Bishop disavows Fr. Rodrigue, removes

The Bishop of the Diocese of Hearst-Moosonee would now be surprised that he has the "Apostle of the End Times" on the loose in his diocese, spreading doomsday scenarios and panic among the lay faithful

 

It's the other way around. Fr. Rodrigue rid himself of his annoying former bishop, and transferring to another diocese. He cannot preach and proclaim himself as the "Apostle of the End Times" if he is continually checked by his former bishop....

 

The search for Truth is never "uncharitable", esp. when one is concerned for any victims involved and not hamstrung in that search by an unequal assessment of the authority involved. All we have here are actions taken and words offered from one side only..... since the Bishop made his personal cause in this public. That isn't "assumption" but that is judgement based on reasoning of the actions given so far. And the facts behind the drastic measures taken are based, as far as the "faithful" are given to know, on that personal disagreement over the alleged mystical events related by one of the priests under his former authority. So if there is any confusion left for those who have not been given clarity for this rather over the top response it isn't due to the victim here. One is left to assume that this victim was either silenced or he has offered more respect for his Bishop than has been shown to him.

Where has there been any serious study of the priest himself, re: the mystical events offered openly; where are the results stated publicly as well of his priestly dedication like the known great intellect for his years of teaching at the higher institutes and forming vocations or the evidenced miracles of healing, incentives for vocations to the priesthood, or evidence of what had been predicted and warned of actually occurring, like what did happen in the early months of this year w/ the disappearance of goods and services for living or the cancellation of in person church services w/ lack of reception of the Eucharist, closing down of churches over other public businesses, etc,, that did occur; where is there even the beginning of an investigation of what was openly given by Fr. M.....easy enough to simply speak to those holy and respected prelates of Medjugorje for instance who were involved in that pretty amazing story of Fr. M's pilgrimage there. All of those things are required by the Church prior to any pronouncement, esp. so publicly, by any Bishop, against a priest in good standing that promote scandal. And where is the correction, other than what has been offered with great humility and sanity of those at CTTK, of the errors made by the Bishop himself in his public pronouncements against one (as well as others he's personally targeted) who hasn't himself spoken out against the Bishop in all of this.

While this end result here may be a dereliction of duty of the authority himself it may be Divine Providence acting in Fr. M's favor for the alleged requirements given to him of forming priests for these times, times of which the Bishop appears to be woefully in denial of or simply not so far seeming to be concerned enough to advise the faithful. Who's been the good shepherd here?

 

Yes, it is sad. I suppose that, having put so much into promoting Fr. Rodriguez and his prophecies, it's hard for them to let go. It doesn't seem to strike them as peculiar that he didn't think it prudent to inform any Bishop that Heaven was giving him messages for transmission to the faithful. Wouldn't the Bishop be in a better position to get the messages to the widest audience?

The most charitable, Catholic thing to do is pray for Fr. Rodriguez and give the prophecies a miss unless the relevant authority officially declares them to be worthy of belief.

 

There is dispute over the article used (by the English translators) in this description which has been given meaning by those who have offered more informative critiques. Fr. M seems to fulfill what has been offered in other messages given for these end times.....that our Lady has pointed to her coming and already revealed assignments for the "apostles of the End Times". If Fr. M is given to be one of those, that isn't something out of the norm for such current types of revelations.

The bishops of today really need our prayers. So many have left any real understanding of the mystical portion of the Church behind for the sake of acquiescing to the more worldly understanding of the material only.....and of course "reputation". And many have been bereft of this education in their own modern formation.

 

"Former" is the operative word you use here. Fr. Michel was not the one in authority to make any change here. Good grief.....place some form of responsibility for all of this public discussion upon how the Bishop has handled this history. The Bishop of Amos has given over that authority to "check" Fr M. to another bishop who seems to also be rather remote. The Bishop of Amos has stated his only limited and meager connection to Fr. M, by mail. And that there is no other remaining relationship between himself and Fr. M....by his own choice. And now that chancery won't have to be bothered by those confused by the actions of the Bishop! All of that history has been placed in the hands of another.

Makes me think of the poor priest who promoted the beginnings of the devotion to Our Lady Thrice Admirable.....he was thrown out of Germany; came to the U.S. And such actions, in the end, served to promote the devotion to other parts of the world. And of course there was Melanie of La Salette who was tossed out of France by the Bishop and had to depend upon charity offered to her in England and Italy to even survive.

 

ETA, we seem to disagree with just who the “victim(s)” is (are). ~AN

 

That's obvious.

 

Don’t get snippy, please. I stated a fact. You came back flippant. Please stop while you are ahead. Thank you.

 

No, I stated the fact.....you used the term "seem". Just wanted to reply so that you would feel safe in your own sensing. I thought I had been clearer than that....so just wanted to make sure I was understood. That's "Snippy"? Oh well, as they say, "different strokes for different folks"!

 

Peace, Sister.
From,
South Jersey’s Sunny Shore

 

Love this

 

Did he discern the messages were false, or did he just state as bishop he wants people to stop distributing the messages because he heavily disagrees with them and they trouble people with anxiety? Not going to read the messagesor those of that Edson guy anymore, but I see that he hit a few hard to guess things (like revolution in the streets of US). It just requires to be seen if the words of consecration do change. So either he’s in league with the devils or he is a prophet of God. Not going to assert any of these 2 yet but in the Old Testament true prophets with messages of doom and gloom were rejected as false and false prophets who preached soothing and false prophecies were considered true.

 

When you're in a hole its time to stop digging.

 

The devil can speak true a certain percentage of the time. So it is not an either/or situation. In any case, for whatever reasons, Fr. M is not endorsed by his former Bishop.

 

Something to keep in mind, and apologies if something similar had been posted on the CTTK thread. Now that this letter has been posted and the bishop has made his stance clearer, many who were following the messages or Fr. Michel may find themselves feeling confused, misled, deceived, etc. Many of these people may have started to come back to the Church because of these messages, or perhaps this was their first exposure to the Faith. We should pray for them as well that this situation doesn’t drive anyone further from the Church (e.g., just another failed prophecy type situation). Rather, this could be the perfect opportunity to engage with those who were becoming more invested in their faith and looking for answers.

 

The Bishop included some spiritual
guidance and prayerful words at the end of his letter to reassure people.

 

Well, it seems that Fr. Michel is still guiding the new Fraternity of Priests, deacons, and lay consecrated. That is what he was asked to do within his messages of his mystical experiences. So perhaps all of this is providential for this great work so needed for our times to continue and even be freed up as we will need such priests and others who understand the times w/ all the accompanying difficulties. He has already brought so many people hope and healing. Too many people are still walking in darkness. When fear overtakes the little ones they will need those with such great faith and knowledge of what is truly occurring. Hopefully too he will also be permitted to give the public more of what he sees coming for the world.

 

Yes, I agree. In charity, we should pray for this priest. None of us know what the future holds. For a very long time, we have felt that heaven won’t continue to remain silent given the serious moral and spiritual decline of the entire world. Other seers have been warning this for far many years prior to Fr.M. If something does occur, it should not surprise anyone, as we’ve expected some event for a very long time now..long before Fr. M ever came onto the scene.. However, if a purported seer is unduly causing panic with his questionable background, its only prudent to vet him and his predictions. Too many lives could be needlessly and negatively affected by his dire predictions. They may suffer Negative financial consequences as well. For Fr. M to continue to give these talks, unvetted, is not proper for all concerned. Let the facts speak for themselves....but let the facts reflect the truth.
If he’s right, we’ll know soon enough. Quite a few defended Charlie Johnston with the same vigor....and no wonder.
Eventually, we know heaven will intervene....and we’ve been awaiting for it. We need to be praying for our own discernment regarding these “seers” in addition to Fr.M and others like him.
This is a very emotionally subject for all concerned....in charity for one another, please do not let emotions tear members of this forum apart. In truth, we are on the same side, just not of the same opinion. Regardless, let the facts speak...even if those facts do not reflect our own opinion.

 

Well said Beth.