Oh yeah....Muller has. Isn't much fond of any apparitions and delayed exam of what he was handed from the special commission of 4 year work. Pope Francis didn't like that very much. Kept having to make excuses for him.
That's wishful thinking on your part. Do you think that Pope Francis wasn't including Medjugorje in his reference to Our Lady being treating like a post mistress? The divisions in the Church have nothing to do with Medjugorje or any other apparition. They are about the Deposit of Faith, the Petrine Office and the Magisterium. Whether one, all or none of the parties involved believes in Medjugorje is irrelevant.
Um.....I was just going on some back channel info re: the CDF, Muller being replaced. But then just happened upon this from earlier this year making similar statements: Monday, July 18, 2016 Newspaper: Cardinal Müller to be Archbishop of Mainz Media report: In a counter-move the Vienna Cardinal Christoph Schönborn (71) is supposed to switch to the Vatican and take over the management of the CDF http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2016/07/newspaper-cardinal-muller-to-be.html And there will more than likely be a lone authority over Medj.....a bishop just for that "shrine".....since it has grown to level of world interest....and the Vatican has to do something since it created that special commission.
Dolours: That's wishful thinking on your part. "Wishful"? No. That actually did happen. The facts are correct.....I'm only the messenger whom you apparently wish to denigrate. Patience will out.
Dolours said: ↑ I doubt very much that anyone involved in this mess has spared a first thought, never mind a second one, for Medjugorje. and....we are to assume that your "mess" includes the confusion discussed here generated by Muller, another one having to be converted to orthodoxy? Trouble today is that there are certainly a lot of "little" popes with apparently their own little groupies willing to follow them and their little magisteriums rather than the one currently installed. What will happen when the choice really is actualized by the division? There may be more than one "little" pope to choose from since there are a few favored each by his own little willing and devoted "faithful". Now that will be a mess. As they say, watch out for what you wish for.
True, but don't underestimate the possibility that this pope might arrive at a "positive" disposition regarding this "apparition," regardless of its relative merits, just to keep a large constituency of Catholics devoted to this "apparition" mollified, supportive of his "magisterium" and blind to his false mercy and heterodoxy.
So now we have it. If/when the Pope eventually makes some kind of statement regarding Medjugorje, this will be just Pope Francis courting popularity....
Your heart is so hardened against this pope I don't you can discern clearly. there is a monster behind every corner.
What actually did happen? Can you quote the exact words? I'm amused at people condemning others for being their own little Pope while at the same time acting as though they were their own little Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. As to Medjugorje, unless the Pope radically departs from Church practice, he won't declare the apparitions at Medjugorje to be genuine because they are ongoing. He could follow Cardinal Schonborn's style of giving something to everyone in the audience, declaring it to be a place where people come to pray and be converted (or crowd pleasing words to that effect) while saying that his hands are tied in respect of declaring the apparitions to be genuine. If Cardinal Schonborn gets to be Prefect for the CDF he will make sure to keep you dangling on a string and hoping that full recognition is just around the corner. Coming from a Cardinal who said that a person can be a Freemason and fully Catholic, I wouldn't be persuaded by anything he says. That said, I wouldn't stoop so low to referring him to by his surname whilst omitting his title of Cardinal. Whatever my personal opinion of him, I acknowledge that the Church has bestowed on him the title of Bishop and Cardinal and out of respect for the Church I would never ignore his title when referring to him because I believe that to be a tactic of the gutter.
So the pope admits adulterers to the Holy Eucharist, in violation of the very words of Jesus Christ in Scripture, 2000 years of Church teachings, all the writings of Pope Saint JPII and Pope Emeritus BXVI, yet in your opinion, I'm the one with a "hardened heart"? Get behind me, Satan.
I am referring to your post on what the pope might do regarding Medjugorje and what his motives will be for doing this. How can you even make a statement like you did? Not sure how you can determine his motives or even what he might do regarding Medjugorje. I am also referring to your belief that the holy year of mercy declared by the pope was really a farce, and the pope had all these other motives behind declaring the year of mercy. Again, you are searching for monsters behind every corner where none exist. Based on all the articles you have posted on this forum, it seems you spend a lot of time on sites that are unfriendly to the pope, or could even be considered anti-pope. So, yeah, I do think this influences your overall opinion of him and clouds your ability to recognize any good he has done. You can call me satan all you want, but you have a body of work here, and those are my conclusions based on your body of work.
This is an awesome video showing a low thundercloud protecting the Isreali army from ISIS. https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/...god-protects-israel-isis/#FJjJqGv2S9BsElmJ.97
When a pope advocates sacriligious Communions globally (and says intrinsically evil things like birth control are no longer intrinsically evil in situational ethics scenarios) and the "church" cheers him and calls evil good and good evil, then yes, his motives MUST be questioned, unless one is a non thinking credulous catholic not interested in protecting Christ's Real Presence in the Eucharist and the entire body of moral teachings of the Church. Time will tell whose "body of work" was prescient and whose was wishful thinking, endangering immortal souls.
When did the pope "advocate" sacrilegious Communions? Never heard him. When did he say that birth control itself/alone was no longer intrinsically evil? And how do you present in order to "question" his motives when you don't know them yourself? Once you know those motives the world should have the opportunity to judge your facts of reading his mind or to also judge "your" motives, which should be easily explained after proving your lone and unique gift of "mindsight"....ha! You have opened a huge area for all shepherds and their underlings to be accused when speaking of any "protection" of the Eucharist. Some would link the Eucharist being used so often for some time now in Satanic "masses" to the long term lack of earlier respect caused by "taking" the host in the hand, leaving particles in various "unprotected" places, and spilling of the Precious Blood. You would need volunteer placard marchers in front of just about every parish these days if you want to be honest! Have you also knowledge of the entire body of moral teachings of the Church being changed only due to being "unprotected"? Anyone should be able to objectively and independently find such in truth. If you're speaking to giving bad example.....well, welcome to finally waking up to the world of probably the past 60 years and prior to that, only it wasn't quite as transparent then. And of course all of that papal history has come under the same amount of scrutiny in order to emphasize to the same level of criticism as your own concerns re: only the current pope to blame - (not) ..... since that would cover, for blame, a time span of an awful lot of earlier popes, considered by history to be good, holy, and rather untouchable by such similar, in degree, critiques. Gee, how did all of that abuse happen then? How did the "re-education" of seminarians so easily complete itself? Just how did so many "get away with it" for so long??? Must have been an awful lot of winks missed from that previous hierarchy! But I guess you couldn't be everywhere in every time! And, btw, just how did the faithful actually survive all of that neglect from the top down?
Euthanasia of alcoholic father sends 'dangerous' message By Mary Rezac Amsterdam, Netherlands, Dec 2, 2016 / 03:09 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- A doctor in the Netherlands performed euthanasia on a 41 year-old father of two who claimed his alcoholism had made his life unbearable. Mark Langedijk, who also suffered from depression and anxiety, was found eligible for a controversial application of the euthanasia laws of the country. Langedijk was euthanized by his general physician in his home on July 14 of this year. His brother, Marcel, recently wrote about Mark’s decision to die in an article published in the Dutch magazine “Linda.” Marcel wrote that Mark had a “happy childhood” and loving parents, but developed an addiction to alcohol eight years ago. Since then, he has been in and out of rehabilitation 21 different times. Although his parents had been hopeful for a recovery, Mark declared that he wanted to end his life. His application for euthanasia was approved by a doctor from the Support and Consultation on Euthanasia in the Netherlands. A 2000 law permits euthanasia in the country for people who are experiencing “unbearable suffering” that is considered incurable. The extension of euthanasia to Mark was met with sharp criticism from many who said that he should have been offered treatment and support for his depression and anxiety, rather than suicide. Fiona Bruce, a Conservative British MP, told the Daily Mailthat Landedijk's death was "deeply concerning and yet another reason why assisted suicide and euthanasia must never be introduced into the UK". “What someone suffering from alcoholism needs is support and treatment to get better from their addiction – which can be provided – not to be euthanized," she said. “It is once again a troubling sign of how legalised euthanasia undermines in other countries the treatment and help the most vulnerable should receive.” Robert Flello, a Labour MP and a Catholic, said: “Yet again Holland demonstrates it is a dangerous place to have any physical or mental illness, to be struggling with any life challenges, or just to differ from what they might call normal.” “The state-authorised killing of their citizens is out of control and is, quite frankly, terrifying.” This case is not the first time the expansive assisted suicide and euthanasia laws of the Netherlands have come under fire. Earlier this year, many critics protested when a young woman in her 20s, who was suffering from PTSD and depression following sexual abuse, was euthanized. Dr. Greg Bottaro, a clinical psychologist with the CatholicPsych Institute, told CNA at the time that the case sent a “devastating” message to other people struggling with mental illness. “...by putting this out there in this public mindset, it calls into question even more the people who are in despair and it gives them greater reason to believe that it's worth giving up,” he said. In May of this year, the Dutch government yet again came under fire when the health and justice ministers announced their intent to extend euthanasia to people who “have a well-considered opinion that their life is complete, must, under strict and careful criteria, be allowed to finish that life in a manner dignified for them.” The option would be limited to “the elderly,” though the briefing did not define an age limit. The “completed life” extension is expected to go into effect in the Netherlands by the end of 2017. The push for legal euthanasia and assisted suicide has increased in Western countries in the past few years. In June of this year, Canada legalized physician-assisted suicide, as did the states of California and Colorado, joining the states of Oregon, Washington, Montana and Vermont. Also in June of this year, Pope Francis denounced physician-assisted suicide as part of a “throwaway culture” that offers a “false compassion” and treats a human person as a problem. Addressing medical professionals from Spain and Latin America at the Vatican, the Pope criticized “those who hide behind an alleged compassion to justify and approve the death of a patient.” “True compassion does not marginalize anyone, nor does it humiliate and exclude – much less considers the disappearance of a person as a good thing.”
