Goodness .... like dragging grandma out of her nursing home since she still must have 2 or 3 hours left within her day to get out there and do some social work in order to redeem herself! Have to wonder now if the Vatican was secretly cheering Obama on when he was going after the Little Sisters of the Poor....to, well, get with it when it comes to birth control! Who's next....the Carmelites/Poor Clares (after all, his selected saint is St. Francis and certainly no doubt that by now the poor one would have changed with the times)? Meanwhile all the messages from above through our Mother are lately begging for "constant" prayer and concentrating on our spiritual, inner selves in order to prepare for the increasing onslaught of evil all around us. Beware all thriving orders like Nashville Dominicans or their like in Michigan.....you're getting too many vocations for your traditional lives.....and habits. These humble Sisters are the image of the remnant Church that seems to be forming....or now forced to declare itself for targeting.
I do not understand why they would ask to be released from their order because of this? How does this serve them or the mission they have devoted their lives to? Does anyone understand why they would ask for this? I went to the petition site and signed it and also read their pleas but I still do not understand. "Conservative order of nuns on verge of destruction following Vatican interventions View attachment 8984 November 27, 2018 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Almost all of the members of a conservative order of nuns that serve the elderly in French nursing homes have announced that they have asked to be released from their vows following attempts by the Vatican to force them to alter their way of life and to “modernize” their order.... LifeSiteNews · November 29, 2018"
I think because placing themselves under the supervision of what is opposed to their original vows and having their superior removed would cause them to live opposed to their chosen vocation. Apparently they have abided by the Church protocol ordered for the proper response to such an interruption. While they are perfectly permitted to separate themselves they also should be able to become perhaps a private Association of the Faithful where they can wear habits of their choice and form their laws. Where is their local Bishop? Canon Law stipulates that he must work with them to solve this forced dilemma and even to re-form. They were left to hang even after following Church procedure due to no response. I believe them to be a sign of both obedience and faithfulness. Even when orders, like lemmings, suddenly tossed away their signs of chosen religious life that distinguished them from the secular culture, they at least allowed for those within who desired to retain their original habits...esp. the elderly.....and make provision for any portion that wished to live either a totally cloistered life or partially cloistered. Shouldn't the precedent of former Popes' "orders" that religious are to wear some form of distinguishing vestments in order for the secular community to know of their presence among them play a role here? I doubt that means just a pin or the like.
Well, I do believe that the prophecy is talking about 2 popes being around at the same time. It doesn't say, 'following this tribulation', but 'at the time of this tribulation'. And looking at #1, #4 and #7, the prophecy must surely be meant for our time.
Since, as St Francis prophesied, "a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate" and "even the elect would be led into error", I believe that what St Francis was saying this man would be recognised as pope, even when he is not the true pope. And that would explain why St Francis didn't mention false pope or anti-pope. I believe that the overwhelming problem with the election of PF, is that the resignation of Benedict XVI was not valid. We've discussed this before. I'm very interested in Socci's new book. Anyone here read it?
Not at the same time, seems to me, because it is merely stating at the time of this tribulation, not at the time of the true Supreme Pontiff In other words, not two popes at the same time
It says that the tribulation includes there being very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff.
Pope Benedict himself has said that his resignation was valid. In fact, he said that questioning its validity was devaluing the pontificate itself. Read what he said as covered in the Catholic World Report: https://www.catholicworldreport.com...n-and-title-pope-emeritus-in-private-letters/ Granted, the report was based on letters leaked to a German newspaper and the newspaper chose which passages of the letters to quote in its report. Nevertheless, neither the Pope Emeritus nor Cardinal Brandmuller has contradicted the report. What I find most sad about that report is that the letters could only have been leaked by the sender or the recipient, and since the report portrays the letters as the Cardinal getting a telling off by the Pope Emeritus, it's unlikely that the Cardinal leaked the letters. So, the most likely culprit is the Pope Emeritus or someone with access to his correspondence. If anyone were giving odds, my money would be on someone who was close to the Pope Emeritus while making sure to curry favour with the new Pope - someone with a role serving both Popes. Anyway, I'm finding the Catholic World Report to be among the best sources of news about the Church. For example, compare the Crux report on Cardinal Muller's recent interview here: https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2018/11/28/muller-calls-out-vigano-us-bishops-in-new-interview/ with the CWR report here: https://www.catholicworldreport.com...iritual-renewal-is-the-churchs-foremost-need/ CWR provided a link to Tornielli's interview. Crux didn't provide a link. This is how they gave credit for the original source of the interview: "In the interview, given to veteran Vatican journalist Andrea Tornielli and published Nov. 27 on Italian site Vatican Insider"An English speaking American (the most likely target audience of the interview) seeing "Italian site" would most likely think that the interview was published in Italian. There's much talk these days about fake news and what qualifies as fake news. In my opinion, fake news can come in the form of what a journalist chooses to headline, emphasise or omit even though the report contains no lies. The bible tells us to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Hard to know who we can trust these days. Even Catholic news sources appear to be agenda driven, and sometimes it's hard to tell whether the agenda is of the faithful Catholic variety.
It is reasonable to think that if he had been forced to resign under threat, he is not likely to say so openly. (and we know beyond doubt that evil does reign in the Vatican). He announced that he was resigning the active ministry. Once a pope, always a pope, he said. He insisted on the name Pope (Emeritus) Benedict XVI, instead of going back to Cardinal Ratzinger as had been expected. He still lives on Vatican grounds. Wears the papal white. Signed off with his papal blessing in that recently made-known letter to Cardinal Brandmuller. Abp Ganswein explained how there was an expanded Petrine ministry (an impossibility), with Benedict XVI having the contemplative part.
While I agree that we have to accept Pope Francis as Pope both because Pope Emeritus Benedict said so and also the Cardinal electors said so, one has to admit there is a lot of unnecessary confusion Benedict caused. A mountain of it in fact. He continues to use the moniker "Holiness" when he is addressed, he wears the Papal White, wears the Papal Ring, lives in the Vatican, created the fabricated title of "Pope Emeritus" something which has never existed. Also, there were the confusing detailed statements given by Archbishop Ganswein, Benedict's supposed spokesman, about the Papacy now being forever changed and seeming to hint that it is in some mode a diarchy now existing of a contemplative member and an active member. None of these are clear signs that Fr. Joseph Ratzinger is trying to convey he is just a regular member of the clergy again. I don't blame anyone for being confused. The safe bet though is to accept Pope Francis as valid until such time as this is all looked into properly. It is not now and has never been up to the laity to decide the validity of a Pope. Unfortunately, we live in the modern world where we want answers 1-2-3. Realistically this could take decades to sort out and will most likely happen in a future pontificate. I think things are only going to get worse in the short run anyway. God will sort it out.
Plus Dolours posted a letter from Pope Emeritus Benedict answering some of the issues you just posted, in his own words, and he said he is not Pope.
I don’t think this whole argument is reasonable at all, Sg! But you are entitled. I’m taking PE Benedict at his word and ducking out now.
