
Now, that doesn’t stop a pope from being removed, but it was compelling reading for me to see how they still managed to theorize a process for the removal of a sitting pope who commits heresy while honoring the prohibition against men judging the pope. It does involve an ecclesial process which fulfills God’s will, but it is still a process with authority.
Which brings me to my conclusive point that there is ZERO AUTHORITY for you – and me – to exercise any such judgment of any pope. Of course, I see what you see, but that changes nothing because of our lack of authority to draw a substantive conclusion that the pope is no longer pope. There is and cannot be any such thing as automatic removal from office just because papal heresy may be obvious to many.
Pope Francis remains pope in fact unless removed by an ecclesial commission or God Himself removes him – NOT you, me, or ANYONE.
I don’t like that much; he’s been here far too long and has inflicted much too much damage, but it’s not my call – or yours.
Here’s the best resource I’ve found on all that:
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope
I think it’s plain silly to call Francis an anti-pope or apostate. In all likelihood he will be the one assassinated as per the 3rd secret. What exactly has he done to invite this criticism?
He has just put out the strongest worded criticism of gay marriage agenda of any pope in recent years. He recently encouraged people to go to confession frequently. An enquiry into a female diaconate is simply that.
Francis is far cleverer than you or I regarding the real politik of the Church. An enquiry is necessary to shut down the push for female deacons because that is how such contentious issues in post-modern society is dealt with – within the Church or without.
So…an investigation is conducted to examine the merits of this idea. It will be found to be contrary to the tradition of the Church for male ordination only and this enquiry will be used to close this agenda down for good.
It is not for no reason that the Jesuits educate students to take on leadership and political roles. Smart is what Francis is and far more strategic with his Jesuit way of thinking than us.
Correct. And this is the position that governs our comment box policy regarding sedevacantism:
https://onepeterfive.wpengine.com/comment-policy/
I am not speaking of ‘sedevancantism’. Bergoglio is not teaching the true Faith as Christ has given It to us. He loses his authority to teach when he holds errant positions. This is not a formal repudiation of whether or not he is the pope. It is to say he is not to be followed. What did Jesus tell his apostles about the Pharisees? Bergoglio is not ‘leaning toward heresy’. He is in heresy.
Dear Steve. A much sexier place to intellectually occupy is sedeprivationism; sedevacanstism is so yesterday 🙂
What is ‘sedeprivationism? What do you mean it is ‘sexier’?
Yes that may be true. In order for CATHOLICS AND ALL CHRISTIANS TO WAKE UP. and our Jewish friends. All people will face God. EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW. ITS COMING HE’S GIVING US THE SIGNS AND THE WONDERS. JUST BELIEVE AND BE READY.
Thank You! So often forgotten That the Church is a Hierarchy and not all Catholics are their own Pontiff. “The church is our mother and we are to Love her even when she strikes us” …..Saint Padre Pio. Also this “righteous indignation” could very well be a trap to get us to all fall into the sin of Pride. Whatever happened to penance, sack cloth and ashes. Humble recognition to God’s just trials etc… I guess it is much easier to be an anonymous opinion on the web……just I have just been. Blessed Virgin Mary, refuge of sinners, protect us.
Definition: Apostate is defined as someone who has left behind his religious or political beliefs or his principles.
Now, to categorically state that Pope Francis is an apostate is ridiculous and scandalous. Go to confession.
By the fruits the tree is known. Bergoglio’s latest
‘apostolic exhortaion’ is riddled with heretical statements. He is an apostate. We know this from the heresy he spouts.
You do not know the state of my soul nor my motives. Refrain from the judgment of me and of them.
Well, you persist in judging the pope beyond your authority. Despite the fact that we all understand and probably agree with what concerns you about him, it appears you can – in violation of Canon Law – judge the pope but complain when you feel others judge you.
Interesting.
I am not judging you. I only gave a definition of apostasy and applied it to what many are writing about Pope Francis. Given the definition of heresy I am suggesting that what is being said about Pope Francis as it relates to heresy is wrong. To support my position, which I am certain will be rebuffed, Cdl. Burke, a noted Canonical lawyer does not think the document is heretical in anyway. I would rather believe Cdl. Burke that bloggers who complain about which they are seemingly ignorant.
If you are not judging me, why did you tell me to go to confession? My need for confession is not yours to know, is it? Bergoglio told a group of priests in Rome that when someone comes in for the Sacrament of Confession, they should give the penitent absolution even if he or she remains silent. His instruction is in violation of the requirements for a valid confession. There are errors in AL that Cardinal Burke said are in contradiction to the Magisterium, and are therefor ‘only PF’s personal opinion’. AL is an Apostolic Exhortation, and it carries the weight of an official Magisterial document for most Catholics. It teaches heresy. What planet are you living on that you do not know how much and how often Bergoglio trashes the treasures of the Catholic Church? Indeed this evil man is an apostate pope.
Dear 3221: You wrote: “There are errors in AL that Cardinal Burke said are in contradiction to the
Magisterium” Please educate yourself and read the following: http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/04/12/cardinal-burke-amoris-laetitia-does-not-change-church-teaching.
I know what Cardinal Burke has said about AL. He dismisses the errant parts of it as only Bergoglio’s opinion. Since the time when Cardinal Burke said that, he has come out more strongly against AL. There is heresy in that document. Think what you want, but let others admit to what is really there. Stop arguing about it.
I read it. Give it up.
Will do.
Your rosy denial keeps you from seeing what is before your eyes. It is neither ridiculous nor scandalous to speak what is obvious. As Catholics our allegiance needs to be to the fullness of our beautiful Faith. Bergoglio is trashing it. Perhaps you need to get a spiritual director/confessor who can help you develop some self knowledge.
I knew it from the heginning of him becoming Pope. My spirit was very uneasy.
Canon Law provides for no remedy for what is obvious to some. There is no minimum which must be attained to satisfy the requirements for a remedy which doesn’t exist. Get a grip, and deal with it like the rest of us.
If that occurs I would faint. That would be a real sign of Apostasy
A 3rd Vatican Council may be superfluous. Amoris Laetitia already has enough explosive material to bring about worldwide fracturing of Church hierarchy.
And purely my intuition/speculation here: Convening and conducting a council could take more time than certain aligning prophecies suggest we even have.
Wouldn’t a Vat 3 be a bit over his head? Maybe not, if the UN gave him help.
That’s right on. The UN.
O wants to be Secretariat gen of the UN…I will give you that Mary…
Could you point out for me the areas where there is explosive materiel and also I would be very interested in the aligning prophecies you write of. Could you give me more information on those please ? There is no private messaging on disqus is there. Thanks
The subversive clauses of A.L. are well documented. Non-traditional clerics the world over will leverage them for all they’re worth. The impact can’t be anything less than rapid since the controversy concerns the sensual lives of Catholics everywhere. Few priests who attempt to pastor in accordance with doctrine can hope to avoid entanglements barked up to their bishops. I expect very discernible fault lines within a year as bishops respond to these tensions by making their permissive policies explicit. The doctrinal rigorists will be minuscule in number (or you’d have heard from them by now).
My reference to prophecies wasn’t meant to suggest I’ve studied them closely. But I do have eyes to see – ISIS inching towards Rome, rifles in sure supply, a frail quasi-pope Benedict in the margins as a “bishop in white”, Francis readying to commemorate Luther’s revolt in tandem with the Fatima centennial while he continues apace inverting established doctrinal meanings (lawlessness), the sudden onset of technologically reinforced effeminacy (the entire Christian West shrinking from its duty to resist rampant error and Islamic invasion) as forewarned by St. Paul in the last days. And, not proceeding from any prophecy that I know, a monumental clash of titans ahead between the globalist Clinton and nationalist Trump (it’s the only part I can get a kick out of).
Obviously, there isn’t much fracturing. Bishops and Cardinals havery been mostly silent. The apostasy is widespread.
It’s just the beginning I think …… I don’t think it’s Francis but he is laying the foundation ….change always occurs incrementally and over time
I believe it’s him. He and Obama.
There is no need for a V3 as we already essentially have it, in perpetuity. Look towards the “Synods on xyz”. These are essentially the same thing as V2 but a little smaller, frequent and periodic.
CONGREGATION
FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA
INTRODUCTION
As the second millennium gives way to the third, Pope John Paul II has decided to publish the text of the third part of the “secret of Fatima”. …
Thus we come finally to the third part of the “secret” of Fatima which for the first time is being published in its entirety..
And so we come to the final question: What is the meaning of the “secret” of Fatima as a whole (in its three parts)? What does it say to us? First of all we must affirm with Cardinal Sodano: “… the events to which the third part of the ‘secret’ of Fatima refers now seem part of the past”. Insofar as individual events are described, they belong to the past. Those who expected exciting apocalyptic revelations about the end of the world or the future course of history are bound to be disappointed. Fatima does not satisfy our curiosity in this way, just as Christian faith in general cannot be reduced to an object of mere curiosity. What remains was already evident when we began our reflections on the text of the “secret”: the exhortation to prayer as the path of “salvation for souls” and, likewise, the summons to penance and conversion.
JosephCard. Ratzinger Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000626_message-fatima_en.html
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now, either those claiming the third secret refers to apostasy at the top of the Church are wrong and a Pope Saint and his successor were truthful in publicly proclaiming this is the entirety of the third secret
OR
Those claiming that the third secret refers to apostasy at the top of the church are right and part of the proof for that thesis is this CDF Document which, if the speculators are right, is one extensive act of public perfidy, deception, and lies.
IANS, than whom none are more conspiratorial about and skeptical towards the modern Church.sides with the Pope Saint and his successor for such structured public lying is not even attempted by a POTUS, to say nothing about a Pope Saint.
True apostates. liars, and frauds are far too clever to produce a product such as this.
Has IANS reviewed the Ferrara book? The statement in question and many other related subjects are examined in fascinating detail.
http://www.secretstillhidden.com/book.html
Dear Brian. No. But what does it have to do with what has been claimed by a Pope Saint and his successor?
If the claim is they are stone cold liars then why not just say it?
That is not what they claim; rather they claim that, for a variety of reasons, these prelates have convinced themselves that the missing portion of the secret – an interpretation of the vision – is not authentic; this thereby allows them to assert that the whole secret has been revealed. You should read the book; it is free and quite persuasive. God bless.
Dear Brian. That is not what they claim. They claim parts of the third secret – not some interpretation of it- was omitted
We’re talking about the same thing; the omitted part of the secret was the Virgin Mary’s words regarding the released vision – her commentary or interpretation of it; and it was this that was deemed inauthentic thereby allowing an claim to be made that the whole thing was revealed.
Dear Brian. You accept as a fact that a Pope Saint, his successor, and the Seer, Lucy, have conspired to produce a public lie of the first order.
But those making the claim are engaged in imputing malign motives to those persons absent objective evidence vis a vis the Fatima Message.
Hearsay is not evidence.
A major player in these accusations of conspiratorial deception by the three was the suspended priest, Fr Gruener,,
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=4086
and is well known that the Remnant’s Mr Ferrara repeatedly claimed he was not suspended.
Lucy was obedient and she attested to the fact that The Third Secret was released in its entirety; Gruener and his gang are disobedient and claim the third secret was not entirely released owing to mental reservation etc etc so who, objectively, has more credibility?
Lucy, obviously (unless she was kidnapped and replaced by a double, a claim one sees freq).
The protests of those denying the facts of Fatima are clearly protesting too much when they claim they are not calling the three persons liars – they clearly are calling them liars but they lack the cojones to say it.
Okay, got it. Because group X chooses not to accuse group Y of lying, you accuse group X of being lying cowards. Thanks for clarifying.
This seems an accurate summary.
I think we can now see that ‘I Am Spartacus’ displays for the world to see that he definitively does not know what he is talking about.
Fr. Gruener is a priest in good standing. This has been proven with documentable evidence and logic. IamnotSparta is howling in the wind and banging pot pans. Maybe he would like to present the charge for the alleged suspension, but the only thing he will find is an outdated article here and there that quotes somebody else that refers to some unnamed authority that still cannot produce any charge as to why Fr. Gruener was supposedly ‘suspended’ other than a sad excuse that he couldn’t show up to a hearing due to immigration issues which even then wasn’t grounds for any suspension over incardination for which Fr. Gruenr was incardinated by the Bishop of Hyderabad which was another card some try to play but won’t work.
As for SparacusamInot’s claim that Sr. Lucia ‘attested” to the 3rd secret being released, all he’ll find are letters typewritten when Sr Lucia didn’t know how to type and always handwrote, that contain factual errors she could never have made, exposed by Fatima biographer Frère Michel, and of whom two culprits, one Fr. Fox & Fr. Kondor were responsible for and accused publicly before a crowd of people by Frère François of FRAUD and fabricating the 5 Lucia letters, a charge they didn’t defend themselves from except to flee in silence. But IAmNotAsSparagus conveniently doesn’t tell us this! Forget about the obvious fact that the 3rd Secret is missing the documentable-fact opening words “In Portugal the Dogmas of the Faith will always be preserved…” which begins the 3rd Secret and the spoken words of Our Lady, which Even Pope Benedict XVI in his recent trip to Fatima admitted were words spoken by the Virgin which are absent from the 2000 disclosure and which refers to sin INSIDE of the Church.
So why does IamTartacus have to say then? What are the implications?
That his ‘Saint’ JPII went along with this? Given the haphazard way in which JPII was canonized, one wonders if it was even valid, forget about the possibility that if someday a future Pope were to condemn Pope Francis’ actions then all his acts would be declared automatically invalid, including his bestowal of Sainthoods. If anything by refraining from accusing JPII outright, the Fatimists are only showing him respect and wish to give him every benefit of the doubt as to why this occurred under his nose.
Sr. Lucia certainly never lied throughout her years, unless Spartacus can prove to us against Frere michel and Francois and the inconsistency of the alleged letters that completely contradict everything Sr. Lucia said about the 3rd Secret and the reasons why the Consecration of Russia was never done. But maybe he like some anti-Fatima experts and defenders of the 2000 release would like to accuse her of simply making other things up throughout those years and of putting her own opinions onto the secret and consecration.
Maybe SparatacusKingOftheJingle wants us to believe the Virgin Mary, Mother of God and Queen of Heaven was lying when she said a period of peace would be granted to the world and Russia would convert? Or was it Sr. Lucia who was delusional and making up stuff about the Secret and the Consecration? Because that’s all I’m seeing coming from IaintSparadadada…
I think it’s time for Sparatacus to stop posting and spend more time in prayer. Investigating the truth and logic are not his forte. It’s okay, it’s not for everyone… Some can only exist in a happy little bubble.
Well, check out the pictures of the young Lucy and the aged one. No way are they the same person (unless one can somehow grow a chin). And the fact that Ratzinger and JP2 released the Secret as they did purporting it to be entire really makes me see the whole thing is very messed up.
Moreover, the text you quote itself says that it is only “an attempt at an interpretation…” which is hardly definitive.
Dear Brian. It is an interpretation of the third secret but it is not Ratzinger’s interpretation that is under question right now.
It is – was the entire third secret released?
Pope Saint , his sucessor and the seer, Lucy, say it was and others say it wasn’t.
This is not a case of a Pope or Curial Official saying that Tradition is thus and such and appeals to Tradition can be made against those claims; no, this is a simple yes or no proposition.
Did the CDF release the entire third secret?
Officially, publicly, it has said it did.
Now, others say “Well, this man told me differently…The secretary to so and so said…Well, these claims are hearsay and are there audio tapes or signed affidavits attesting to the fact/accuracy of these misty claims or do these claimants axiomatically have more authentic authority than a Pope Saint, CDF Head, and the Seer, Lucy, because they appeal to our own prejudices?
But there is nothing official about those claims and all of those claimants have/had no authority when compared to the Pope.
O, and in the article you linked to, there are claims that are inaccurate- such as Apocalypse 12:4 referring to those who will be duped by the apostasy.
Haddock : His tail drew the third part of the stars: a great part of mankind. This is spoken with an allusion to the fall of Lucifer from heaven, with the rebellious angels, driven from thence by St. Michael. (Witham) — According to Pastorini, this passage refers to the angels whom Lucifer drew after him by sin to the earth. Menochius interprets it of those bishops and eminent persons who fell under the weight of persecution, and apostatized.
Aquinas 2:4 his tail drew the third part of the stars: Now, that he says that the dragon’s tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, this may be taken in two ways. For many think that he may be able to seduce the third part of the men who believe. But it should more truly be understood, that of the angels that were subject to him, since he was still a prince when he descended from his estate.
IANS could generate other orthodox commentary from Tradition opposing the claims made by the very same authors that the Pope Saint, Ratzinger, and Lucy were, effectively, liars, but there should be no need after Aquinas has been heard on a matter.
Just out of curiosity, was Dr. von Hildebrand’s original E-mail testimony sent by her out of the blue or was it requested? I only ask because it would be very telling if she chose out of her own volition to share this information at this point in time.
That is my understanding. The key is here:
“In a private email at the beginning of May Dr. von Hildebrand told me about this 1965 conversation in Florence. I asked her whether she would allow this to be made known to a wider audience, and after consulting with her spiritual director, she replied that he had given her permission to do so.”
I can’t help wondering what would have happened if Abp. Sheen had advised Bella Dodd to release the names of the infiltrators she personally “placed.” In her testimony given to the House Un-American Activities Committee, she refrained. Now, obviously, this would have been dangerous. But was there no way she could have entrusted at least the names of the 4 Cardinals into Abp. Sheen’s custody, to be released upon her (and his?) death(s)? Has anyone ever asked Dr. vH this?
Yes, this was a dreadful error especially when Our Lady gave the order for it to be released in the 60s. This brazen disobedience by the highest authorities in the CC to Our Blessed Lady cannot be emphasised too much. Even as they draw near to the end of their earthly lives they still show no respect towards Her. Absolutely unbelievable for Catholic prelates!
I wasn’t talking about Fatima, but about Bella Dodd’s claim that she was involved with an organized Communist infiltration, getting ‘sleeper agents’ into the seminaries, the priesthood and the ranks of bishops. Abp. Sheen was her spiritual advisor, and like Bella Dodd he never revealed the names of those agents, nor the names of the 4 Cardinals supposedly working with Dodd and her fellow travelers. This is referenced above in Dr. vH’s letter. Yes, Dr. vH asserts that all this ties into the Third Secret, but I was referring specifically to the names of the Cardinals and the infiltrators – which have never been revealed.
Is it not possible that Bella Dodd was an attention-seeking fantasist, with a tenuous grasp of reality ? Such people do exist, and it seems they can be very plausible.
I do think that it’s possible. Bella Dodd has died, and I’ll remember to again pray for her soul. Even well-meaning people like Abp. Sheen can be taken in by people such as you describe. I don’t know whether Bella Dodd’s claims exceeded her true experiences, but will readily admit that the lack of evidence has always troubled me. Interviews and conversations, even asserted by greats like Dietrich and Alice von Hildebrand… Well, sorry. I’m old enough to know that even the wise are not immune to ‘attention-seeking fantasists.’ Even after reading many sources on this matter, I’m not persuaded that objective truth has been revealed.
Suppose BD was completely crackers. How much worse would CC be with actual card carrying KGB agents making mischief? One disaster may be an accident, two a coincidence, but 50 years of continuous wreckage sure looks like the work of an enemy.
I agree that wreckage has happened but whether it happened as Miss Dodd said-mainly through an organized infiltration of outside agents- is what I question. The corrosive effect of historical/critical Scriptural study, converging in many cases with de Chardin’s influence, is in my opinion likely an equal if not more influential driver of the breakdown. There are other, wider historical influences at work too, as others have documented over the years.
It is rumored that there are several chastisements in the Third Secret and that the apostasy in the Church is the backdrop of the Third Secret, but is not the main part of the secret. Fr. Malachi Martin said in a radio interview before his death that ” it would give a shock, would terrify people, would fill confessionals on Saturday night, would fill the cathedrals, the basilicas, and the churches with believers on their knees, beating their breasts.” People wouldn’t react that way over apostasy. Not over an apostasy beginning at the top, and over the apostasy of a Pope. The apostasy at the top, is a very serious spiritual chastisement, but there has to be a material chastisement in the Third Secret that terrifies the Churchmen who read it.
Yes, that also fits in with what Pardre Pio has said about the days of darkness engulfing the world. …a catastrophe …and not only a spiritual one.
Yep, Padre Pio also predicted that the apostasy would begin at the top. ‘Even unto the Papal shoes’. I believe you can take his predictions and prophecies as pretty much right on, because he was one of the greatest mystics of our time, and a saint that has helped many souls after his death.
Padre Pio never spoke of the days of darkness, that has falsely been ascribed to him, those were the words of a seerer of the 19th century. Look to the secrets of Garabandal for hints (which were also approved of by Padre Pio).
Malachi Martin was an agent for B’nai Brith and an agent of the American Jewish Committee and Martin always walked around with their $100.00 bills crammed into his wallet given to him by The AJC.
Martin had many AKAs Michale Serafin, F.E. Cartus ,Timothy Fitzharris O’Boyle, S.J.
“Look” magazine identified him as a “double agent.”
All is documented in E. Michael Jones’ “The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and its impact in world history.”
I am not going to debate this issue or derail the thread, all I can say is that Malachi Martin was a priest in good standing, who in the later years of his life, was a staunch holy Traditionalist Catholic priest who helped numerous souls. Malachi Martin did all he could in exposing the errors and apostasy in the Church in his later years, to remedy all the past mistakes made by the Churchmen he served. I think in the end, he was leading a saintly life.
Martin was committing adultery with the wife of a journalist, Robert Kaiser, and that broke up their marriage and he was a well paid agent of the Jews who sought to subvert the Catholic Church.
https://youtu.be/InmMdjEj9iY
That’s nonsense. That rumor has been debunked. Pope Paul VI released Fr. Martin from the Jesuits and the vows of obedience and poverty, but not the vow of chastity. He served in the NY diocese as a priest with faculties. He did not break his vow. Even Fr. O’Keefe, who was the liberal head of the Jesuits, defended Malachi Martin. Stated he was a priest in good standing.
Robert Kaiser has been shown to be a suffering as a paranoid schizophrenic. William Kennedy had an article in Seattle Catholic debunking Kaiser.
prove it…make your sources beat up other sources. E M Jones…and you are ?
Antisemitism within the Catholic Church? What a surprise.
My father told me that in the Roman Catholic Churches in Poland in the pre-WWI period, priests on Easter would preach messages about how the Jews had killed Jesus. After the services were complete, the members would be
incensed with hate of the Jews, and that they would seek out the first
Jewish family that they could find, burn the houses down, beat them up
and even kill them.
And is it a wonder that the RCC now has an
apostate at the very top? The Bible tells us that anyone who curses or
hates the descendants of Abraham (the Jews), will be cursed by God
Himself, see Genesis 12;
“I will make you into a great nation,and I will bless you;
I will make your name great,and you will be a blessing
I will bless those who bless you,and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.”
Do you want to have God’s curse upon your head? Continue to hate the Jews if you do.
Dave. Do no tread the New Testate nt for in several places it teaches the Jews killed Jesus as publicly declared by the first Pope, Peter, and the convert Paul.
O,and those two were Jews and so was Jesus who told the faithless Jews that Satan was their father.
You seem a run of the mill fake christian (one can’t be a christian if he does not accept Jesus and the Church He established) whose zionism has blinded him.
Try reading the entire Pentateuch which records the Blessings and The CURSES having to do with the Mosaic Covenant.
If the Jews kept the covenant – Blessings
If the Jews broke the covenant -Curses.
Good luck sorting all of that out on your own outside the Catholic Church Jesus established.
O, and good bye
I have read the OT and the NT many times, from front to back. And I’m a born again Christian, the only kind. God reached down to me and placed His Holy Spirit within me about 33 years ago when I was mired in a false religion, seeking God through my own works.
You do seem to know something about the Bible and the OT covenant that God made with the Jews (via Moses) in c.1,400 BC. You’re absolutely correct, it has blessings and curses for obedience and disobedience. The Jews have certainly experienced them in spades, haven’t they?
But there are in fact two different covenants that God made with the Jews at separate times in history. Around 2,000 BC God made a totally different and separate covenant with the progenitor of the Jewish people, Abraham. It’s terms are specified in Genesis 12 through 17. What were its requirements upon Abraham, the first Jew?
Only one, that he and his male descendants (his sons) be circumcised. And God required them to be circumcised on the 8th day after birth. This has been the sign of membership in the covenant ever since and all Jewish men are circumcised in a ceremony called a “briss” until today. This is specified by God in Genesis 17 when He completes the terms of the covenant. Please note that NOTHING else is required by God of Abraham’s descendants to be in compliance. No laws, no special diet,etc.
The rewards of the covenant with Abraham were specified in Genesis 12, and in Genesis 17. They include the ownership to the land of Canaan (Genesis 17). All Abraham and his descendants had to do to maintain their side of the deal was circumcision on the 8th day.
As you are aware, since you seem to have actually read the Mosiac covenant (well done! Most haven’t), it’s quite different in that God required the Jews to fulfill all 613 laws to qualify for the blessings and avoid the cursings. The Temple, its priests and its sacrificial requirements were all part of the Mosiac covenant, again made at a different later time in history.
The NT goes on to state that the Law (all 613 parts of it) was in fact a curse on its recipients since no-one could maintain it. You and I couldn’t today. And that’s why Jesus came as the Messiah, to remove its requirements from the Jews, for everyone of them who accepted Him as their Messiah personally.
But the Abrahamic covenant still exists today, witness that miraculously the Jews are in possession of the nation of Israel again since 1948. They still have circumcised their children since 2,000 BC in an undisturbed line, consequently they still hold the deed to that land of Canaan as far as God is concerned. That is the physical fulfillment of the covenant with Abraham. Yes, there is also a spiritual fulfillment that Jewish and Gentile believers in the Messiah Jesus hold – they are circumcised in their hearts, and when the Lord Jesus returns, we will rule with Him ( as His bride) in the heavenly Jerusalem. But that’s a whole ‘nother matter – we are still in the last phase of the fulfillment of both covenants. Abraham’s still exists – the Jews have never failed to fulfill their part and so they own the deed to Canaan (aka Israel today).
Hope that I have explained this well enough – regards … Dave
Dear Mr. Roberts. Initially, the Hebrew word Eber meant a foreigner and that, indeed, was what Abraham was. He was a foreigner, not a Jew.
Thus, Abraham was an ante-semite.
Mr. Roberts you have fallen under the sway of Satan and The synagogue and you call darkness light.
Circumcision is not Salfivic; you must be born again by Dying and Rising again with Jesus Christ in Baptism.
The Synagogue (Mosaic Religion) has been superseded by the Universal Church; Moses was faith in his house as a servant but Christ is faithful as the son in his church (1 Tim 3:15: Eph 1)
The Synagogue was for the purpose of preparing the Jews to accept Jesus as Messias and the various sacrifices p[roduced only a legal sanctification not a true sanctification which can only be attained unto through the Sacramental System Jesus established.
Jesu established His church for two purposes”
SALVATION
SANCTIFICATION
and you can attain unto neither outside His Church.
Who is King now in the House of David?
Who are the priests offering sacrifice on the Temple in Jerusalem.
Where has the temple been for over 2000 years?
No Temple. No Priesthood, No sacrifices.
Judaism is an entirely dead false religion.
Thus has been my second attempt and so now IANS must obey the New Testament and ignore you because you are a heretic.
Repent while you until have time
If you think that Peter was in Rome acting as the Pope not long after the Lord Jesus’ resurrection, then why was it necessary for the apostle Paul to write the letter to the Romans describing the entire theology of Christianity to them? Surely this would be totally unnecessary since they could have popped over to see the Pope Peter who was there in the first place making decisions and rulings on behalf of all of Christianity (as per RCC teaching).
You have been reading and listening to absolutely false theology and stories. If you don’t know that Abraham was the first Jew, then your theology is on the level of the KKK.
Remember, Jesus Himself warned us – you must know Him personally to enter the kingdom of heaven. no amount of obeying rules and religious rituals invented by the RCC will answer God’s requirements. You don’t obey the Bible, so there will be no sacrifice available to you when you are judged on you works. I warn you of this in all sincerity, and so does Jesus Himself;
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter
the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’
And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.”
Your religion is identical to that of the Pharisees, the sect that the Messiah condemned most severely.
You say you are “a born again Christian, the only kind.” Dave, I am not entering into your debate with ‘I am not Spartacus,’ but only want to say that since you identify as a Protestant, I have a few questions for you. Why, if you are striving for the truth as a Christian, wouldn’t you want to become a member of the Church that can trace its history back to Jesus, Himself? More specifically, Protestantism, which includes ‘born again’ Christians, only goes back to 1507 A.D. and not 33 A.D.. Did Jesus let humanity just **twist in the wind** until Luther et al. finally gave us a new way (Confess Jesus as your Lord/Savior and ask Him to come into your heart) with no sacraments including no real presence in the Eucharist??? Seems VERY HEARTLESS and MERCILESS of Jesus, our Savior and Good Shepherd, to wait for Luther to correct the Church’s practices and beliefs since His death, don’t you think?? Of course, if that’s the case (and it isn’t!), it would make Jesus, by default, a HUGE JERK,which He obviously ISN’T!!!! Plus, Luther and Calvin and the boys did *NOT* claim any any new divine revelation (as far as I know). So, why are you fighting His Church and recorded history, as well??
(Said with much love and hopes for your conversion!)
The very existence of Protestantism proves the divinity of the Catholic Church ; for there must have been dogmatic truth declared before it could be denied, and there could not have been dogmatic truth declared without authority. To protest against authority is to admit authority ; for the act of protest is the personal assertion of authority, the only difference between the Catholic and the Protestant (in regard to this one question of authority) being that the Catholic says it resides in the teaching Church, whereas the Protestant says it resides in his own mind.
Thank you, MPCB. I appreciate your concern for my eternal well being and I return the same to you. We both love the same Lord Jesus, our hope is in Him, that we will worship Him in heaven. As the apostle John wrote;
“See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be
called children of God; and so we are. The reason why the world does not
know us is that it did not know Him.
Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when He appears we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him as He is.
And everyone who thus hopes in Him purifies himself as He is pure.”
Around 35 years ago, my wife was blessed to receive a vision of Jesus in all His glory. Subsequently I saw, and continue to see, His light shine through her. A few years later, God spoke to me while I was attempting to save myself through the teachings of a false religion, Zen Buddhism. The words that He spoke into my mind were;
“My Son, Jesus, has already done it all for you.”
Simultaneously, the Holy Spirit entered me, and my life was changed forever from that point forward.
God bless you, MPCB.
Yes. Choose God or Obama. Which would you choose? If he isn’t rebuked then what are Catholics thinking? What are Catholics doing to stop his APOSTACY over us? Are CathoCatholics speaking out or caring more about liberalism than of Jesus and His Words of truth about the last days?
Churchmen shouldn’t be terrified. What can possibly terrify them ? The danger of damnation ? Then they should repent, as must all men. Death ? But Christ has overcome it. The end of the world ? But Scripture forewarns us of it, so that we may not be taken unawares. The Day of Judgement ? That is a further motive for repentance and conversion – and what is going to Confession, if not a rehearsal for the Day of Judgement ?
They shouldn’t be terrified? Since Sister Lucia had such a difficult time actually writing down the Third Secret, it makes sense that they would be terrified to reveal it. It still doesn’t change the fact that the Third Secret MUST be revealed ASAP.
Yes and JPII also alluded to such world catastrophes and held the Rosary as the only weapon of protection.
Others who have seen the Third Secret have linked it to this message of Akita, Japan: The third message on October 13, 1973, the actual anniversary of the final visions and miracle of Fatima is as follows:
“As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by my Son. Each day, recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and the priests. The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, and bishops against other bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their Confreres. The Church and altars will be vandalized. The Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.
“The demon will rage especially against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will no longer be pardon for them.”
Bingo.
Thank you for sharing this important message. Please see the You Tube video with recent footage of Sr Agnes Sasagawa (filmed last summer): Akita and the Fatima Secret. And share with as many people as possible.
You’re 100% correct. Only Part 1 of the 3rd secret was published and even then it was false referring to JP2’s “attempted” assassination. It was zero to do with JP2 but about a later pope in exile being killed. Part 2 has not been revealed but you can find it in the messages at Akita 1973. They are essentially the same. And yes it would fill the confessionals – if people were not so inurred to what the Catholic Church says – thanks to the paedophile scandals trashing its credibility in the world.
The world and everyone in it will receive a divine warning first though…
Francis IS Pope. However he is such by the permissive causality of God. In my belief to finally strip away the naive Papalism of the mainstream post- VC II “conservatives” of the EWTN/George Weigel school to which so many of us (including me, belonged) for decades.
The celebrity hero worship of John Paul II and even our beloved Benedict XVI ( il gran rifiuto of our day?) led us nowhere but to this sad ignorant vulgar travesty of a pontificate. However they did preserve the Church to the extent thst Francis is being resisted and criticized. This is perhaps the only good effect of the Revolution.
The calibre of Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI inspired, raised up and formed many Catholic prelates and clerics, without whose efforts the last two Synods would have seen far greater catastrophes.
They have prepared for the way for the faithful to stay faithful:
The TLM
Yes.
John Paul 11 is a saint! Not because some liberal put him there but because of a miracle of healing of a nun who had Parkinson’s disease. Let us remember that St. John Paul was intimately joined with the Blessed Mother who he tells us saved his life after an assassination attempt. Was he perfect? No. He kept the church afloat in very difficult times. He gave us the Catechism and an abundance of guidance in the multitude of writings, exhortations and encyclicals. He railed against the culture of death. He lived out his suffering which showed us how to die to self. Let us refrain from the tearing away at holy men. It does not serve us well.
St John Paul II and Benedict XVI accomplished even more than that. With great efforts and initiatives and deeds, they forestalled or mitigated the kind of trials and tribulations that the Church is experiencing now from both within and without. It is up to us to carry on where these holy men left off. Where are the saints of the new millennium?
Agreed Leba!
St. John Paul II allowed Unbelievers they were traditionally called Heathens before Vatican II to pray to their different gods in the Sanctuary of Christ. St. John Paul II also kissed the Koran. St. John II also had a Holy Mass with Figii black. Magic Indians dancing around the Holy Altar with serpents. But the Church calls him a Saint so He’s a Saint. The St. John Paul II just made one new doctrine and that is women can not be Priests thanks be to God for that !
Yes, but i think it helps not to report things inaccurately, as some have done. I also believe it helps to put these events into context: What was the historical context in which they took place? Why did John Paul II initiate certain projects? What came out of them? To what extent were they misrepresented by others? To what extent did he achieve his goals?
It helps also to keep to the doctrines of the Catholic Faith which Christ taught which is go out and Baptize all Nations into the Catholic Church not to pray to false deities like what has been abd is going on at Assisi and at Fatima.
Agreed. But I don’t think John Paul II ever promoted praying to false deities.
Mmmm… Kissing the Koran… “St. John the Baptist protect Islam”… Being marked with the Hindu red mark on the forehead…much?
I don’t want to defend these sorts of gestures but I think there is a risk of making too much of them at the expense of forgetting the bigger picture. In any case, I doubt if Muslims have taken that particular act as anything more than a friendly gesture. I think we need to open our eyes and try to put things into perspective.
John Paul II spoke emphatically about the real differences between Catholicism and other religions (for example, in his ‘Crossing The Threshold Of Hope’) even while he befriended them, he upheld the teachings of the Church even in the face of the greatest opposition, he was up against challenges that were disproportionately greater than any previously known in history, his faith was unshakeable, his ability to inspire faith and love in others was ginormous, he corroborated the philosophical foundations of the Faith in a way never before seen, his ability to diagnose and treat a world grown sick with forms of self-hatred is still little understood, and he effectively stopped the world and the Church from descending into a very dark tunnel. It’s time to open our eyes and follow his lead.
And he raised Bergoglio from his well deserved obscurity; made him a bishop, Archbishop of Buenos Aires and Cardinal! All because JMB had the reputation of being anti- Liberation Theology. Whatever gifts and virtues he possessed, he often showed very bad judgment of character and poor administrative skills.
And he gave us altar girls and that dreadful Assisi festival of religious indifferentism.
Listen to your own words: “All because JMB had the reputation of being anti-Liberation Theology.”
I thank God that you appreciate the need for context. Perspective is necessary to help us understand the strengths and weaknesses of great men like Pope St. John Paul ll. His holiness comes from his life of Heroic Virtue, not from whether or not he always exercised good judgement. An example of questionable judgement was Assisi 86.
Thanks Tom. I appreciate your appreciation :-))
What comes to mind is that, around the time of the Assisi 1986 gathering, and correct me if I’m wrong, the cold war had created serious risks and dangers, terrorism was already showing its face, the threat of nuclear war was real, and religious and/or political fundamentalism were being publicly construed (rightly or wrongly) as responsible for these and other troubles.
What John Paul II did at Assisi was to make a very clear statement to the whole world that the representatives of world religions do not support violence and war in the name of religion, and that they support peaceful coexistence and dialogue. In fact, each representative signed a statement drafted by Pope JPII to that effect, and the Vatican subsequently sent a copy to EACH AND EVERY head of state around the world.
The fact that each religious representative was allowed to pray to their “own god” in Assisi for peace, alongside other religious representatives, was never meant by the Pope to endorse the worship of “foreign gods” but instead to signal to the world, among other things, that we will not stand for the lie that wars are waged in the name of religion. It demonstrates great short-sightedness to affirm otherwise.
I’m not so sure about that Leba. Pope St. John Paul’s good intentions(assuming he wanted to make a statement about peaceful world religions)don’t seem to be working too well with Islam.
Historically, long before Osama and ISIS, Islam was an enemy of Christ and His Church. In the 7th century, Islam destroyed Christianity in North Africa. And Islamic invaders reached the heart of Europe twice before being repulsed. I can’t imagine that Pope JP ll was not aware of the inherent violence of Islam and their drive for world conquest by the sword. Hinduism has always oppressed women and created a class of Indians, degradation and misery, called the Untouchables.
Honestly, I don’t know what the pope’s motives were regarding Assisi 86.
The place I’ve finally arrived at regarding Vat ll and all the confusion and betrayal of the church from within that appears to be accelerating, is that certain ideas took hold within the church that have led her away from her mission which is to preach the gospel to all nations.
While I agree with your comments supporting the impossibly difficult pontificates of JPll and BXVl, it seems to me that one of those Vatll ideas that has spiraled out of control is this notion of ecumenical outreach to Protestants and dialogue with non-Christian religions.
The church appears to have put aside her infallible doctrine of Original Sin as the root cause of all human misery, disobedience and rejection of God and Christ’s Church, the Catholic Church.
The church seems to have forgotten the fundamental doctrine of OS, and popes and theologians, in their eagerness to find areas of agreement with Lutheranism. as one shining example, is going to be a tragic failure. Martin Luther was a heretic, a priest who, because of the Sin of Pride, rejected the Catholic Church. There’s no way to get around that, so it has to be faced. Most Protestants are never going to return to Catholicism, no matter how many concessions the church makes. That has to be the goal of ecumenism, the full union of Protestants with the One True Church. Not to find areas of agreement so that we settle for Jesus uniting us and we go our separate ways.
Remember Pope Francis’ recent visit to a Lutheran church and his ridiculous response to the woman who wanted to know why she can’t receive Holy Communion with her Catholic husband. His laboured, ambiguous response was the fruit of this mindless mission the church has taken on to tippy-toe around. Never speak the plain unadorned truth for fear of hindering the ecumenical spirit.
This is what the Catholic Church has been reduced to. She is no longer, or she has forgotten that her true calling is to be a missionary church.
It seems no one has pointed out to this sincere Lutheran woman that if she yearns to receive the Eucharist, she must convert to Catholicism. She must have the Catholic faith in her soul that the Eucharist is the substance of Christ’s Divinity under the appearance of ordinary bread. It’s not enough for her to want to receive along with her husband and children. She can do that at her church since it’s only bread.
I’ve come to believe Leba that the Post Vat ll Church has lost sight of her mission and her roots. And even a great saint like JPll, lost sight of the Catholic essentials. The Holy Spirit gave him heroic virtues. But does not prevent great popes from error and blindness due to Original Sin. The only promise the Holy Spirit makes to popes is that they will be prevented from betraying church doctrine.
God bless you.
Yes, I take your point about a false kind of ecumenism and about the misguidedness of Vatican II. There is an excellent study here on the ambiguities of the 2nd Vatican Council:
http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/history/79-history/370-ambiguity-and-vatican-ii.html
But there is much more to St John Paul II than meets the eye: he spoke emphatically about the real differences between Catholicism and other religions (for example, his ‘Crossing The Threshold Of Hope’) even while he befriended them, he upheld the teachings of the Church even in the face of the greatest opposition, he corroborated the philosophical foundations of the Faith in a way never before seen, he inspired countless souls to love and follow Christ and to set foot on the paths of sanctification, and he turned a world gone crazy back from the paths of self-hatred and self-destruction. I’m not saying necessarily that he was perfect in every way but I am saying that he achieved great things at a time when no one else in the world could have filled his shoes.
God bless you too.
Thanks for the link to USC. Boniface is excellent. I’ve been following his posts for over a year. Of course, I agree that JP ll was completely orthodox. And Assisi 86 in no way implied that he thought those world religions were worshiping the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob which we Christians know as the Sacred Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
A stumbling block for me was that I could not see past the generations we live in. Like the cburch itself, it seems, I was convinced that the world could no longer hear the gospel the way it was preached in former times or Pre Vat ll. It took years to see that this is a fallacy. The church just lost it’s nerve around the time of the council. And the reasons have to do with global changes outside the church’s control. One obvious example is that technology has made the planet a “global village”. But really, deep down the reasons for the church’s collapse after Vat ll are basically spiritual. Like Boniface explored the ambiguities of Vat ll documents which are real and valid in the day-to-day world we live in. But do not have the ultimate answers for Catholics. The spiritual world of our wounded natures by the sin of Adam and Eve has the final answers as to why Vat ll was such a dismal mish-mash of confusion, ambiguity and seduction by the technologically advanced 20th Century. So many false hopes at the highest levels of the church. The illusion that human nature was “progressing”. God help us.
Now I can claim the church has to face the bitter truth that all this reaching out to Protestants and pagan religions is largely a compromise of the Catholic Faith and will never succeed in converting “all nations” to Christ and the Catholic Church.
The church has to raise up men to be men, to become fearless missionaries to convert the heathen. And probably should start by sending missionaries to the pagan lands of Canada and the USA.. Boys have been systematically emasculated for two generations starting in kindergarten, by man hating feminists who pretty much run the west.
As for your comment about JP ll that “…he inspired countless souls to love and follow Christ…”, well, maybe!!! The question that has to be answered though is why the church has collapsed in the west with no end in sight. Mass attendance is about 10-15%, and is even worse in Europe.
I agree with everything you said in support of Pope St JP ll and Pope Emeritus Benedict. However, the problems are bigger than those two men could resolve or fix. All they could do was “stopgap”. Or “hold the fort”.
Which I think is pretty much what you are claiming.
It took me time to come to see that neither of those two popes could halt the internal corruption of bishops, cardinals, the infiltration of sodomites and freemasons. They could have done more harm than good. If they had taken a hard line approach. Popes have lost so much moral authority since 1965 that it’s downright frightening.
So what is the answer? The Catholic Church can never be defeated. But all is in God’s Will. Personally, I’ve come to the conviction that nothing short of a Divine Chastisement can save the church and the west from final collapse.
God bless.
Leba, I want to share something personal because we’ve talked about Pope St. John Paul ll specifically in our posts. About two years ago I stumbled across a radio interview of Michael Dimond, one of two brothers who promote Sedevacantism.
He was saying the stupidest things about JP ll based on a paragraph of one of the pope’s encyclicals. I no longer remember the disgraceful things he said nor the encyclical. But he was so outrageous, that it was hard for me to believe he was talking about this living saint.
So I googled the document and the specific paragraph this lunatic was referring to.
Needless to say the paragraph had nothing to do with any of this guy’s accusations. The more important point was that I had an epiphany as I read. It was like the pope’s words on my phone spoke to me in my soul. The only way I can describe it was that his holiness made itself known to me just by reading his written words. Which would be the last thing those Dimond brothers would expect since they considered Pope John Paul an antipope.
Tom, thanks for sharing this personal experience. It speaks volumes! I can attest the same of JPII’s writings in my own experience. Some of my favourite encyclicals are “Veritatis Splendour” and “Faith and Reason”, among others. John Paul II was truly gifted, a great inspiration for many souls, and a truly holy man prepared by our Lady to lead the world in his time. It’s a shame that his writings are not read by more Catholics.
God bless you.
GREAT comment, Tom. Thank you so much for it.
Aall of this is true as regards the history of Islam, but recall that St. Francis went to the Holy Land to convert Saladin. And failed. Does that tarnish the sainthood of St. Francis?
Hi MJ, I’m not sure if I understand your point. No, St Francis’ sainthood is not tarnished. Nor is John Paul ll’s just because they failed to convert Moslems. The point I was getting at is that dialogue with Islamic nations is not going to convert them. Maybe most of them never will. The best that will come out of this outreach will be cordial relations. In any case the Catholic Church still has to do the extremely hard missionary work of preaching salvation to all nations. That’s been forgotten since Vat ll.
Where is that information coming from? Was that in there own environment? Certainly not in the Vatican.
They all happened on St. John Paul’s trips abroad you are correct the as instances did not happen in the Vatican. The road trip Asissi was the shortest. Oh, I forgot at India St. Pope Paul allow a Hindu Preistess to bless him on the forehead with oil from another god. Hindus believe in the elephant god and the godess with eight arms etc. God Bless. And have a Blessed Pentecost.
In bed with Obama. The Anti Christ.
Hi Mary, Barak Obama is an evil man. But the Anti Christ!!! I disagree. Spiritually BO is pathetically shallow. The AC will be a spiritual genius, albeit, an evil genius. His genius and spiritual profoundity will have their roots in Satan’s malevalent influence. Compared to which Obama is a pipsqueak. No question though, his downfall is the sin of pride that engulfs his rotten soul.
What if the brilliance comes after full possession. I think the host has to have an evil enough disposition to be such, but some say the Antichrist will be born of a Jewish whore, who might be impregnated nephilim-style, as a mockery of Christ’s birth. The host could have been born in 2012, the supposed Bethlehem star a year ago, or some day special to those into left hand path kind of activities.
Hi Steve, You address some intriguing concerns, and I’m not sure there are definitive answers.
Your first point that the Anti-Christ’s spiritual profoundity might come from Satan’s genius after full possession takes place in the spiritually mediocre soul of a leader like Barak Obama.
I think though that the AC will have to be someone very “special”, i.e., a man of outstanding natural intelligence. By which I mean not just “linguistic” intelligence as atheistic scientists define it. But intelligence as the Catholic Church understands intelligence as metaphysical – the spiritual soul and faculties of intellect, memory and will. So, in my view, this dreadful creature will be intellectually brilliant combined with a deep psychological and spiritual understanding of the frailty of humanity which he will prey upon and manipulate the fears and foolish hopes of an apostate civilization.. This will be another way for the devil to mock God and degrade our spiritual natures.
Assuming that full possession takes place, and as far as I know that is only speculation, there have been many cases of possession where a priest was required to exorcise the demon, is there any evidence that the possessed man or woman’s natural spiritual capacity was increased? The demon spoke through the individual revealing extra sensory powers beyond personal limitations. Your point that the possessed host would be a “mouthpiece” for Satan who revealed his great spiritual powers through the host!!! My belief is that it’s not possible. I’m not an expert on demonic possession. But what I know is that the possessing demons displayed a knowledge of the priest and other witnesses present that was extra sensory, that had little to do with the Christian soul and it’s natural God given gifts. Someone of quite ordinary gifts can have psychic powers. New Agers dumb down our glorious spiritual natures to a pantheistic understanding of God and humanity by glorifying the imagination. Satan’s attack will be to mock our spiritual likeness to God, being made in His Image and Likeness.
Two things come to mind. I think we all agree that Pope St. John Paul ll was a HIGH END genius. Intellectually and spiritually. Profoundly holy. Would it be possible for Satan, allowed by God, to take a megalomaniac like your president Obama, and infuse in him the gifts of someone like JP ll, except predisposed to great evil??
The other point I want to make has to do with the Church Fathers. Were any of them just ordinary men? Or did they possess in varying degrees intellectual and spiritual genius, apart from their great holiness? The Holy Spirit guided them, using their NATURAL GIFTS AND INHERENT CAPACITIES, to work out the doctrine of the Trinity and how it was possible for human nature to be co-joined with God the Son in his Divine Personhood. Could men of just ordinary gifts have accomplished this, and much more, even under the guidance of the Holy Spirit? Or, since God is not arbitrary, did He honor and respect human nature by raising up these men to be the special ones to accomplish His Will?
I think the host of the Devil would have intelligence contingent upon Satan’s angelic intelligence being in him. If he left the person right before defeat, like if God extracts him from the host body to send him to Hell, the host could just be a nasty person, unless it were cursed in the womb as the worst possible generational sin of the mothe instead of getting possessed later.
I don’t know demonology any more than you and don’t know the intelligence of the Apostles. I do know the Holy Spirit had to enlighten them more than was done when Peter identified who Jesus was. There could be a disposition of the soul and not one’s intelligence, that makes one fitting for either possession or easily receptive to graces. That’s all just my opinion. God bless!
The antichrist will come from the revived Roman Empire, Phillip. It’s written in Daniel 9. There’s no place in the Bible where it says that he will be Jewish, although of course it’s possible. Just not biblical.
The Books of Daniel and Revelation tell us that he will orchestrate the signing of a 7-year peace treaty between Israel and the Gentile world. Plus at the half-way mark, after 3 1/2 years, he will sit upon the Covenant Seat (in the 3rd Temple in Jerusalem) and declare himself to be God in the flesh.
Most bible scholars interpret this to be a point at which the antichrist is physically possessed by Satan himself. He will perform the ultimate mockery of God and His Son, the Lord Jesus.
Has to be Jewish or able to be passed as Jewish, or else how will he be presented as the Messiah, son of David, yet to come now come? I believe it is some of the Church Fathers who says he hails from the tribe of Dan [cf. Jacob’s oracle about his sons).
1. He was more interested in phenomenology than Aquinas.
2. CCC is a vague document; Baltimore is much better
3. “…afloat…? # of religious, priests, faithful declined precipitously and dogma became confusing
4. “…railed…” against the culture of death but did not discipline ONE prelate who openly defied his exhortations
5. Yes ! he suffered at the end and seemed to be a holy man
It appears that your glass is not even half full; perhaps empty. Sorry that you fell that way.
Yikes!!
“Baltimore is much better.”
Oh, really? Says who? You? Are you the magisterium now?
This is what has happened to the American Catholic “right,” folks; they’ve become protestants, picking and choosing what they want to believe and do. It isn’t as obvious, because they approach the faith from the opposite direction–but they’re “cafeteria Catholics” much like the leftists whom they criticize.
Clare Clare did you read the Third Secret above in the blog?
The apostasy will start from the top down. Everything from Vatican II down is vague including the CCC. The great Fr. John Hardan SJ. had his reservations on the CCC because of its vagueness. The confusion continued with this Pontificate today. Cardinal Burke has come out and stated that the Catholics are being falsely Catecheased and do not know the basic tenants of the Catholic Faith by this apostasy which we Catholics must resist even to the point of being Martyred for doing so. The Church is being destroyed from within and those who are gullible to defend the apostasy which is confusing and dividing the Holy Catholic Church.
Young children preparing for First Holy Communion at our local church are being told that Sacred Host is a meal instead of teaching them that it is the Body & Blood of Our Saviour Jesus Christ. This explains the talking, laughing and general disorder now being witnessed in all Catholic Churches as people are simply not properly formed due to the ecumenical outlook of the CC since Vatican II.
That is sickening.
Those behaviors are everywhere now. No respect. Parents and teachers st my Catholic Scholl which was many years ago taught very rigid strict behavior. We were never allowed to talk during Mass. I had my mouth taped. This was a trauma I will always remember. Was that appropriate? I would never do that to my students but it was done and more. But the Sisters were very disciplined and Order and discipline was taught.
I think Parents and teachers are not together . This liberal view of discipline for children and protecting their “self esteem” was taken to the nth degree which now thanks to those liberal views we are now reaping what was sewn. Total lack of respect for teachers, Parents, Authority and one another.
AUGH!!
I wrote to this priest and requested he corrected this error before the First Communicants’ reception of the Sacred Host in a week or two. At the Vigil Mass yesterday, with the First Communion class & their parents present, he emphasised that the teaching of the CC was that the Holy Trinity exists in the Sacred Host and in the tabernacle (which in this church is to the side) and they should approach Holy Communion with true belief.
I also noticed the behaviour of the children (and parents) was much more subdued and some of the children went over to where the tabernacle was and genuflected before & after Holy Mass. This never happened before, so I guess he got the message.
I truly believe you are misinterpreting what the Lady of Fatima was truly speaking of by “from the top.” I believe it’s a pact between Obama anti Christ and The current Pope.
Obama is just a Puppet because without the power and money from Goldman’s Clientel with are richest and most powerful in the world. The Banking Company Goldman Sachs are currently advisors for the Vatican Bank. The basically are controlling the world economy. They are in control of the Federal Reserve and the World Bank. Goldman is the hand instituting the Transgender and Homosexual agenda in order to change the face of the World in its darkest moments. They organized the four billion dollar insurance scam for the owner of the World Trade Center after 9/11. Goldman Sacks is the Bank that is washing dirty money for the Drug Cartels and the list goes on and on. If you lock deeper you will be amazed how Goldman controls nations through Usrary which is Condemned by the Holy Catholic Church before Vatican II.
I believe “from the top” truly means the top and not just the upper hierarchy — the bishops and cardinals near the top but “from the top” as in the very top…..i.e. pope. I also believe that the “bishop in white”………….the children speak of (as if looking in a mirror??? i.e. two seemingly popes???) and that “we had the IMPRESSION it was the holy father” (as if he appeared to be the pope but perhaps he wasn’t REALLY the pope?? as in not canonically elected??). Only in the future will we be able to look back and see the truth revealed.
Listen to Malachi Martin’s Peter in Chains series.
I’ve been re-reading all the transcribed interviews (triumph publications) and they are frightening! I am reading through a whole new lens in these times.
So right on.
Well tearing of Pope John. Pope Benedict another story.I do not trust him. At all.
Not to mention the Theology of the Body — which, to my utter astonishment, everyone at the recent Synods seem to be completely unaware of. I did not see one single mention of it anywhere! But if clerics in the last 30 years had been paying attention to TOB, taking it to heart, and teaching and preaching it, none of the current issues causing so much trouble — from Communion for divorcees to transgenderism — would even be getting any traction.
Not because some liberal put him there but because
of a miracle of healing of a nun who had Parkinson’s diseasehe lived a life marked by the exercise of heroic virtue, and [was] only canonized after this [had] been proven by common repute for sanctity and by conclusive arguments [cf. Catholic Encyclopedia > B > Beatification and Canonization – http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm%5D and ratified by heaven by two remarkable miracles.*
raphaelheals – The Book of Tobit is one of my favorites in the Bible. It inspired these prayers:
– PREPARATION FOR MARRIAGE (girl)
– PREPARATION FOR MARRIAGE (boy)
And also prelates like Bergoglio, Kasper, Marx, Cupich, “Bravo ” Dolan, Madariaga, Tagle, Forte, etc. The last pontificates spanning well over thirty years are a complex picture not excluding bad judgment and irresolution with serious consequences.
Our Lord also had disciples who turned away from His teachings.
BINGO!!!
(Sorry, inside joke.)
That one must be from the 3rd anniversary edition.
You have named a few “bad” prelates. Good for you. However, you have not tried to name those prelates who are guarding the gates of the Church in order to keep it pure.
One might think that two pontificates spanning 1978 – 2013 might have seen far viewer “bad” prelates; especially since one is Pope and the rest are powerful Cardinals and papal advisers.
Yes.
Francis IS NOT POPE. A Freemason cannot be a validly elected pope. More people need to read and understand the ancient prophecy given to the real St. Francis of Assisi. Father Paul Kramer understands and he has high level contacts in the Vatican.
Do you have any substantial information that he is a freemason? That’s a very serious charge.
I wonder what Dante would make of the Church today…
I tend to subscribe to the thinking that some of that Papolotory, at least in the English-speaking world, is a long-enduring historical holdover from the days of persecution in the reign of “Bloody Elizabeth” and similar. I’m told that the idolatry of the Papacy, or, more specifically, the men in it, hasn’t been as much of a problem outside of English.
While we need to be careful what we say about him, some go to another extreme and think all he says and does is gold, even if it contradicts a previous pope or even doctrine. Unofficially defying doctrine is practically officially doing so, because the sheep are watching and don’t know as much as they. Sadly, we have to know much more than we should have to, these days, to even maybe know the difference.
There were few Catholics killed under the reign of Elizabeth I, until the revolt of her
sister Mary.. This was because she herself had no problem with anyone’s personal belief as far as religion was concerned. But there were many people killed in rebellions against her rule, unfortunately conducted mostly by Catholics who wanted to put a Catholic on the throne in Elizabeth;s place. Under the circumstances, she was a most moderate monarch.
Now, that couldn’t be said of her father, Henry VIII, who was quite a monster in many ways. Here’s an article that covers the issue pretty well;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism_in_the_United_Kingdom
Queen Mary succeeded Henry VIII. She was very Catholic, and consequently mny Protestants were burnt at the stake then. Worth noting is that the great majority of religious pogram occurred in France and Spain, two Catholic countries. We’re talking about 10’s of thousand here, not the few hundred in England on either side. The Waldensians, the Inquisition, The Albigenses, etc.
I have nothing but the highest respect for Dr. Alice von Hildebrand. I thank her for sharing her recollections on this. In the most horrible way, it makes perfect sense and I’m sure the implications are correct. What else would we conclude, seeing what we see almost every day, the faith systematically decimated. Our Lady of Fatima, ora pro nobis!
The truth of the Third Secret exposed too late. However, time has already told the content of the Third Secret.
P.S.: I heard this music (link: https://youtu.be/ErUJsF1vJ9k) as I read this article. It fits best to this situation; the “World War III”- like spiritual war.
Everything that is happening within the Church has been foretold in numerous Church approved sources including the CCC #675 & #677, scriptures (Books of Daniel & Revelation), Marian apparitions and other prophecies from previous saints, popes, etc. The False Prophet from the Book of Revelation will remove the “daily sacrifice” and set up the “abomination of desolation” as described in Daniel.
Thank you for referencing Sacred Scripture before private revelation.
It’s happening before our eyes.
I don’t need any letters or other such testimony to tell me that we have a majorly compromised Church and therefore are in store for major Divine Wrath, which is only Divine Justice really. Just look at salvation history from the earliest days to see how the story repeats, the only difference being now the largest magnitude in the history of the earth. Consider the depth of sin (e.g. laws mandating support of sodomy) and the quantity based on the number of people on earth now. I am definitely of the “Socci school” where the 3rd secret of Fatima is only partially revealed. It makes sense why they would want to suppress the most drastic portion. Pope Benedict XVI also makes sense for the words “bishop in white; we thought he was the Holy Father” as the martyr. The way it was worded is strange – why not just say that he was the Holy Father or the Pope? But in today’s circumstances it is clearer. My prediction as to when is no later than October 2017 which is the 100th anniversary of Fatima and the 500th anniversary of the Protestant heretical revolt. BTW, there is an astronomical sign of Revelation 12 on September 23, 2017.
I read elsewhere that July 13, 2017 is the 100th anniversary..your source pls?
The great miracle of Fatima was October 13, 1917. Recall what it showed, like the sun falling to the earth. There are two ways now know how that can happen. The first is man-made – nukes – so WW3. The second is an incoming asteroid which hits the earth, that too lights up the sky before the explosion. I suspect that we will get both.
That is what I am saying. Arguing over who us right or wrong doesn’t change the facts as they are before us. Denial is Satans tool to keep people in darkness. Whether it be through drugs, sex, alcohol, whatever it is that keeps is from seeing and seeking CHRISTS TRUTH. It’s upon us . There is no changing what’s been done or allowed in the church which has spanned every church including Protestant. It’s evil and we know it. Now we must REPENT ON OUR KNEES AND ASK GOD TO FORGIVE US AND ASK HIM TO LEAD US GOING FORWARD. there will be major consequences. We are seeing that already. But, we are CHRISTIANS CALLED TO CARRY OUT THE LOVE AND THE TRUTH. IF WE END UP BEING PERSEcuted for that then that will be. But, arguing and staying in denial isn’t going to change what is whether you want to believe it or not. COME OUT OF DARKNESS AND COME INTO THE TRUTH. THE TRUTH IS FREEDOM IN CHRIST.
AvH is a rock. Saw her speak several years ago and I’ve read so much from her (and of course DvH). The knowledge that we win in the end is really the greatest source of hope we have right now.
Are there any other links or sites to get more information on Alice von Hildebrand’s new revelation on Fatima?
Bravo! Brava! This is exactly what Catholics need to read and study; Fatima.
In fact, the whole world does too!
This is the real NEWS of our time!
We must pray and make sacrifices to assist souls from being lost. Pray the daily Holy Rosary, go to monthly confession, do works of Mercy, read Holy Scripture, and indeed, receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the Most Holy and Blessd Sacrament, as often as possible!
Sunday is our Obligation Mass; thanks be to God! And, Daily mass is our Love Mass, Praise to you Lord Jesus Christ!
In addition, Jesus wishes (from Sister Lucia of Fatima) that we have a sincere, true, and loving devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, along side His Most Sacred Heart!
O Mary, Gate of Heaven, pray for us!
Ad Jesum per Mariam.
JAMLY,
euie
I have read Bella Dodd and also AA-1025–so what Alice von Hildebrand claims is quite believable.
Steve; I would like to make one correction on this article regarding Fatima. It will be 100yrs that Our Lady appeared in Fatima on May 13th, 2017. She appeared in Fatima in the yr. 1917
The article is correct, though the phrasing may be confusing. It states, “as we begin this Friday (May 13, 2016), the 100th year since her first appearance to the Portuguese shepherd children.”
Today is the 99th anniversary of this event, which means that today we begin the hundredth year, which will reach its conclusion on May 13, 2017 on the 100th anniversary.
Kind of like how you’re around for a whole year before your first birthday? But that’s still your first year. The day after your first birthday, you’re on your second year. 😉
St. Michael appeared to the children in 1916, but I forget the dates.
It was the self-proclaimed Angel of Portugal, and the children could not recall specific dates of his 3 appearances, although they have been attributed to Spring, Summer and Fall of 1916, with the advent considered being May 13.
Hmm. Oh.
The article states she appeared in; 1916, not true. It was in 1917 …………
The angel first appeared to the 3 children in spring 1916. Our Lady appeared to the 3 children in 1917.
No surprises here. This has been clear for years. Michael Voris has interviewed Alice Von Hildebrand recently for his Vortex program. Some folks expect something dramatic to happen on the 100th anniversary of Fatima one year from today. Note Patrick Archbold article:
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2127-apocalypse-now-another-great-sign-rises-in-the-heavens
Also St Francis’s prophecy of a non-canonical elected Pope that becomes the “destroyer” to the Church and Cardinal Dannell’s book (2015) and press conference on his membership in the self-called Mafia group has strong parallels. Dannells stated that he was a member of a group of prelates that were planning to aid the election of a Pope that would help liberalize the Church. He also claimed this group met annually in St. Gallan, Switzerland from 1996 to at least 2006.
The group included Italian cardinal Achille Silvestrini, English cardinal Basil Hume, Dutch bishop Adriaan Van Luyn, German cardinal Walter Kasper, German cardinal Karl Lehman and the infamous Italian cardinal Carlo Martini ( the group’s founder).
That admission in light of Pope John’s Paul’s II (Universi Dominici Gregis) Implies that those cardinals were likely excommunicated per below:
“The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition.”
Cardinal Dannell also indicated that the “mafia group” contacted then archbishop Bergoglio to verify that he would accept a nomination from their efforts. Now depending on the context of that communication with Archbishop Bergoglio, the Archbishop himself may have been excommunicated prior to the conclave vote.
Just a note: this alleged prophecy of St. Francis is, I’ve been told by Desmond A. Birch, author of one of the most noteworthy books about Catholic prophecy (Trial, Tribulation, and Triumph…), apocryphal.
It gets quoted a lot these days, and does come from an early Franciscan source, but it is not from St. Francis, and was aimed at a specific ecclesial situation of the time.
One of these days I’m going to have to document this more, because it’s misleading and its popularity seems to grow every day.
I can understand why it is popular today, especially after AL and now a commission to study women deacons?!?
Dear Steve. THAT is a great book
Steve,
When I first encountered a reference to this prophecy at Gloria TV, I found it very easy to find a pdf of an apparently photocopied 1882 edition called Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi, Washbourne, 1882, pp. 248-250.
The Forward says the original book was published in Cologne in 1848 under the title “Works of St. Francis.” It seems authentic, given what seems to be font styles typical of 19th & early 20th century books.
I found it here: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiV9dyv5OLMAhVCnRoKHehkD_AQFggjMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.saintsbooks.net%2Fbooks%2FSt.%2520Francis%2520of%2520Assisi%2520-%2520Works%2520of%2520the%2520Seraphic%2520Father.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGKWEdpQrSB6kkwZTOG9xq8qnOA-Q&sig2=id9xRu2gZquirE5sQKaXaw
If that link fails, then google it under “works of the seraphic father st. francis of assisi washbourne 1882.” That’s how I found it a year ago and again tonight.
As you can see, it carries an Imprimatur by William Bernard, Bishop of Birmingham, in the UK.
It seems there is such a book; do you have independent and valid sources calling its authenticity into question?
All references seem to lead to that book, which, due to its age and bona fides lends it credibility.
But I was told personally by Desmond Birch (author of “Trial, Tribulation, and Triumph”) that in his scholarly research, he found it to be apocryphal.
Demond is fairly exhaustive when it comes to the time he puts into the credibility of various Catholic prophecies, which are his forte. (IIRC, he traveled to Quito, Ecuador and managed to get access to some secret archive in his attempt to verify the message of Our Lady of Good Success.)
We’ve ceased our correspondence, in part because of a strong disagreement about Pope Francis. I am inclined to believe him on this topic, however. If I find more info, I’ll share it.
Help me out. We know the Vatican released the third secret of Fatima in 2000. Here is the text:
“I write in obedience to you, my God, who command me to do so through his Excellency the Bishop of Leiria and through your Most Holy Mother and mine.
After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!’. And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it’ a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father’. Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way; having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions. Beneath the two arms of the Cross there were two Angels each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the Martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God.”
This third secret does not seem to pertain to apostasy.
Thanks,
Tom
There is the “Fourth secret” meaning the Third Secret of Fatima Not Entirely Revealed. There Are Two Texts, Secretary of Pope John XXIII Admits.
http://www.fatima.org/news/newsviews/010207fourthsecret.asp
Those denying the entirety of the third secret was included in what the CDF released as the entirety of the third secret at the behest of a Pope Saint and attested to by the subsequent Pope – and, more importantly, attested to by the Seer Lucy – then those making that claim are calling a Pope Saint, his successor, and the last living Seer, stone cold lairs.
But they do not have the courage to say it.
Nope; see my reply below, and read the book.
Interesting comments. I found this at Wikipedia:
“In early September 2007, archbishop Loris Francesco Capovilla, private secretary to Pope John XXIII, who witnessed Pope John open the envelope of the third secret, said there was no truth in the rumor that the Vatican was suppressing a vision of the end of the world. “There are not two truths from Fatima and nor is there any fourth secret. The text which I read in 1959 is the same that was distributed by the Vatican.” Capovilla is also quoted as saying, “I have had enough of these conspiracy theories. It just isn’t true. I read it, I presented it to the Pope and we resealed the envelope.”[42]
See also p.267 of Fatima For Today by Father Apostoli where he addresses this issue in the same manner as the Wikipedia quote above.
Tom
“
Both versions of events cannot be true. Who is lying? And we should be clear that whichever side is lying involves multiple liars telling the same story, often people of otherwise unimpeachable character.
This is quite the dilemma.
You set up a false dichotomy.
As was explained to me recently (I’ve never paid close attention to Catholic prophecy, though I’m always tangentially aware of the important bits) there was a secret revealed in 1917 and written down, and there was an explanation of its meaning given at a later date by Our Lady to Sister Lucia that was also written down, but separately.
They revealed the one but not the other. So when they say the revealed the whole secret from Fatima, that’s technically true. But they did not everything said to Lucia subsequently, which is also important.
There have now been multiple credible sources who say there is more information about the Third Secret in the Vatican archives than has been publicly revealed. Sources who have seen the information in question.
We already know that Our Lady’s request to reveal the secret in 1960 was not honored. We know that the consecration of Russia was not performed as specified, whatever Lucia meant by the idea that heaven “accepted” it. (The promises of that consecration have not been honored, which is itself a sure sign.)
None of this requires that those in question lied. Mental reservation is more likely. But we are not being dealt with honestly, of that I am morally certain.
And since there is no charism preventing a pope — sainted or otherwise — from telling a lie, this is hardly an impossibility even if that’s exactly what happened.
Do we really fear to say as much?
Dear Steve. Nine Catholics were paying attention to this so why would Pope Saint John Paul Ii, his successor, and Lucy, conspire to dupe the entire Catholic world about Fatima?
Cui bono?
As regards credibility, who has more, the three mentioned or the others claiming the third secret was not entirely revealed?
Cui bono?
Well, monetarily, those in the business of selling books that Pope Saint John Paul II, his successor, and the Seer, Lucy, have conspired to dupe the church about a private revelation
Cui bono?
Modernists & enemies within the Church stand to benefit much!
And even if JPII was a saint, it’s remarkable that you can never attribute to him any mistakes or errors in judgment, as if St. Peter himself never did any wrong, oh no… so please cease with this stupid argument of appeals to ‘saintliness.’
As for Sr. Lucia as numerous people have already confronted you about, she is completely innocent and a victim of fraud as are you for falling for it because you have a tendency to imagine the devil himself in this final battle with our Lady is incapable to trying to reinterpret and bury the truth.
Russia has not converted. There has been no era of peace. The third secret is clearly not about the Assasination attempt on JPII. In fact, the vision doesn’t even remotely resemble it. And the revelation that Alice von Hildebrand offers here comes from long before the public announcement of the “full Third Secret.” So unless you’re saying that she’s lying and making this all up, we have a problem of contradictory evidence.
As for the credibility of these popes, look what they allowed into the Church. We just published an article with Cardinal Lehmann, one of Germany’s most notorious dissenting prelates, which says that JPII intervened personally to gain him a red hat after they fought (and Lehmann would not submit) on fundamental Catholic moral teaching. Benedict not only abdicated, he has remained silent on what his successor is doing when his voice is the only one that might restore order.
The questions about what Sister Lucia admitted and did not admit remain in the hands of men like Cardinal Bertone, who reported her words. I’ll leave it to others who have studied the issue more, but from what I’ve seen, none of it adds up.
Here we have been covering the plan to infiltrate the Church by the Masons, we bring up the testimony of Bella Dodd about the communists at the highest levels of the Church, we watch this papacy unfold as the most destructive force in Catholicism since the “Reformation”…but you think that such conspiracies and deceptions are unthinkable?
You know what’s unthinkable? A pope advocating eugenic contraception. A pope empowering heretical bishops. A pope publishing a document like Amoris Laetitia.
But here we are. The unthinkable is what we eat for breakfast these days.
Great last Mic drop line
I would say the greatest destruction ever as Luther left the Church to create his sects while the man at the top is aiding and abetting men (now women too) like him.
I have no doubt that taken on their objective errors and influence, Francis is the worse of the two. Luther had centuries for his destruction to take its toll, though. The Francis revolution won’t be given that much time.
“Nine Catholics were paying attention to this so why would Pope Saint John Paul Ii, his successor, and Lucy, conspire to dupe the entire Catholic world about Fatima?”
That’s an easy one to answer. The real Sr. Lucy was replaced by an impostor.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_qMhBtKe3htg/Sgo-Dk0A_8I/AAAAAAAAFSM/2AQLUCeSL6g/s400/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzlucy.jpg
I am so glad that you put out these two pictures. They clearly are two different people; look at the different shape of the mouths and the differences in the teeth. It may be a difficult problem on the part of many to admit that there was an imposter Lucy, but here it is to see. It is hard to wrap one’s mind around what ‘just cannot be’.
Nine Catholics know about that and they are the same nine Catholics who know Pope Paul VI was replaced by an impostor
http://www.tldm.org/News3/impostor.htm
Amen!
Interesting exercise to show these images to random people and ask if they were the same person. There was a rock music forum or some such where some one did this. IMHO it may explain a lot.
Must be twins!
“Do not despise prophetic utterances. Test everything; retain what is good.” (1 thessalonians 5:20-21).
Mary is the Prophetess of our time!
Our Lady appeared to the children every 13th day of the month from May to October of that year. Of course students of Fatima, the clients of Mary, know that on August 13, the children were in jail; Mary appeared on the 19th of that month.
The final apparition, October 13, was the well-documented celestial phenomena of the “Miracle of the Sun” or the ‘Dancing of the Sun” witnessed by tens of thousands of people, believers and unbelievers alike. It was the most witnessed miracle ever! It is the most incredible public miracle since Jesus ascended into Heaven!
Secular and anti Catholic Newspapers published this story. After intense investigation, the apparitions at Fatima were declared worthy of belief by the Catholic Church.
The feast of Our Lady of Fatima is today, May 13th.
Every Pope, since Fatima 1960, has consecrated their papacy not under the title of Our Lady of Grace, or Lourdes, or Perpetual Help, etc. but under the title, “Our Lady of Fatima!”
Ave Maria!
euie
Possible correction: I read somewhere yesterday that Our Lady appeared to the children in August on the 15th, not the 19th. I see also that Wikipedia has it as Aug. 15th, citing to this book: De Marchi, John. The Immaculate Heart, New York: Farrar, Straus and Young, 1952.
Hi KtG,
Good concern!
However: On August 19, at about four o’clock in the afternoon, Lucia was with Francisco and another cousin at Valinhos, a property belonging to one of her uncles, when the atmospheric changes that preceded the apparitions of Our Lady at Cova da Iria began to occur: a sudden cooling of the temperature and a waning of the sun.
Feeling that something supernatural was approaching and enveloping them, Lucia sent for Jacinta, who arrived in time to see Our Lady appear – heralded as before by a bright light – over a holm oak slightly larger than the one at Cova da Iria.
Lucia: I will give you (cousin) two nickels if you bring back Jacinta to me! Here is one now, and I will give you the other when you return! (smile)
Mary to Lucia:
I want you to continue going to the Cova da Iria on the 13th, that you continue praying the Rosary every day. On the last month (October), I will perform a miracle so that all may believe. If they had not taken you to the city, the miracle would have been greater. Saint Joseph will come with the Child Jesus, to give peace to the world. Our Lord will come to bless the people. Our Lady of the Rosary and Our Lady of Sorrows will come also.
On October 13 1917, in the presence of some 70,000 eyewitnesses, a miracle was worked in the sky above Fatima at the exact moment and in the precise spot that the children had announced earlier. Witnesses recounted that the sun appeared to actually “dance” in the sky and seemed to fall to the ground before resuming its normal place in the heavens.
Ave Maria!
eugene
Got around to reading this this afternoon, and got to the end and was all… wait… where’s the rest of it?
This is new? That the apostasy is happening “at the top”?
“New study finds ocean very large; filled with water.”
“Scientists predict sun will rise in the east tomorrow! Details at six am!”
“It is raining in Vancouver!”
I realize that when you’re in your 90s it might be hard to keep up with
the news, but seriously… It’s not two weeks out of date, it’s twenty
years out of date.
If she had named the names, we probably would have shrugged and said, “Yeah, I figured.”
It is a bit ho hum
…and isn’t the centenary of Fatima next year, on May 13th?
The apparitions of the angel began in 1916, not the of Blessed Virgin which first appeared on Sunday, May 13th, 1917.
Am I wrong here or…
We’re beginning the hundredth year. It’s pretty significant, upon further reflection.
Yes, you are wrong. Today marks the beginning of the 100th year. Birthdays and anniversaries both mark the first day of the next year. The baby’s one day old on the day he/she is born. Starting the count on that day, the 365-day mark is the day prior to the baby’s birthday, a year later. So at the end of that birthday eve the child will have been alive 365 days — one year. The next day, the child’s birthday, is the *first* day of the second year; and so on.
No need for sarcasm. Dr. AVH is simply repeating a conversation that was had some 50 years ago that simply adds more confirmation of what we have been experiencing in the Church these last several decades.
What I contend is that the next pope will be worse than Francis. Francis may retire and then practically endorse a certain cardinal (Kasper, Marx?) and THEN there will be the great schism that was prophesied. *sigh*
By the time Bergoglio retires, will the Mass be totally trashed and will the Blessed Christ still be the Holy Eucharist? Coming soon will be Bergoglioi’s meeting and participation in the Lutheran celebration. What fresh heresies will this apostate pope proclaim before he retires? Will the true Church be underground with Mass celebrated in homes, in garages, etc.? The schism is already happening. The effects of AL are still being seen, with more and more people speaking up to state its heretical content.
Unlikely. Francis himself said that he would have a short reign and next year is the 100th anniversary of Fatima. I think chastisements followed by the period of peace and therefore a good pope.
I attended a lecture by Alice’s husband in very early 1966, or perhaps very late 1965, directly upon the close of the Council at the Jesuit Scholasticate house attached to Spring Hill College, Mobile, Alabama. I believe Alice accompanied him and was in attendance. I was a mere Postulant at the time in a religious community nearby. Regrets that I cannot recall the substance of Dietrich’s talk. It was an exciting time, and we were quite intent on hearing what the esteemed professor’s ‘take’ on the Council was…because we were strongly committed to pushing for the most extreme change to the Church possibly manageable. I think he reined us in…that’s probably why I have forgotten it….Or, it was entirely over my head!!
The man who is now Pope Francis may not have known about it…a pre-conclave liberal cabal determined to break (do-or-die) from the JPII-Benedict rigorous orthodoxy. But members of such a cabal were subject to excommunication under the rules for papal election put in place by John Paul II, shortly before his death. Therefore – if such a cabal had planned prior to the conclave to vote ‘en bloc’ for Cardinal Bergoglio: he is not a valid Pope. Curiously, the Francis’ papacy does not seem to fit the Malachy Prophecy of the pope after ” from the branch of the Olive” which fits Benedict XVI. “Peter the Roman” doesn’t relate to Francis one little bit. But if Francis’ is an illegitimate papacy…then he is not the “NEXT” Pope…since Benedict is still alive (hallelujah!). I think someone should ask Cardinal Theodore McCarrick about the clandestine cabal that voted in bloc for Bergoglio…maybe he will revel in the delight of it and divulge something significant – for surely someone as contaminated as McCarrick would know about such a thing. We may still see the true “Peter the Roman.”
Commenters below seem to be attributing the ‘apostasty at the top’ to Francis. I think that’s a totally shortsighted and truncated view.
It has been a slow downward path from the Council, under every pontiff–and yes, even under Saint John Paul ‘may Gandhi live forever’ the second and Benedict. Francis is just the natural progression in the trajectory of disorientation.
I don’t think you appreciate (or understand) John-Paul’s philosophy of “existential humanism”…the 3rd philosophical systems after Thomas and Scotus. John-Paul II was the greatest philosopher pope ever, and Benedict the greatest historian pope ever…. There is no “downward spiral.”
Assisi, the greatest act of existential humanism yet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRX-KEXBvYY
Steve, if you or anyone is able, please interview Alice Von Hildebrand on all she is able to report, even if it just archived. I would expect she has a plan or memoir, but it may fall into the hands of an editor that would suppress her memories. God bless Dr. Von Hildebrand.
The Seer, Lucy, confirmed the consecration was made
https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/Fatima1984.htm
…and as we all know, Russia has converted and there has been an era of peace.
Another consecration of the world-not Russia-should work this time, especially with the intercession of st. John Paul II, the patron saint of interreligious prayer meetings.
Those letters have been shown to be fakes. The 1989/1990 letters were computer generated. Sr. Lucia never used a computer. She didn’t know how use and write on a computer. Her sister Carolina, went on record, telling people to ignore the letters because Sr. Lucia didn’t know how to type. The Vatican gave an order after 1989, that everyone had to say and acknowledge that the 1984 consecration was the fulfillment of the requested consecration of Russia. Frere Michel wrote the book “The Whole truth About Fatima” and he confronted Fr. Robert Fox, Fr. Kondor, and Basilica of Fatima rector Fr. Guerra, at a Fatima conference in 1992, accusing them of creating and circulating these fake Sr. Lucy letters. They had nothing to say and never refuted Frere Michele over his allegations.
“A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just.” [n. 1753.]
“It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.” [n. 1756.]
“The deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error, by saying things contrary to the truth, constitutes a failure in justice and charity.” [n. 2485.]
How does the accusation of mental reservation (two kinds) remove the charge of a lie at work here for this is not a question of – Hey, Pope, CDF Prefect and Lucy, where did you hide the Jews? _
http://tinyurl.com/zpe2xua
What is being claimed is the three persons conspired in a strict mental reservation; that is, a LIE
From your cited text: “What are some reasons for using a broad mental reservation? The main reason is the need for preserving secrecy, where the value to the common good is greater than would be the manifestation of something that is sure to cause harm.”
I make no claim to the accuracy of this source, or what follows, but if true, it is in accord with what AvH and Cardinal Ciappi (and others) have said, and would provide a plausible explanation for the justification of BROAD MENTAL RESERVATION according to the interpretation YOU supplied:
“Only months after Bishop Ito approved the Akita apparitions, Cardinal Ratzinger was interviewed on November 11, 1984 by Jesus magazine, a publication of the Pauline Sisters. Within this 1984 interview (titled “Here is Why the Faith is in Crisis”), published to millions in Italy, Cardinal Ratzinger acknowledged that he had read the REAL Third Secret and that it speaks of “The dangers threatening the faith and the life of the Christian, and therefore the world, and also the importance of the last times.” Cardinal Ratzinger said that the Third Secret had been suppressed since 1960 “to avoid confusing religious prophecy with sensationalism.” He also said, “But the things contained in this Third Secret correspond to what is announced in Scripture and are confirmed by many other Marian apparitions….”
Again, I make no claims of having verified these quotes. But they do provide a plausible explanation:
http://www.tldm.org/News7/PopeBenedictXVIThirdSecret.htm
Dear Steve. Far be it from IANS to argue tooth and nail over anything but the claims made in releasing the third secret do not seem to fit the category of broad mental reservation for there is no indication that the claim this is the entire third secret includes any indication facts are being withheld as is being claimed by those opposing the claim.
In reading the release, how could the average catholic be expected to know that the claim – this is the entire third secret – was not to be taken at face value?
This seems to be a case of a strict reservation which is a sin if indeed what the opponents of the text is saying is true.
In any event, it is cocktail hour and IANS thanks you for being so patient as it is in arguing that IANS thinks out loud and learns from others.
Pax tecum Steve
There has been plenty documented that facts were withheld, and not only withheld, but that the facts known were to be reinterpreted according to a new hermeneutic. Some even so far going as to suggest that some parts of the text absent were to be attributed to Sr. Lucia and not to Mary, and even accusing her of childish fantasies and casting doubt on the Apparition as a whole. You can find plenty of this documented by the god work of Fr. Gruener, Chris Ferrera, Rbert Sungenis, Michael Matt, John Salza and more. Pretty much some in high places in the Vatican embarked on a campaign of disinformation under Bertone and co. to rewrite history and distort it to be more in line with their optimistic view of the 20th Century.
As the CDF document stated, they wanted to relegate the prophecies of Fatima to the past, but instead we can clearly see now they predicted our times, and Pope Benedict XVI already contradicted this and admitted it was only Bertone/Sodano’s interpretation of Fatima to which no Catholic is obligated to believe, and which he contradicted by stating a few years back that the 3rd Secret regards things occuring in the present and pointing towards the future. Even JPII is quoted to have said that unless you wanted to hear about apocalyptic events like waters flooding the earth of fire consuming everything then you probably didn’t want to know about the Secret. And Pope John XXIII who refused to release it in 1960 said “this doesn’t refer to MY PAPACY” indicating something troubling about the Pope, but martyrdom wouldn’t really be anything so troubling as to affect the faith of the Church, and drive people to severe repentance as plenty of Popes were martyred.
If there was any chief mental reservation, it’s that these optimists of VII firmly believed a better world was lying ahead for the Church and that therefore Fatima had to refer to the past, or that they were protecting the faithful from something very troubling, or given the revelations of other apparitions such as Akita, they could have the mental reservation that Mary herself had already revealed the contents herself to be considered sufficient.
Hello Steve, Just to give you a heads up. The link at the bottom of your comment is from the ” Bayside apparition ” site. The proclamations at Bayside contain false prophecy and errors and the Bayside (“Our Lady of the Roses”) movement have been condemned by their Bishop. Bayside is one to avoid. https://www.ewtn.com/library/NEWAGE/MUGABAY.TXT
Thanks. As I said, I don’t endorse the site itself, but they were quoting Ratzinger from other sources, and I didn’t have time to look elsewhere.
If anyone knows a better place to find those Ratzinger quotes online, I’d be happy to replace the link.
The quotes from the article seem legit, but perhaps you could use this : https://catholictruthblog.com/2016/02/20/akita-confirms-fatima-message/ or this : http://www.fatima.org/thirdsecret/ratzinger.asp I’ll leave it to your discernment.
This fits right here. Dr D Von Hildebrand was the Director of Fr luigi Villa’s magazine Chasia Visa.
http://www.padrepioandchiesaviva.com/Padre_Pio___Fr.html
I find a lot of comments scarier than the article above. Pray, fast, do penance so that the few will be of help to the many. Don’t relish the sins of the hierarchy, which only God really knows, but pray and fast for them all. Yes, today of all days, please Our Lady of Fatima pray for us!
Yes, we should pray for the sanctification of priests https://www.opusangelorum.org/crusade/crusade_frontpage_dw.htm
John Paul 11 was shot on May 13th, 1981. With the significance of the date and his miraculous survival you would have expected a resurgence of interest in Fatima at every level of the church. New books, films, devotion to First Saturdays etc; but one month later Medjugorje started up which has done so much to distract the faithful from studying and responding to Our Lady of Fatima.
Malachi Martin concluded that Medjugorje was Satanic deception. .. and seemingly functional ..
Satan just needs to implant one error amongst even speaking the truth and that was done at least twice at Medjugorje, when the apparition said all religions are pleasing to God and when it told the seers to ignore the bishop’s negative statement about it. Whatever you think is the problem about any particular obe, one can make a decision that can be reversed by a successor. I don’t know if the second bishop after that started is still the bishop, but that one declared it not-supernatural (of God) that being said, even Fatima is no excuse to battle against each other. The doctrines, anything else binding and the Bible are public revelation and applying them charitably, but assertively, in public discourse, are all we really need to know.
In all the discussions of Fatima: Why no mention that Mary promised in August and September that St. Joseph and the Child Jesus would also come in October, with the miracle, to give peace to the world? Is it possible that there are church officials who do not want people to turn to St. Joseph as the head of the family, honored by Mary and Jesus that way for thirty years and therefore revealing that God’s eternal, changeless divine will is to perfectly honor St. Joseph, in heaven, as the head of the family?
Maybe it had to do with the future disastrous synod of the family. Sr Lucy did state the final battle would be over the family.
I am sorry. I do not see the connection between your reply:
“Maybe it had to do with the future disastrous synod of the family. Sr Lucy did state the final battle would be over the family.”
to my original comment: “In all the discussions of Fatima: Why no mention that Mary promised in August and September that St. Joseph and the Child Jesus would also come in October, with the miracle, to give peace to the world? Is it possible that there are church officials who do not want people to turn to St. Joseph as the head of the family, honored by Mary and Jesus that way for thirty years and therefore revealing that God’s eternal, changeless divine will is to perfectly honor St. Joseph, in heaven, as the head of the family?”
please clarify your thinking.
If I am correct that Jesus perfectly lived the changeless, eternal, always in the present tense Divine Will of God, and He perfectly honored St. Joseph as the head of the family, St. Joseph having the right and obligation to pray to God in the name of the family, asking for God’s blessings on the family, and because God’s eternal will is changeless, then, since Mary promised on Aug. 19 and Sept. 13, that Joseph and the Child Jesus would come in October to give peace to the world the world, this is still God’s divine will to give His peace through Joseph and through the Child Jesus honoring St. Joseph as the head of the family, in response to our prayers through Mary who also honors St. Joseph as the head of the family in heaven. Does anyone see how I could be wrong in this? Does it make sense that the devil would want priests to be silent concerning the role God has for giving His peace through St. Joseph, honoring him as the head of the family?
The word of God is predicated on Love not fear. The present pontiff is only trying to reconcile the teachings of Jesus to our understanding of the various manifestations of human frailty.I believe he is not trying to obfuscate the truth or core beliefs of the Catholic church but is rather sounding out radical new ways of interpreting those same truths.This will be, of necessity, a painful process for absolutists, but will ultimately transform our way of looking at the world as it really is and not how many of us imagined it was in the recent past. In this way he is addressing systemic corruption within the Vatican itself and proselytising among the lapsed.This is a tricky balancing act as he risks alienating hard-line conservatives and disappointing liberal spiritual-types. Be assured, as a Jesuit, he will take no prisoners.The message of Fatima was of its time and helped re-affirm belief in the supernatural presence of God, for those who needed reaffirming. Its relevance lies in the message of hope it gives and not in its portents of doom(all of which have since been realised)
Except that the radical new ways are actually contradictory to these truths.
The interpretation being given does violence to the Lord’s own words.
Addressing corruption in the Vatican or aiding and abetting it? Is not the worst corruption the corruption of doctrine by changing the practice? Is that not in fact hypocrisy? We have here the Pope basically teaching us to be hypocrites: yes affirm the teaching but live contrary to it. Mouth ascents to the teaching of Christ but disobey HIm in your daily life.
Actually changing the pastoral practice to contradict doctrine is a subtle Christological heresy as cardinal Muller said in 2014 around the time of the Synod.
Thanks.
Can you give me a link. Would love to have this in my file.
http://torontocatholicwitness.blogspot.com/2014/12/cardinal-gerhard-muller-separating.html
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/12/cardinal-muller-separation-of-theory.html
Perhaps these radical new ways are only contradictory to our present day understanding of these core truths. The man-made heresies propagated within and without His church have of necessity to be addressed, if His teaching is ever to be fully realised. How far the present day pontiff is prepared to address these issues is constrained by the cultural differences within the Catholic church.The adherence to scripture is not as fervent among the congregations of so-called first world nations as it is in the third world.This is why(I believe) he has deliberately not introduced the hardline or cast judgements on those considered unclean by those who regard the practice of faith as an academic exercise or those who hold fast to the illusory nature of power. It ill behoves us all to cast judgement on the words of Pope Francis, but rather to exercise a modicum of humility lest we be subsumed by Pride.
Our present day understanding of these truth? Can the 2000 year old understanding of these truths be called present day?
Was the Lord lying when He said that those who divorce and remarry commit adultery?
How did the church since it’s inception understand that?
Okay. Here’s my translation of your statement: First world nations tend toward apostasy more than third world nations for mammon becomes God and wealth destroys the blessedness of poverty.
Considered unclean? By who? Was it not Jesus who declared them adulterers? Would you classifiy Jesus as a person who consider faith as an academic exercise.?
And isn’t it the watering down of the faith -as is now taught by Francis – that in effect reduces faith to an academic exercise. His proposal of a hypocritical faith (affirm doctrine but don’t live by it) is precisely what makes faith an academic exercise: yes marriage is holy but if you want to have 2 or more, that’s just fine.
But we can cast judgment on the words of Pope Francis because the Lord in His wisdom gave us the Magisterium. During Vatican II, Pope Paul VI wanted to insert a statement in the V2 documents to the effect that the Pope is only answerable to God. But the Fathers were against it and said that the Pope was answerable both to God and the Tradition of the Church. So the Pope can’t come up with novelty and expect that to be believed as the truth if it goes against the teaching of the Magisterium.
This is why we can assess whether the Pope is faithful to the teaching of the Church or not.
You can question, but not cast judgement.
Oh but we can cast judgment.
For it is not our judgment really, it is the judgment of the Church. We are merely stating the perennial judgment of the Church as taught to us through the centuries.
In fact it is the judgment of Christ.
It was not me who said that anyone who divorces and remarries commit adultery. It was Christ.
We still have the ancient teachings of the Earliest Church Fathers along with 2000 years of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. And all of them can be sourced.
So tell me – what brilliant insights does this Argentinian hyper-politico liberation-theology communist on the Chair of Peter currently enjoy that 2000 years worth of Truth guided by the Holy Spirit seems to have gotten so wrong?
Lot of big words there, you’re too clever for a lowly one such as I.
You and your demigod Bergoglio – you’re both very proud of your humility.
The worst corruption was failing to recognise paedofilia as a sin against man and God.Further, being complicit as apologists for the perpatrators of these crimes.It is this alone which has exposed the Catholic church as being morally redundant and led Francis, (a lamb among wolves) to the present day morass.One must reconcile oneself to the teachings of Christ and their practice within or without an organised faith and not go blindly according to dogma.Your ways are not my ways.
Indeed. But it was not that they failed to recognize paedophilia as a sin but how best to deal with it. At the time, the advice given was that this was a sickness that could be “cured”. Furthermore, it must be remembered that majority of the sexual abuses was not a case of paedophilia but of pederasty. So the problem was homosexuality rather than paedophilia as such. And yet here we have Pope Francis saying that it is okay to be gay. Here we have prelates approving of same sex copulation when it is precisely this orientation that brought shame to the Church.
I would not classify him as such. He is more a wolf among lambs. For what is a wolf but one who leads lambs away from the true shepherd.
But that is absurd. How can one reconcile one’s self to the teaching of Christ if one is to eschew Dogma? The dogma of the Church is precisely a presentation of the teaching of Christ. Are you saying that the dogma’s of the Church goes against the teaching of Christ? Nothing could be more absurd and heretical.
And oh how true. God’s ways are above the ways of the world. And yet here we have someone who is supposed to be the Vicar of Christ giving us the ways of the world rather the ways of Christ.
Here we have a Pope who proposes to give us earthly comfort rather than the victorious cross of Christ.
What is absurd is your belief that the celibate clerics did not recognise sex with a minor as a sin or a crime. but rather a sickness to be dealt with by stealth. You’re in good company with the many childless celibates of the same view.Human sexuality is an entire spectrum of which homosexuality is a part whether you approve or not does not change that physiological fact of nature.No man should let the teaching of any church stand between him and salvation.This is the same church who invented limbo and the concept of original sin(Augustine).As for the latin Mass how outmoded was that. The moribund Catholic church does not have a monopoly on religious expression, which is why many have abandoned it to practice faith as they see fit, rather than adhere to a morally bankrupt regime – which is what it is. Francis is addressing this with some success, unburdened by the yoke of tradition.
I don’t know whats’ going on with you but I actually said the exact opposite.
No Noel, homosexuality is a corruption of human sexuality.
And it is not a matter of me approving or not but what God intended sexuality to be. Homosexuals are in denial of the biological fact that we are either male or female and as such designed to mate with the opposite sex.
Except that the teaching of the Catholic church is precisely the way to salvation as Jesus Christ who is God intended.
This is the same Church who taught THE REALITY OF ORIGINAL SIN. This is the only doctrine that makes absolute sense of our fallen nature.
And if you have an issue with the Catholic Church, then you are more than welcome to join other churches.
If this is what you believe, then why are you in the Church at all? Why did you not leave? Why not join the Anglicans? They have abandoned most of the moral teachings of Christ so why don’t you go join them instead.
Success?? You have got to be joking. The only thing he has been succesfull at is to create schism in the Church.
The Yoke of Tradition is the Yoke of Christ. He said my Yoke is easy. Those who would remove this yoke ends up with the yoke of the evil one.
You really place a lot of store in on-line discussion don’t you Marc? Its a beautiful day don’t let it get away.Go out meet some Anglicans and homosexuals created in God’s image.They don’t have horns in their heads unless their is a mardi gras.
Actually, the majority of the sex abuse cases involved post-pubescent males, teenagers. We have 40% or more homosexual men in our priesthood. The problem was with many of these homosexual priests engaging with teenage males.. That is no more pedophilia than an adult male who finds a 15 year old female attractive.
I am so tired of people defending homosexuality ( I am not speaking of persons, but the tendency) while at the same time mercilessly going after the sex abuse crisis in the Church. This crisis is indefensible. But it came upon us because of homosexuality in the priesthood.
You clearly haven’t a bulls notion what you are talking about. Paedofilia was perpetrated on young females by clerics. Paedos don’t discriminate.The argument for pederasty dosen’t hold much water in a court of law anywhere.But your views are broadly in line with the thinking of senior clerics of the Catholic church but not with God’s love. Never confuse the two.
Where exactly did I even hint that I believe that homosexuals and Anglicans are not created in God’s image? See , this is exactly the kind of irrational thinking that LGBT advocates fall back on.
When they run out of rational arguments they act like precious princesses fall back on emotion.
You know what your response reminds of? This :
Husband: I just checked our credit card and you’ve over spent again. Your shopping spree has put far back in the red. You don’t need that many shoes and bags and clothes when your wardrobe is already bursting with them.
Wife (sobbing): You don’t love me anymore.
As for putting much store on this online discussions, you do too. Or you wont be commenting.
Ah yes and there it is. You openly admit your contempt for the Catholic Faith. So it is no wonder that Bergoglio is a hero to your twisted ideology. Thank you for displaying your putrid adherence to immorality.
And no – homosexuality is not part of the natural human spectrum of sexuality. Because homosexuality is not reflected in our natural design. It is no more grounded in our intended human nature than the prevalence of any contrary disease or mental illness.
No one understands ‘manifestations of human frailty’ better than Jesus. And no, the ‘portents of doom’ have not been realised.
The portents of doom as indicated by the seer Lucia have.Every day we can see the manifestation doom in the news headlines and our personal lives. Each new spectacular event only corroborates the message of Fatima.We can only hope to be a part of the solution to the woes of the world by the way we address ourselves to the conflict within our own lives and lead by example, not mere pious platitudes
The ‘portents of doom’ in Sister Lucia’s vision have not taken place.
Perhaps
“The present pontiff is only trying to reconcile the teachings of Jesus to our understanding of the various manifestations of human frailty.”
– That’s not his job. The teachings have long ago been discerned. His ONLY job is to defend that Truth. Especially after 2000 years of discernment by the greatest saints sinners and theologians the Church has ever known. In other words – those “doctors of the law” which this arrogant pontiff so obsessively despises.
” but is rather sounding out radical new ways of interpreting those same truths.”
– that is heresy. And it is far beyond his pay-grade.There are no new sins under the sun. Human nature does not change. Therefore the ONLY reason anyone would reinterpret that which has long ago been interpreted would be to appease the popular sentiments of an immoral culture. Which is exactly what Bergoglio is doing.
Great name there Strife.Our understanding of the teachings of Jesus are in a constant state of flux or evolving.It is only by questioning them and teasing them out will we even begin to comprehend them much less adhere to them.While the Catholic church should not acquiesce to populist credos, it must not alienate those who are sincere in their fervour. Like I say it is a tricky balancing act.Your contempt for the this papacy would make a decent Protestant blush.The Jesuits do not suffer fools and you can rest assured that Francis will lay to rest many of the demons, not the least – the enemy within.And will do so under the guidance of the Holy Spirit alone.He has clearly alienated many detractors on this site, but not as many as those clerics and laity who were/are apologists for paedofilia, self-aggrandisement and academic introspection
Our understanding of the teachings of Jesus are in a constant state of flux or evolving? Really? Then in that case the Truth we thought we understood yesterday is now a fallacy. Which of course means that The Way The Truth and The Life have been unattainable for 2000 years. And that of course is complete heresy. What you’re describing is more akin to the ancient heresy of Gnosticism – which of course is completely contrary to the Deposit of Faith.
And the church must not alienate those who are sincere in their fervor? That is complete nonsense as well. The most ardent sinners and schismatics can be sincere in their fervor. The LBGT Nazis are a prime example. And why should my contempt for Bergoglio make a protestant blush? After all, Bergolio is in protest against the Catholic faith. He is their kindred spirit.
And the modern Jesuits are fools. And they ARE the enemy within. And the only “spirit” Jorge is listening to is his own demonic spirit. But I will stand with the Deposit of Faith like a faithful Catholic. And in due time Bergoglio will meet the God Lord’s Justice. I pray for his pathetic eternal soul.
“The word of God is predicated on Love not fear.”
It’s actually both fear and love. But it starts in fear:
“The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; prudent are all who practice it.” ~ Psalm 111:10
And yes – Our Dear Lord did instill fear in His Truth:
“Whoever will not receive you or listen to your words—go outside that house or town and shake the dust from your feet. Amen, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.” ~ Matthew 10:14-15
“If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body thrown into Gehenna. And if your right hand
causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to
lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna” ~ Matthew 5:29-30
“Then he will say to you, ‘I do not know where [you] are from. Depart from me, all you evildoers!’ And there will be wailing and grinding of teeth when you see Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God and you
yourselves cast out.” ~ Luke 13:27-28
The fluffy, tolerant, Disneyland cartoon caricature of Jesus that you’re attempting to advance – never existed.
Good luck with that.God is love.
And God’s Love demands Justice. But then, the term “love” that you’re using really means heretical tolerance and moral relativism. All of which are abhorrent to God:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” ~ Matthew 5:17-20
http://www.fatimamovement.com/images/img-third-secret-of-fatima/Third-Secret-of-Fatima-large.jpg
January 4, 1944:
Now I will reveal the third part of the secret;
This part is the apostasy in the Church! (1)
Our Lady showed us a vision of someone who I describe as the ‘Pope’, standing in front of a praising multitude.
But there was a difference with a real Pope, the evil
look, this one had eyes of evil. (2)
Then after a few moments we saw the same Pope entering
a church, but this church was like the church of hell, there is no way to describe the ugliness of this place, it seemed like a fortress made of gray cement, with broken angles and windows like eyes, there was a beak on top of the building. (3)
We then looked up at Our Lady who said to us:
you have seen the apostasy in the Church, this message can be opened by The Holy Father, but must be announced after Pius XII and before 1960. (4)
During the kingdom of John Paul II the cornerstone from Peter’s tomb must be removed and transferred to Fátima.
Because the Dogma of faith is not preserved in Rome, her
authority will be removed and given to Portugal. (5)
The cathedral of Rome must be destroyed and a new one built in Fátima. (6)
If 69 weeks after this command is announced Rome continues it’s abomination, the city will be destroyed. (7)
Our Lady told us this is written, Daniel 9 24-25 and Mathew 21 42-44. (8)
The church in question is the new church of the Most Holy Trinity in Fatima. John Paul 2 indeed sent a stone from St Peter’s tomb to the new church during his pontificate. It is a truly hideous building. Finally, Amoris Laetitia was signed April 19th. 69 weeks from that date is the one hundredth aniversary of the giving of the third secret: July 13th 1917.
God help us, Our Lady protect us.
Edit:
The church in question,
https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Church+of+the+Holy+Trinity/@39.6298016,-8.6760581,304m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x324e4d8eec08c5ad!8m2!3d39.629672!4d-8.6752832
An aerial view shows it situated at the “foot” of the Fatima shrine, like a “dragon waiting to devour her offspring” (Rev 12:4)
How can pope francis be a chastisement to the church when the world loves him? The faithful who strive to do what is right seems to be the ones punished by this pontif. It does not make sense.
There is too much rumour-mongering in this report for it to be credible. If this Bella Dodd person was in good faith, and was not deceiving the von Hildebrands, why did she not give the names she was asked for ? Would a Catholic conceal the names of high-ranking she claimed were up to no good ? I smell an extremely large rat: it wouldn’t surprise me if BD were a (pathological ?) liar trying to get a rise out of the Church by faking conversion to the Faith and spreading outrageous falsehoods in order to hoodwink anyone she could get to believe her story, and so as to cause mischief and suspicion. She sounds exactly like Leo Taxil. For info on him and his hoax: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxil_hoax
Hello to you Father Brian Harrison. You are much loved and remembered and missed by the families who had our children at Holy Family Academy in Manassas, Va.
I am so tired of all the “he said, she said” regarding the third secret of Fatima. Please can you or Dr. Von Hildebrand go ask Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI point blank, for the truth in all this!
Seriously.
He isn’t getting any younger. If it is true about some part of the secret involving whatever horrors we are seeing now, or WHATEVER, the time is now to tell it.
He may even save his own soul by fulfilling Our Lady’s request, at last!
If Pope Benedict knows The Message is authentic, the time is now to tell it.
I am not surprised that a great apostasy was unvieled at Our Lady’s University, Notre Dame.
You can only have a Great Apostasy from The True Church, Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
One cannot be for Christ and anti Christ simultaneously. One cannot be for Christ while denying The Word of God, as He Has Revealed Himself to The Body of Christ, His Church, in the trinitarian relationship of Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and The Teaching of The Magisterium.
One should never depart from the request of the Queen of Heaven. If she said publish before 1960 then that is exactly what should have been done. I can hardly believe that a human would question the word of Holy Mary!
Professor Hildebrand qualifies one of the visions of Fatima which the
Children did not understand and they were told by priests the priest in
white climbing over dead bodies was the Pope. What was their question
what is a Pope? This vision was, as I wrote somewhere, the secular vision
of ambitious and successful managers climbing over dead bodies to get to
the top. Substitute dead souls for dead bodies and the soldiers who shot
him are soldiers of Christ. Not one prelate or priest would admit or dare to to admit
that description. If they had, so long ago, then we would not be in the
position we are today
Perhaps, or maybe The Bishop in White is our Holy Father, who, recognizing how serving The Common Ground rather than The Common Good, denies The Divinity of The Word of God, Jesus The Christ, and is thus a recycling of The Arian Heresy, has been silenced. We have two Popes. One has read The Secret of Fatima, and knows whether it is authentic or not. Why won’t our Holy Father, Benedict speak about the authenticity of The Third Secret? I Pray that he is in a safe haven, protected from the wolves.
I must add one other thing. I ask, was God annoyed with the performance at Assisi which ST.JP2
allowed. He sure was moved by the prayers of aliens and Gentiles there, was He not? Look at the later damage caused by an earthquake. Surely a happy God would protect His Property? I have often wondered who was the Franciscan killed there during the ‘quake and what was his relationship with the “fiascoan” ecumenical retreat
Bella Dodd was under the guidance of Archbishop Sheen in what way? She could talk about it and not give the names? She was advised not to talk about it? Was she going against his “spiritual advice” by talking about it at all? This statement leaves open too many questions. I think most observers would have a hard time believing Archbishop Sheen told her she could talk about it but not reveal the names. The advice would be either, talk candidly about it or keep your mouth shut about it. Revealing “half-truths” about it serves no purpose. Any “informant” who provides half-information and conceals the other half with “I can’t say,” for whatever reason, is not credible.
I have severally been corrected by some (what bad English grammar). I wish to reiterate what Fatima was all about. It was a corrective statement about the Church and the wonderful finale was Heaven’s confirmation of who sent it. Rather like Moses in Numbers, “So they shall know who sent me and so they shall know who I am speaking for” . The most important statement if the sacrileges and blasphemies to the Eucharist in which the majority of catholics today have only made worse.
The interpretations that are around are just speculative theology, personal opinions.
Let be give you some errors that have arisen out of catholic hubris. “All the Bishops of the World”, which bishops does Bl Mary recognise as bishops of the Apostolic Tradition? I think Sr Lucia’s latest statement most be seen as made under obedience. My next question is , “Would Bl Mary give us or change Church Doctrine? Would it completely emphasis our Church’s doctrine? Therefore we can say that as the Church teaches we do all things to ascend into heaven and this must mean we grow in faith or do everything to get closer to heaven. This means every thing we do everything we do earns merits until we are perfect. Is this not so? If it is not then we are all lost.
therefore we can say as I have been told, “Due to the frailties of man the Consecration is not perfect” Our eternal problem. The first thing to do to raise us higher so the prayers of the pure are heard is confession and get the Papacy, the Russian Patriarch, the Greek Ecumenical P{patriarchy to place in the Liturgy prayers for each other and for each of their churches.
Then we will be closing in on the perfections needed for a perfect consecration of Russia .
You can ask me questions and I have to answer just think first.
I think that for anyone who puts stock in the notion that the 3rd Secret revealed that apostacy will “start at the very top”, it’s worth looking back the Prophecy of the Popes by St. Malachy. The last and 112th Pope in his prophecy is Francis. .
To learn what the still unpublished part of the Third Secret is and why attempts are made by anonymous Vatican officials to mislead the faithful to dismiss Fatima, see on YouTube the documentary Akita and the Fatima Secret. After viewing this film you can also better understand why Our Lady of Fresno is crying in California (see the May 9 ABC News report or google Our Lady of Freso on YouTube). With the 100th anniversary of the Fatima dancing of the sun miracle approaching, everyone should invest the time to know the truth and the book Defeating the Brotherhood of Death is highly recommended. May the peace of our Lord be with you!
This discussion is mostly moot since there is adequate evidence that the papacy was usurped 2 days after Cardinal Siri was elected pope, accepted, 5 min. of white smoke, public announcement, then he was threatened into invalid abdication, gray and then black smoke, and became the prophesied “pope in exile.” This also explains how we could experience an unprecedented revolution in the Church from the 1960s until now.
Also, it has been proven that Sr Lucia was replaced by an impostor, the latter appearing for the first time in 1967, so anything from her is part of a disinfo plan and hijacking of the Fatima Message by the enemy colonizers, including the papal pretenders.