Not only is Pope Benedict a "brilliant chess player" as you describe, but a man of prophecy. He provided much prophecy of these times himself and there is one prophecy out there that I am watching and waiting to be fulfilled. His mission is not yet fulfilled, it is as follows: From the book God Speaks Will You Listen www.godspeakswillyoulisten.org 10-17-07 Please read the last part of Apocalypse 12:4. It states: And the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered: that, when she should be delivered, he might devour her son. Now, my people read Apocalypse 12:5: And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod. And her son was taken up to God and to his throne. My church is to rule the nations spiritually through my vicar, the Pope. These verses are literally being fulfilled before your eyes. Pope Benedict XVI is the man child elected through the power of the Holy Spirit to rule with a rod of iron. My son, the Pope is my instrument being used to purify my church. His recent proclamations and decisions are setting my church on the narrow road to heaven. Once his mission is accomplished, he will be taken home to be with his Lord and Master. Then, my people you will see the fulfillment of Daniel 12:11: And from the time when the continual sacrifice shall be taken away and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred ninety days. (The Fatima "Bishop dressed in white")?
He is not Pope Benedict. He is Pope Emeritus Benedict by his resignation from the papacy. That his mission is not yet fulfilled, I can grasp, since while any one of us is still alive, our mission is not yet fulfilled.
God has always had his plan in place to crush the devils head. He chose his mother to be that heel to do so (Genesis 3:15). Today, as the prophets of today are revealing, is the time for this biblical prophecy to be fulfilled. Yes, in our time, in our moment. If God had wanted Pope Benedict to be in the chair of St. Peter, in lieu of Pope Francis, it would be so. But, God's mercy for this world is nearing an end and Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, are fulfilling their end of the era moment. If Pope Benedict was still sitting in the chair of St. Peter, the moment were are in would not have been hastened and unmasked. I believe they are all playing the parts of God's plan. Pope Francis is exposing the evils within the church in an unintended way, which Pope Benedict could not have done. He has made way for everything evil that we are seeing unfold, which under the reign of Pope Benedict would still be in limbo. That's my take and I think we will all see this come to fruition soon enough. It's all in God's divine providence to usher in the era of peace that scripture and prophecy have foretold.
Anne Catherine Emmerich called them the "Two Popes" and I will do the same. https://onepeterfive.com/anne-catherine-emmerich-and-the-two-popes/
Steve Skojec’s article on this forum explained that: that ACE was receiving two visions from two separate time periods concerning Popes in different time periods. (not simultaneous)
https://onepeterfive.com/anne-catherine-emmerich-and-the-two-popes/ Dmjoforegon posted this recently on the thread about Melchisedek. It was written a few years ago. The vision really had nothing to do with two simultaneous popes.
The secretary to Pope Benedict, Archbishop Ganswein comments about the summer of 2012, and his statements about an expanded Petrine ministry in this article. https://onepeterfive.com/interview-archbishop-ganswein-on-benedict-the-two-popes-and-prophecy/ Some of the quotes from this article are from Archbishop Ganswein are: "I spoke about a exponentiated [enlarged] pontificate. It is clear – to say it clearly, because I have seen in some of the reactions how people insinuated things that I never said. Of course: Pope Francis is the lawfully elected and lawful pope. That is to say, there are not two popes – the one lawful, the other unlawful, that is simply not correct. And I simply said – that is also what Pope Benedict said – that he, after all, is still present with his prayers, with his sacrifices, in the “Recinto” of Saint Peter [within the walls and precincts of the Vatican], and that, through these prayers, through these sacrifices, there shall come forth spiritual fruit for his successors and for the Church. That is what I meant to say, and now we have had for three years two popes and I have the impression that the reality that I perceive is covered by what I have said." Then the interviewer, Paul Badde, then sums up how he understands what Archbishop Gänswein tries to say: If I understand you aright, he [Benedict] remained in the office, but in the contemplative part, without having any authority to decide. Thus we have – as you said – now an active and a contemplative part which form together an enlargement of the Munus Petrinum [primacy and office of Peter]? Gänswein responds: That is what I have said, indeed, that – if one wishes to specify it – it is very clear, the Plena Potestas, the Plenitudo Potestatis [full power, incarnate authority] is in the hands of Pope Francis. He is the man who has right now the succession of Peter. And then there are no difficulties left, as I also have said it. These two are also not in a competitive relationship. That is where one has to make use of common sense, as well as the Faith and a little bit of theology. Then one does not have at all difficulties to understand properly [sic] what I have said.
Does anyone remember the 3 prophecies of Don Bosco? I always wondered if Don Bosco's interpretation was correct and have wondered about the venerable old man in the prophecy. The First Prophecy God alone is almighty, all-knowing, all-seeing. God has neither past nor future; everything is present to Him, everything at a single point of time. Nothing eludes God. No person, no place is distant from Him. In His infinite mercy and for His glory He alone can unveil the future to man. On the vigil of the Epiphany of this year, 1870,2 all material things in my room disappeared, and I found myself contemplating supernatural matters. It was only a matter of an instant, but I saw a great deal. Although what I witnessed was sensibly present, I find it extremely difficult to communicate it to others intelligibly, as one may realize by what follows. This is the Word of God in human parlance: "War will come from the south,3 peace from the north.4 "The laws of France no longer recognize the Creator. The Creator will reveal Himself by visiting her three times with the scourge of His wrath.5 The first time He will destroy her pride by defeat, pillage, and destruction of crops, cattle, and men.6 On His second visit the great whore of Babylon, which the faithful grievingly call Europe's brothel, shall lose her leader and fall prey to chaos.7 "Paris! Paris! Instead of fortifying yourself with the Lord's name, you surround yourself with houses of ill repute. You yourself shall destroy them; your idol, the Pantheon, will be razed to the ground,8 so that it may truthfully be said that 'iniquity has lied to itself.' [Ps. 26,12] Your enemies will plunge you into anguish, famine, terror, and the contempt for My law, says the Lord. "On My third visit, you shall fall under the foreign yoke. From afar your enemies will see your palaces in flames, your home in ruins, soaked in the blood of your heroes who are no more.9 "But behold, a great warrior from the north appears,10 a banner in his right hand, his arm bearing this inscription: 'Irresistible is the hand of the Lord.'11 At that moment the Venerable Old Man of Rome went forward to meet him, wielding a flaming torch.12 The banner then grew larger and its blackness became white as snow;13 in its center stood out the name of the Almighty in golden letters.14 "The warrior (Don Carlos and the Pope) and his followers bowed profoundly to the Venerable Old Man and joined hands with him. THE THREE PROPHECIES OF DON BOSCO
France has been through 2 horrific world wars but the 3rd chastisement sounds truly terrible. Anyone have any context for any of this? I am at sea.
Sep. 13, 2019 New JPII Institute Professors Question Church Orthodoxy on Homosexuality, Contraception Father Maurizio Chiodi and Father Pier Davide Guenzi currently teach moral theology at the University of Northern Italy in Milan, and both are well known for their questioning of moral absolutes. Edward Pentin | http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edwa...controversial-statements-on-homosexuality-and VATICAN CITY — The latest development in what is becoming increasingly viewed as both a purge and a revolution of the Pontifical John Paul II Institute is the hiring of two moral theologians whose views on homosexuality and contraception contradict the magisterium. The new professors, Father Maurizio Chiodi and Father Pier Davide Guenzi, both moral theologians at the University of Northern Italy in Milan, will begin teaching at the Pontifical John Paul II Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Sciences as part of its 2019-2020 curriculum announced this week. Father Chiodi, whom Archbishop Paglia appointed as a member of the Pontifical Academy for Life in 2017, is to teach “Theological Ethics of Life” at the institute. Father Guenzi is to lecture on the “Anthropology and Ethics of Birth.” Both professors, whose appointments follow highly contentious removals of long-serving lecturers in July, are well known for their questioning of moral absolutes. In 2017, Father Chiodi gave a controversial Rome lecture on Humanae Vitae in which he used Chapter 8 of Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation on the family, Amoris Laetitia, to justify contraceptive use in some cases. More recently, he gave an interview to the Italian bishops’ newspaper Avvenire in which he asserted that, while each homosexual person is called to chastity, “under certain conditions” and depending on circumstances, homosexual relationships can be “the most fruitful way” for same-sex attracted persons “to enjoy good relations.” The interview appeared to suggest that Father Chiodi was open to considering homosexual acts as “objectively good,” according to bioethicist Tommaso Scandroglio, writing in the Italian Catholic daily La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana. Father Guenzi expressed similar views to Father Chiodi in another recent interview with Avvenire. On the subject of whether homosexual acts could ever be licit, Father Guenzi equivocated, saying it depended on the “relationship, between the intention of the individual and the sense of their actions.” In this regard, he added, “they may be deemed ‘imperfect’ as other sexual behaviors are, even within the life of a stable heterosexual couple.” With respect to homosexual relations generally, he drew on Amoris Laetitia, Chapter 8, to assert that every situation has to be discerned differently. In recent years “we have learned that the natural law must be continually rethought,” he said. “There are deep dynamics inherent to each human person which ask to be respected as inherent to the structure of anthropology.” Fathers Chiodi and Guenzi are two of eight new lecturers to be hired by the institute this forthcoming academic year, all of them Italian, while other incumbent professors including Polish philosophy Prof. Stanislaw Grygiel, a close friend of Pope St. John Paul II, have been sidelined or given their marching orders. Grygiel has said he believes the institute is being “destroyed” and that John Paul II’s anthropological teaching replaced by “sociological and psychological meanderings.” Both Professors Chiodi and Guenzi are understood to be close associates of the institute’s grand chancellor, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, and effectively replace Msgr. Livio Melina, a former president of the institute who held the institute’s now-obsolete chair of fundamental moral theology, and moral theologian, Father José Noriega. The removals in July of Msgr. Melina and Father Noriega, and the way they were dismissed, led to over 200 scholars worldwide, including well-known U.S. academics such as professor Robert George and professor. Scott Hahn, signing an open letter to Archbishop Paglia, and the institute’s president, Msgr. Pierangelo Sequeri, asking they be reinstated. The personnel changes come two years after Pope Francis issued a decree refounding the institute and giving it a new name. The Register asked Archbishop Paglia whether he could give reasons for employing Fathers Chiodi and Guenzi to teach at the institute in light of their views on homosexuality and contraception. He has yet to reply.
Br Bugnolo is not a sedevacantist. As long as Benedict continues to want to be called Pope, continues to sign off as Benedictus PP and give his papal blessing, wear the papal white and reside in the Vatican, there are no grounds to say that anyone who considers Benedict to be the true Pope is a sedevacantist.
Well, all these trappings that you mention aside, PE Benedict has asserted that Francis is the Pope. That would make it a sede situation to imply that Francis is not Pope. We have to go with what PEB has said. It is sede to say that the Chair of Peter is empty. That is what sedevacantism means. And PEB says he truly resigned the Papacy. And he says that Francis is really the Pope. We have to go by what PEB said. We can't make up stories or think that someone saw something or think that PEB meant to do this so it would come out this way. It has to come from PEB himself. The danger is that Catholics who don't accept the Pope are excommunicated. We must continue to follow the True Magisterium of the Church and do as Our Lady of Fatima has asked us to do. It is truly dangerous to spread anything to the contrary.
Of course Francis is the only pope, Benedict said it so many times! It is just absurd that supporters of Benedict wouldn't take his own words as of a true value. And besides, Benedict is quite old and is unlikely to survive Francis. While most of the people here see in pope Francis the leftist whom they oppose, seems the things are a bit different. There is ongoing struggle between the German bishops and the Vatican as of the scope and extent of the German Synod this Advent. https://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2...-but-documents-indicate-ongoing-disagreement/ I wonder, if pope Francis loses support of the so called "liberals" (and I never like that division of people similar to that of american political bi-polarity conservatives vs liberals only)... Then what follows? If pope Francis resigns having in mind his advanced age, and another conclave comes sooner, then the conservatives have only several cardinals that are far not enough to have a conservative cardinal elected as the next pope. Does it mean we will wake up one day, if not with pope Marx, then someone less extreme but still strongly pro-reform, who will take the name Francis II to stand on some tradition... Think about that when easily dismiss the canonical pope and put intentions of the holy pope emeritus that he never had! Here is an interesting article about the 2013 conclave Why the Pope's opponents might regret new conclave https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/11624/why-the-pope-s-opponents-might-regret-new-conclave
A rinse and repeat of the same circus we were treated to before the infamous Amoris Laetitia was released. Does anyone doubt that the relevant footnotes for the next Apostolic Exhortation have already been written by that "great theologian" Cardinal Kasper? So what if the next Pope is Pope Marx or a fellow traveller who has been biding his time and keeping his mouth shut. We are still bound by the Ten Commandments no matter who gets to be Pope. Francis 11 will have no more authority to contradict the law of God than Francis 1 has.
You still see things in political terms, which is crazy. Was St Paul a Leftist? Was St Peter a Leftist? Was Jesus a Leftist? Was the Holy Mother of God Right Wing? Was St Joseph a Traditionalist? Are the Angels Communists? Was Padre Pio a Fascist? These are political terms meant for a political debate. 1 Corinthians 1:10-17 A Church Divided Over Leaders 10 I appeal to you, brothers and sisters,a]">[a] in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought. 11 My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12 What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephasb]">[b]”; still another, “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
What so political to say that Francis is the only pope and that Benedict confirmed it so many times? Is that the problem for you guys? or the problem is that someone dares to say it in your forum? I responded to a post that said, pope Benedict is the valid pope, not pope Francis. Will you approve that statement or not? And if you guys do not agree with that statement, why aren't there a storm in responses to that poster? But there will be a storm in response of my posts instead? If that is not a double standard, I don't know what it could be. Does it mean that the idea pope Francis "has already trespassed the law of God" is so much entrenched in the views of our brethren? Pope Francis doesn't trespass "Law of God". I can say more, but I prefer to keep it. I do not see the things politically, and I said clearly I do not accept the american political division projected on the Church. Others do, and I use their terminology of conservative and liberal, so much wide spread, although it is an absurd terminology. I hope you will not put political labels on the Apostles and Jesus, because it is just absurd. I didn't and won't do it. As of "pope Marx", I don't think it will happen, but it is a red light for the sincere traditional catholics who think they know all better. Isn't that clear from the news of the German bishops? And why don't you discuss THAT instead? The topic is very important, and frankly you guys should say a "thank you" for bringing it here. Or only archbishop Vigano letters are what matters to be discussed in detail. Ok, go forth and say cardinal Marx is a heretic who must be excommunicated! I expected some of you to say it already. Instead of saying that pope Francis is schismatic. That spat between the German conference and the Vatican has a potential of a big storm coming. Especially After the pope warned the conservatives with a schism. It is what it is, a warning from the pope. Better take it seriously.
For my part, I have no problem acknowledging Francis as pope. My concern is the heresies he speaks to, the disdain he has for those orthodox hierarchy he tossed out of key positions in the Vatican, his push for the globalists agenda, the LGBTQ he panders to and one could go on and on. Yes, at this time I contended he is our pope and I pray for him in my rosary every day along with the many bad and good cardinals, bishops and priests.
I was a big protector of church and papacy. With all the good and all the bad. But when Cardinals and Bishops are lying to protect evil priests. We have come to the crossroads. And if our holy father is protecting and advancing the careers of these evil bishops...then we have a problem. The church needs to return to saving souls. Joining the globalists has nothing to do with Christianity.
I find it hard to believe that PF and the hierarchy of the Church don't know what they are doing. Tired of hearing the dialing back of all of PF's words after they are out there to make them easier to swallow. What is being said is evident even to a slug.
