I think that Mary will draw all to her own at the Miracle in the Pines at Garabandal. The permanent sign will be the testament or validation to her motherhood to all. Anyone who rejects this motherhood will walk in the dark from thence on. It will be the defining moment who will be signed with the seal of Christ and who will be signed with the seal of Satan. Then perhaps the anti-Christ will manifested himself to the world shortly afterwards.
It is so noticeable in the lives of the saints and in scripture how God picks the little ones, shepherds, children, often people who are entirely illiterate. Even the Holy Family came from a very humble background. Perhaps God needs a blank slate to write on, clear ground to build on. He likes to raise up the lowly but in order to raise them up they need to be lowly in the first place. I was thinking a lot lately about the incident in Lourdes where Our Blessed Lady asked St Bernadette to eat some plants from the grotto in front of a large crowd of onlookers. How humbling that must have been but St Bernadette never even blinked! The aroma of humility is the great huge sing in all such things and when we meet it it is really unmistakable. Of course it is possible to fake humility, at least a little but if there is one thing the devil finds impossible it is to fake being lowly; prideful people find it next to impossible too..and at the bottom of most of what is false in such matters is pride, pride, pride.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up. John 3:14 Numbers 21:6-9 6 Then the LORD sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. 7 The people came to Moses and said, “We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us.” So Moses prayed for the people. 8 The LORD said to Moses, “Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live.” 9 So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, they lived. John 3:14-15 14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.” Genesis 3:15(NIV) 15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.” It is fun to guess. My guess is that the sign that will be raised will be the same as the one in the sky, the Cross as found in Deuteronomy when the Hebrews rose a Sign of a snake to prefiguring the Cross. This Cross will seem real at a distance but when you approach will disappear. It will confound totally sceptics and unbelievers and break the back of unbelievers. I am not sure but I think St Faustina may have alluded to this in her writings I think this was also alluded to at Dozulé (Calvados) France : http://trinite.1.free.fr/english/english.htm
Have just finished reading the Cletus Schefers/Verne Dagenais pdf ... The closest comparison I can think of in terms of tone and theological focus is Ottavio Michelini, whose 6 vols published in English as 'Confidences of Jesus to a Priest' has to be one of the biggest elephants in the room of modern mystical/prophetic literature (as cameriere segreto to Paul VI, Michelini is probably the highest-ranking ecclesiastic to have had extensive locutions in modern times). Schefers/Dagenais basically confirm the interpretation of post-Vatican II church history set out at length in Michelini, i.e. that truth is to be found in sticking to the teaching of the post-Conciliar Magisterium, avoiding the twin dangers of Hans Küng-style liberalism on one hand and the SSPX on the other. There is much that could be said about this, but right now I wanted to append the message given to Verne Dagenais on Sept 25, 2007 regarding the consecration of Russia (as it relates to discussion on another thread). Submitted 'for your discernment', as always, but it's the most coherent explanation of this whole conundrum I've yet seen. The implication is that the problem with the consecration lies with the Bishops, not the Pontiff. __________ 09/25/07 My son, there is much fighting in my church regarding the consecration of Russia. Many older prophecies were given regarding a communist led war which resulted in the destruction of much of Europe, including the Vatican. Documents released in your media verify these war plans. But my people forget one important factor in this discussion: God. I alone govern the universe and the affairs of mankind. I even govern the affairs of hell. Nothing happens without my will being done. Do you even think one moment, I am going to give glory to Satan and man’s pride? Remember Isaias 42:8: I, the Lord: this is my name. I will not give my glory to another, nor my praise to graven things. My son, John Paul II consecrated the world to the Immaculate heart of Mary, as you already know. Do you not think my son, these consecrations bore no fruit? For I the Lord God Almighty creator of heaven and earth prophesy to you: The result of the consecration of the world to my son’s mother Mary had two effects. It interrupted and changed the plans of masonic communistic forces and it gave the world an extended period of my mercy. Do you truly think a consecration to the Mother of Mercy would have no effect? It allowed more souls to enter my kingdom. Do not forget my primary purpose is the salvation of my children. If you remember this my son, world events will make sense to you. Look at events from the eyes of your Father in heaven, not with your human eyes and understanding. My son at Fatima, my daughter Mary asked explicitly for the consecration of Russia by the Pope and the bishops of the world. This event has not taken place as asked by my daughter Mary. If it had my son, the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary would have already taken place. You would already be living in the era of peace. It is evident there is no peace in your world. Only a blind man would make such a statement. My son, mankind has not responded to my mercy. Mankind has increasingly become more evil and sinful. A day will soon arrive which will cause my wrath to chastise my children. Again, I say these words not to frighten, but to wake up my children. If you live in my peace, there truly is nothing to fear. Again, only the ungodly and lukewarm need to fear. My son, the Masonic communistic forces are again starting to rise in your world. The forces of Islamic terrorism, communism, and practical atheism are being used by Satan to cause another World War. For I the Lord prophesy to you again: If mankind refuses my mercy, another World War will be allowed and the man of sin will be allowed to chastise the ungodly and sinner. Read these words carefully. I am allowing these events because of my people rejecting my mercy. Where are the prayers, penances, and masses being offered in reverence for my honor and glory? Why do my people reject prayer and fasting to bring about my continual mercy on your world? Do you not see my hand in the weather changes and natural disasters occurring on your planet? Isaias 45:12, 18. I made the earth: and I created man upon it. My hand stretched forth the heavens: and I have commanded all their host. For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens, God himself that formed the earth and made it, the very maker thereof, who did not create it in vain, who formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is no other. Remember stop trying to figure out the mind and purposes of the Almighty. Seek not the things that are to high for thee, and search not into things above thy ability: but the things that God hath commanded, think on them always, and in many of his works be not curious. Ecclesiasticus 3:22. But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, for I am the Lord that exercise mercy and judgment and justice in the earth: for these things pleases me, saith the Lord. Jeremiah 9:24. What did my son command you to do above all other things? Love your God and your neighbor. Are you truly fulfilling these two commandments? If not, repent of your sins. My son, while my people argue over the validity of the consecration of Russia, many souls are going to hell. Do not allow yourself to be caught in Satan’s trap. The consecration has not taken place. It will take place. The message of Fatima was primarily concerned with repentance and the salvation of souls. The consecration of Russia is a message addressed to the Pope and bishops of the world. Pray my Holy Spirit will give the Holy Father the strength and wisdom to overcome the forces fighting against him. My son, I am gong to tell you why the consecration of Russia has not yet taken place. My church was not purified of the evil forces hiding among the clergy. Remember the Pope and bishops of the world are required to make the consecration. In the past, there were to many Bishops who were rebellious against the Holy Father for the consecration to have taken place. My Holy Spirit has led the holy Father to purify my house. Once my church is purified and my house is in order, you will see the consecration of Russia done. As you have read, my son told Sister Lucy it would be done late. Now Read Isaias 55:8 , 11. For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, saith the Lord. So shall my word be, which shall go forth from my mouth. It shall not return to me void, but it shall do whatsoever I please and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it. Do not presume in your pride to know the mind of God. Do not cause division among my people by arguing over the consecration of Russia. It is a deceptive trick of Satan to prevent my people from focusing on your mission: the salvation of souls. Again, I will repeat myself for you. Your mission is to lead souls to my son Jesus Christ for salvation, not cause souls to leave my church because of your proud and argumentative spirit. I the Lord will hold you accountable for your actions, words, and thoughts, which cause another to stumble. The consecration will take place in my time, not yours or Satan’s. I receive no honor and glory from your pride but only from your humility. Be a part of my son’s army and my daughter Mary’s army. Fulfill your mission. Let those whose mission it is to work for the consecration of Russia, fulfill their mission. It is not your mission. Do not cause schism or division, but love and unity among my people. I repeat myself to stop the confusion among my people. If you do my will, I will protect and guide you no matter what takes place. For I am the same living God of the Bible who is your Father today and forever. I love you my people. Return to the Father’s fold through the graces of my son Jesus Christ, the power of my Holy Spirit, and the intercession of my daughter Mary. These are words from Almighty God to my people. Amen.
Another question about the post-concilliar church, has not the perennial teachings of tthe church that the old covenant being null and void (torn in half symbolized by the tearing of the veil in the sancuary at the time of Christ's death) now changed into the old covenant is still valid? Thanks.
Care and balance needed here on this sensitive subject. Appended below is the Conciliar passage on the Jews in Nostra Aetate. What it seems to emphasize is that we need to hold in tension the Church's identity as Israel with the Apostle Paul's clear and extensive statements in Romans 9-11 about God's ongoing purpose for the Jewish people: 'Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.' (Romans 11:11) 'if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again' (11:23) 'Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved' (11:26) 'As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God's gift and his call are irrevocable' (11:28-29) In other words, the distinction needs to be made between the sacrificial covenant (which was indeed superseded at Christ's death) and the irrevocable call that is God's election. It should be added that CCC 674 affirms that 'The glorious Messiah's coming is suspended at every moment of history until his recognition by "all Israel", for "a hardening has come upon part of Israel" in their "unbelief" toward Jesus.[...] The "full inclusion" of the Jews in the Messiah's salvation, in the wake of "the full number of the Gentiles", will enable the People of God to achieve "the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ", in which "God may be all in all".' _________________ NOSTRA AETATE 4. As the sacred synod searches into the mystery of the Church, it remembers the bond that spiritually ties the people of the New Covenant to Abraham's stock. Thus the Church of Christ acknowledges that, according to God's saving design, the beginnings of her faith and her election are found already among the Patriarchs, Moses and the prophets. She professes that all who believe in Christ-Abraham's sons according to faith -are included in the same Patriarch's call, and likewise that the salvation of the Church is mysteriously foreshadowed by the chosen people's exodus from the land of bondage. The Church, therefore, cannot forget that she received the revelation of the Old Testament through the people with whom God in His inexpressible mercy concluded the Ancient Covenant. Nor can she forget that she draws sustenance from the root of that well-cultivated olive tree onto which have been grafted the wild shoots, the Gentiles. Indeed, the Church believes that by His cross Christ, Our Peace, reconciled Jews and Gentiles. making both one in Himself. The Church keeps ever in mind the words of the Apostle about his kinsmen: "theirs is the sonship and the glory and the covenants and the law and the worship and the promises; theirs are the fathers and from them is the Christ according to the flesh" (Rom. 9:4-5), the Son of the Virgin Mary. She also recalls that the Apostles, the Church's main-stay and pillars, as well as most of the early disciples who proclaimed Christ's Gospel to the world, sprang from the Jewish people. As Holy Scripture testifies, Jerusalem did not recognize the time of her visitation,(9) nor did the Jews in large number, accept the Gospel; indeed not a few opposed its spreading. Nevertheless, God holds the Jews most dear for the sake of their Fathers; He does not repent of the gifts He makes or of the calls He issues-such is the witness of the Apostle. In company with the Prophets and the same Apostle, the Church awaits that day, known to God alone, on which all peoples will address the Lord in a single voice and "serve him shoulder to shoulder" (Soph. 3:9). Since the spiritual patrimony common to Christians and Jews is thus so great, this sacred synod wants to foster and recommend that mutual understanding and respect which is the fruit, above all, of biblical and theological studies as well as of fraternal dialogues. True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ.
I have only read a few pages of Fr. Michelini's locutions (I had never heard of him) but I am persuaded. This is beautiful and also very important. If only every priest and Catholic would ponder on these words, the Church would be transformed. Thank you PB for bringing this to my attention, I will try to interest others. http://english.michelini.in/
Thanks PeterB for posting this. It is magnificent in its words. This is exactly what my heart has been telling me for some time now. This is the first I have read of Cletus Schefers, but plan to read much more.
Either V2 is in error or Cleteu Schefers is a false mystic: From Cletus Schefers comes the theory of substitution which used to be catholic teaching. I believe in it. Has it changed since V2? This is whyhe has deceived many of my people with false interpretations of my scriptures. Manyteach the physical nation of Israel is the fulfillment of my scripture. Many teach theantichrist will resume the Jewish sacrifice in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem to constitutethe abomination of desolation. This is a false teaching, not from God, but from humanunderstanding. My son, in the book of Daniel, the persecution by the Jews under Antiochus can be considered a partial fulfillment of the abomination of desolation. Butthe complete fulfillment has not yet taken place. At my death, the veil in the temple wasrent in two and the old sacrificial covenant was replaced by my new covenant. Mysacrifice on the cross was the final sacrifice for my peoples’ sin. I am the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham. I am the seed of Abraham, the son of David, in whom all thenations of the earth are blessed. My nation of Israel is my church, not the modern nationof Israel. My people are now all those who become part of my church through sanctifyinggrace. The complete fulfillment of the prophecy from Daniel of the abomination of desolation will occur: when the continual sacrifice of the mass is abolished by the false prophet and the anitchrist. Acceptance of the protestant doctrine of the mass by anantipope will be the fulfillment of the prophecy. The temple of God is my Holy RomanCatholic Church.
picadillo, I am not following your post above. Can you break out the heresy in what Cletus is saying vs. what the Catholic Church teaches? Thanks.
Old covenant has been replaced. At my death, the veil in the temple wasrent in two and the old sacrificial covenant was replaced by my new covenant. Teaching substitution. My nation of Israel is my church, not the modern nationof Israel. My people are now all those who become part of my church through sanctifyinggrace.
The Church has encountered anti-popes throughout its history (Father John Hardon's Catholic Dictionary has a list of all of them since Peter). I do not see this as 'dodgy ground'. The doctrine of infallibility guards against a valid elected pope teaching heresy in regards to faith and morals. An anti-pope has no authority whatsoever. I can envision an anti-pope during the time of confusion, but it will not be hard for anyone rooted in the doctrines of the faith to identify them. Only those who walk in man-made doctrines will fall to the anti-pope. Modern Catholic Dictionary Modern Catholic Dictionary - John A. Hardon, S.J. ANTIPOPE. A false claimant to the Holy See in opposition to the Pope canonically elected. There have been more than thirty in the Catholic Church’s history. (Etym. Latin antipapa; Greek anti, against + papas, father.) Complete list of valid popes and anti-popes http://www.therealpresence.org/dictionary/popes.htm
The problem here Fatima is that is what I was taught(what Cletus taught), what every saint born before V2 was taught, and what I believe. St Padre Pio down to St Stephen. It is what is called tradition. That is why trads hate Nostra Aetate, a bunch of gobbldee-gook.
Precisely why it is necessary to understand what and only what could cause an anti-pope. If one does not understand clearly that they have many times existed in the Christian era, then one could also fall when one does exist. That is why I like the clear teaching I posted above from the Catholic Catechism. It is clear that a canonically elected Pope can not be an anti-pope or teach false doctrine.
I can understand what you're saying here, but I think that patient exegesis can show us a way past this apparent conflict which allows us to keep both Nostra Aetate and Dagenais/Schefers for the moment (the messages, by the way, are very explicitly supportive of Vatican II and insist that the Holy Spirit initiated the Council). What follows is only my opinion as a lay theologian, so I only speak for myself, but my sense is that it is possible to affirm both a form of substitution theology and yet uphold that God's calling and gifts are irrevocable as is said in Nostra Aetate and was later confirmed by John Paul II. Indeed, we have to do this if we want to remain faithful both to Romans 9-11 and Hebrews 8:13 where the first covenant is termed 'obsolete' (at least in some translations). The key point here IMHO in reconciling these texts is to understand that the 'irrevocable calling' referred to in Romans and the covenant regarded as 'obsolete' in Hebrews are not necessarily referring to the same thing. The clue is found in Romans 9:4 where Paul speaks of 'covenants' in the plural. What is definitely superseded is the sacrificial covenant under Moses (established in Exodus 24). This is clear from the context in Hebrews chs 8-10 where the author quotes from Jeremiah 31:31-34, saying that the new covenant will not be like the covenant made 'when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt' (Heb. 8:9). The 'election', 'gifts' and 'call' that Romans 11:28-29 is talking about as irrevocable, on the other hand, refer to God's love for Israel on account of the 'patriarchs', clearly meaning Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, i.e. to promises pre-dating the sacrificial covenant. Naturally this is a matter of interpretation, but looking at the Dagenais/Schefers message quoted above, it evidently refers to the 'sacrificial covenant' as what was done away with when the veil was torn at Christ's death. This ought to be uncontroversial as the restatement of a basic truth of the New Testament. However, neither ought Nostra Aetate and JP II be read as contradicting Hebrews 8. What they are rather affirming is the ongoing purpose of God for Israel to which Paul held - which is clearly that all Israel should come to believe in the Messiah. What can legitimately be said is that it might have been better if at least in the English translation of John Paul II's Nov 17, 1980 address to the Jewish community in Mainz the much-quoted words 'covenant, never revoked by God' (von Gott nie gekündigten Alten Bundes) had been phrased differently in order for the conclusion not to be drawn that Pope John Paul II - speaking in any case in a foreign language - was referring to the Sinaitic covenant rather than the promises to the patriarchs. A very helpful summary of what I'm trying to argue here can be found in some words of Cardinal Avery Dulles (in an article critical of certain theologians contending on their interpretation of Nost. Aet./JP II that Christian outreach to Jews is 'no longer theologically acceptable') in 2002: 'The most formal statement on the status of the Sinai covenant under Christianity appears in the Letter to the Hebrews, which points out that in view of the new covenant promised by God through the prophet Jeremiah, the first covenant is “obsolete” and “ready to vanish away” (Heb. 8:13). The priesthood and the law have changed (Heb. 7:12). Christ, we are told, “abolishes the first [covenant] in order to establish the second” (Heb. 10:9). These passages from Hebrews do not overturn Paul’s insistence in Romans that the promises of God to Israel remain valid. The Hebrew Scriptures, containing God’s promises, have enduring value, but are to be interpreted in the light of Christ to whom they point forward. The elect have obtained what was promised, though the rest were hardened (Rom. 11:7). “And even the others, if they do not persist in their unbelief, will be grafted in” (11:23). Paul in fact looks forward to a day when all Israel will recognize Christ and be saved (11:26). He does not mean that Israel is already saved by adherence to the Sinai covenant. In view of his promises to them, God has a special providence over Israel. The Jews have a status distinct from the Gentiles. It would be a mistake to read the passages from Hebrews and Romans as if they contradicted one another.' (http://americamagazine.org/issue/408/article/covenant-and-mission) Bearing all this in mind, I don't think that someone who upholds Nostra Aetate - while regarding it as theological work in progress - necessarily has to regard Dagenais/Schefers as false mysticism. The latter might be 'private meditation' anyway, of course, but that's a separate issue. The locutionary might for example have been reading Ottavio Michelini and then allowing imagination to take control, but that sounds a little far-fetched as an inference to a best explanation.
Vatican II was a 'pastoral council' mandated to clarify Church teaching and not to amend it in any way. What the Church traditionally and officially taught before the Council is still, of course, true in all respects (how could it be otherwise). The practical effect of Vatican II documents obscuring traditionally taught truths has been admitted by many, including Popes. It didn't change any teaching whatever, it didn't have the power to do so because of the mandate given to the participants at the outset.
Exactly. At the same time I get Padraig's point about confusion, of which there is a great deal at the moment. This is at least in part due to the more or less complete absence of sustained heavyweight theological engagement (at least since the death of Hans Urs von Balthasar, René Laurentin being a major exception) with any kind of prophetic/mystical material. Nature doesn't tolerate a vacuum, so in place of responsible appraisal, i.e. assessment which is rational without being rationalistic, we have a huge number of speculative and theologically illiterate blogs promoting or demolishing anything and everything. This isn't necessarily the fault of the alleged visionaries themselves, as it is sometimes due to their entourage; just today I discovered that what I consider one of the more substantial Latin American websites is relaying sensationalist YouTube videos (produced by others) arguing that Pope Francis is a New World Order puppet. That's really disappointing in terms of discernment, but unfortunately all too typical of the present climate which, as Padraig says, has unfortunately given true prophecy a bad name and causes people to throw the baby out with the bath water. We simply have to do better than this. I still feel that there is much to be said for the 'four transcendental precepts' of Bernard Lonergan S.J.: "Be attentive, be intelligent, be reasonable and be responsible", or, in another version, "Be attentive, be intelligent, be responsible, be loving, and, if necessary, change."
I am only half way through Verne's messages. They are the most profound messages I have ever read. They are for our time. They are the most coherent of any prophetic messages I have read in 30 years. They are down-to-earth easy to read and understand and they hit on every major prophetic point in the near tribulation and what we must do to survive in the hearts of Jesus and Mary. Tough to put these writings down, because they bring me to pause, prayer and discernment while I am reading them. These writings are ones I will keep and reflect often on during the Tribulation, no doubt. A+++
My mom was from this part of Minnesota, German descent. Big family, faithful, poor, some of the best people I have ever known.
