Here's what puzzles me: this discussion seems to center around Benedict's apparent belief in a bifurcated Papacy. I would say he must, otherwise he would have simply retired to Germany, written some books, and played the piano. Personally, considering his wisdom and intelligence, I believe it was his way of responding to somehow being forced from the office. It is no coincidence that normal banking procedures were restored to the Vatican State once Pope Benedict resigned. International pressure had been applied to the Pontiff to abandon the Office. Why? Safe in the Barque of Peter!
Yes. Why. And it seems a strong arm has been applied since 2017 to get DJT to leave office. Similar pattern? A. Vigano talks of a deep state and a deep church working in tandem. Curiouser and curiouser as Alice in W..would say.
Yes he was under pressure from inside and outside the Church. Presumably, he thought his resignation would save the Church from both schism and financial ruin if he let his enemies take control. What we have now is Pope Emeritus Benedict, Francis Bishop of Rome, and Jeffrey Sachs de facto Pope: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Sachs The Arab Spring was about regime change. I think that's also what the Catholic Spring was about, and from a worldly perspective it worked but that might not be how God sees it. For our part, we have to accept that Pope Francis is the valid Pope because our Bishops say so. We don't have to believe that Jeffrey Sachs is the voice of the Holy Spirit. This isn't the first time a man has ascended to the papacy under less than ideal circumstances (to put it mildly). Neither is it the first time that the Rock behaved more like quicksand. Given the history of the Church, only God could have sustained it for two millennia. We'll just have to trust that God will set things straight before all is lost. We're on a promise, and God keeps his promises.
Dr's Marshall and Mazza did a video today on Benedict, it's very long, but Mazza's hypothesis is fascinating. I usually don't pay attention to this topic, it's way over my head, but I have to say this is worth a watch.
Just finished watching that video. It is very long but, as you said, Mazza's hypothesis is fascinating although it seems to be a bit of a stretch. It's also frightening. Whether or not his hypothesis is correct, the video was worth watching if only for the discussion about the restrainer. I need to watch the video again to get a better grasp of what they were saying. Thanks for posting it.
Yes, even in their discussions Ann, Mark, and Prof. Mazza are pretty much begging canon lawyers to weigh in on the debate. Maybe if Pope Francis resigns we'll have 3 popes.
Fatima was discussed during the last 1/2 hour of Ann's 2nd interview with Prof. Mazza. Some highlights: 1) In a 1946 interview Sister Lucia told Professor Walsh who wrote the book, Our Lady of Fatima, that all countries including the US would become communist if the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart was not made. LifeSite News just published an article on this: https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/...mmunist-without-marian-consecration-of-russia 2) While the request for the consecration was made by the Blessed Mother in 1917, she appeared to Sister Lucia in 1929 and said it was now time for the consecration to be performed. In 1931 (I think) Jesus appeared to Sister Lucia to express his displeasure that the consecration had not yet been done and to warn that if it was not done the world would suffer the same fate as the king of France. Jesus had requested the king to consecrate France to his Sacred Heart in the late 1600's. Out of pride, the king would not do it nor would his son. So 100 years later his grandson the king did it while in prison before he was beheaded. Professor Mazza believes that we have until 2029 to make the consecration of Russia. He also believes the Sister Lucia who said the consecration was performed was a fake. They tie this to the situation of Masons and homosexuals now controlling the Vatican and the situation with pope(s).
I believe that Dr Mazza has nailed it! With valuable input from Dr Marshall and even a helpful prompting from Fr Z, he shows how history, the Church Fathers and Scripture explain what Pope Benedict has done. Interestingly, as one commentator wrote: there is perhaps a new meaning to the prophecy of La Salette - “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist” +
I thought of that too. If the Pope is forced to let go of Rome because of the wickedness there--then ??? RH Benson foresees this in Lord of the World. The Pope goes to Jerusalem. I havent listened to the talk yet although I intend to but I agree with Garabandal it is all above my pay grade. I did listen to an interview Bernard Janzen had with Malachi Martin in 1992 called Kingdom of Darkness (on you tube) and it is so worth listening to it. Many years have gone by since I first heard it. He talks about all of this and our situation as a Church and as the world. It could be right now! This day. Eerily close to what is going on. The hand of the evil one and his minions at work. He says that if the enemy captured the papacy if will be a time so terrible that it would shred the faith of St Cathetine of Siena. He speaks of the necessity of praying to be spared. Very very sobering.
I have to really question the fake Sr Lucia. Anytime people promote the idea of an imposter to promote and support their hypothesis, I stop listening. I have said this before. There were too many people to fool. I mention the family. The family has expressed their deep displeasure about this imposter concept to Alban, otherwise known as Aviso. He posted on his website that they told him there was no imposter. Even if, as Sg says, Sr Lucia was a cloistered nun, people would notice this. If my next door neighbor was suddenly replaced by an imposter, I would know. And if my brother was replaced by an imposter, I would know. If my choir director were replaced by an imposter, I would know. She was in a convent! I think it’s absurd. It’s cloak and dagger stuff. I don’t think you can explain all that has happened based on a theory that Sr Lucia was an imposter. What about Paul McCartney?
So much to ponder..... I am not sure I can watch a 2 hour Youtube programme but I did read the analysis and comments on Fr Z's blog (which I don't normally read any more). How much of this is wishful thinking? Many people still deeply mourn the 2013 resignation. I don't think that BXVI intended to split the papacy - he did not know the identity of his successor or how things would play out. Some time ago I read a comment (I think on this forum) that a very holy priest in the USA had said the church is in a time of purification. That is something we can surely agree on. The smoke of satan has invaded not just the sanctuary but is in the air everywhere. America's Democratic party is led by people who in at least one case appears to be possessed. I don't say this lightly - where there is no possession there is oppression. A year ago I had some American guests to stay and one of them said that this was not really a case of Donald Trump and whichever Democrat, it was a war fought on much deeper lines. As to the Consecration of Russia - I am one of those who believe that the March 1984 act of Pope St John Paul II was valid. Sr Lucia had said it was accepted by heaven. Unfortunately, it was very, very late but it did avert a world war. Two months later an event took place which crippled Russia's military capability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severomorsk_Disaster
That may have been me quoting my confessor--a very Holy elderly Franciscan priest from eastern Europe. He told me I had a right to be angry about what is happening but it would not be allowed to stand. That God was permitting it as a purification of the Church. Later he said the Warning was very very close. I consider him a saint--although he would never allow anyone to say so.
Was it also he who claimed to see demons? I recall also reading about a holy priest who said he had never seen as many demons as now (about 2 years ago or so). I'd imagine (though I don't see demons) that there are likely more now than then. There is a madness in the world at the moment, like a terrible fury. People complain that our Prime Minister says nothing - but what can he do right now that would have any effect? Our police don't arrest vandals and our MSM have a double standard. They complain when a government advisor takes his autistic son for a drive on Easter day and they refuse to comment on the lack of social distancing of the demonstrators, calling them 'peaceful' when they are anything but. The signs of the times are all round us. Are there any private prophecies among readers about this?
That was not Fr John speaking about seeing demons. (Although he is an exorcist so he may very well see them) I think we are knee deep in a severe purification. Here in US things are very bad. We need to pray hard for DJT. This evil is palpable. They really mean to take over by whatever means necessary. So many people are "asleep". St Michael the Archangel defend us in battle!!
Clare, I have used your term "wishful thinking" in my responses to some posts here before. I thank you for confirming that it is a question worth considering: how much of this brouhaha over PEB is wishful thinking? And you are right, evil is palpable now.
There is a bit of wishful thinking about it. The wishful thinking comes not so much from the basic premise of Benedict believing he could retain an aspect of the papacy because Benedict himself and Bishop Ganswein are the source of that premise. I think that the wishful thinking is leading people to read too much into it. I also think that Pope Benedict knew only too well that he would be succeeded by Cardinal Bergoglio. I once was as convinced as you that the consecration of Russia was done and dusted but now I'm not so sure. While the "false Sr. Lucy" is silly, not all of the arguments about whether Russia still needs to be consecrated are equally silly. The best part of the video for me was the discussion about the katechon (restrainer). Prof. Mazza brought a whole new insight to that topic, irrespective of his opinion on the resignation of Pope Benedict.
