Th thank you. This post of yours is helpful to me. I am sorry to hear about your daughter. You really have quite a story to tell. I pray God can use you to help others who are under bondage to the new age movement which is a vehicle to try and enslave humanity. I will pray for you. God bless you.
I am not an expert on freemasonry but I can tell you this. The lower levels are used as a ruse to keep hidden the agenda of the higher levels. You have to be initiated into the next level to be taught the mysteries of the corresponding level. Masonry is attractive to the public because lower level masons do community charity. According to the church, being a member in any level of freemasonry is cause for excommunication. In the last part of the 1800's a Freemason named Albert pike wrote a books called morals and dogma. In this book he outlined the different levels of masonry. He said the goal was to bring the pure doctrine of lucifer to the world. I think it is safe to say all levels of masonry are satanic. You still have to take a Masonic oath on the lower levels. In fact, many of the founders of modern occult magic and witchcraft were also masons. The founder of the Mormon religion was also a mason. I think this illustrates all of masonry is deception from hell. Capture a person at the lower levels and indoctrinate them until complete loss of faith in Jesus Christ is replaced with allegiance to hell. If you want more information, I could probably continue for awhile. One personal story my grandfather was a mason. One day at his house, satan appeared in his house. I was in a different adjoining room. This answers the question for me. God bless you.
Welcome to the forum Verne. I am sorry I missed you joining or I would have said, 'Hi' earlier. You remind me of what is written in the Book of Sirach, 'The just man fall s several times a day'. We fall down , but we get up.
In the 1800's the permanent instruction of the Alta Vendita was leaked to the Vatican. This document is a blueprint in how they were going to infiltrate the Church and bring it down. http://www.tanbooks.com/doct/destroy_church.htm This was so upsetting to Pope Leo XIII that he made it public. Shortly thereafter he had the vision of Satan talking to God the Father regarding the 20th Century. It was then he penned the St. Michael the Archangel prayer to be said after every Mass. The Masons were so set on finding someone who was an allie, it is told that they didn't want a masonic pope--just one who would allie himself to their plans. One thing they didn't want was a Polish Pope! Because back in Europe then to be Polish meant that you were deeply rooted in your faith. The masons never did get a foothold in Poland. It is told that a mason was one vote away from becoming pope and a devout Cardinal had two votes because he was voting proxy for another who could not make it (no planes back then!) Sure enough an Italian was voted in by the name of Cardinal Gusseppi Sarto. Unbeknownst to them however was the little known fact that he was NOT AN ITALIAN, but POLISH! His father had moved the family from poland to Italy when the child was young and changed his name to Sarto which meant 'shoemaker'. He had been a shoemaker in Poland. The curia was so aghast that they burned his documents trying to hide history! Sure enough this Pope became Pope Pius X who not only became a saint, but God in his infinite wisdom knew that the 20th Century was going to need bookends for it. A Saintly Polish Pope for the beginning and one for the end of the 20th Century--Pope John Paul II! Thank you God for wonderful Popes! He knew what we needed and provided so beautifully, just as he has now. Freemasonry will not prevail. Our Lady shook the rug and got Cardinal Bertone' out and gave us this awesome humble Pope for a reason! Trust!
Pope John’s Revolution It is well known and superbly documented that a clique of liberal theologians (periti) and bishops hijacked Vatican Council II (1962-1965) with an agenda to remake the Church into their own image through the implementation of a “new theology.” Critics and defenders of Vatican II are in agreement on this point. In his book Vatican II Revisited, Bishop Aloysius J. Wycislo (a rhapsodic advocate of the Vatican II revolution) declares with enthusiasm that “theologians and biblical scholars who had been ‘under a cloud’ for years surfaced as periti [theological experts advising the bishops at the Council], and their post-Vatican II books and commentaries became popular reading.” He notes that “Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis [1950] had . . . a devastating effect on the work of a number of pre-conciliar theologians” and explains that “During the early preparation of the Council, those theologians (mainly French, with some Germans) whose activities had been restricted by Pope Pius XII, were still under a cloud. Pope John quietly lifted the ban affecting some of the most influential ones. Yet a number remained suspect to the officials of the Holy Office.” Bishop Wycislo sings the praises of triumphant progressives such as Hans Küng, Karl Rahner, John Courtney Murray, Yves Congar, Henri de Lubac, Edward Schillebeeckx and Gregory Baum, who had been considered suspect before the Council, but who are now the leading lights of post-Vatican II theology. In effect, those whom Pope Pius XII considered unfit to be walking the streets of Catholicism were now in control of the town. And as if to crown their achievements, the Oath against Modernism was quietly suppressed shortly after the close of the Council. St. Pius X had predicted correctly. Lack of vigilance in authority had allowed Modernism to return with a vengeance. “Marching under a New Banner” There were countless battles at Vatican II between the International Group of Fathers, who fought to maintain Tradition, and the progressive Rhine group. Tragically, in the end, it was the latter, the Liberal and Modernist element that prevailed. It was obvious, to anyone who had eyes to see, that the Council opened the door to many ideas that had formerly been anathema to Church teaching, but which are in step with modernist thought. This did not happen by accident, but by design. The progressives at Vatican II avoided condemnations of Modernist errors. They also deliberately planted ambiguities in the Council’s texts which they intended to exploit after the Council. These ambiguities have been utilized to promote an ecumenism that had been condemned by Pope Pius XI, a religious liberty that had been condemned by the 19th and early 20th-century Popes (especially Pope Pius IX), a new liturgy along the lines of ecumenism that Archbishop Bugnini called “a major conquest of the Catholic Church,” a collegiality that strikes at the heart of the papal primacy and a “new attitude toward the world”— especially in one of the most radical of all the Council documents, Gaudium et Spes. As the authors of The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita had hoped, the notions of Liberal culture had finally won adherence among major players in the Catholic hierarchy and were thus spread throughout the entire Church. The result has been an unprecedented crisis of Faith, which continues to worsen. At the same time, countless highly placed Churchmen, obviously inebriated by the “spirit of Vatican II,” continuously praise those post-Conciliar reforms that have brought this calamity to pass. Taken from The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita by TAN Books & Publishers, Inc.
Care needed here... One of the most striking things in 'God speaks will you listen' is the line taken in the messages regarding Vatican II. As you'll see, the interpretation of the significance of the Council is neither 'liberal' nor 'traditionalist' (as I've said before, this is also exactly what we find in Ottavio Michelini's locutions, the only other place to my knowledge in the modern prophetic literature where the issue is dealt with so directly, although there may of course be other sources of which I am unaware). The question of masonry is tackled head on in the second quote. Emphasis is mine. 1. In my present church, there is much confusion regarding Vatican II. This is from Satan, not from me. Answer me a question:if the Holy Father calls an ecumenical council with all the bishops of the world and the Holy Spirit is guiding the church, how can that council be of Satan? It was not. My people do not understand the working of my Holy Spirit. Remember, I told you to bewareof false prophets who come to you in the clothing of sheep. Satan has caused schism inmy church, by allowing false interpretations to abound concerning Vatican II. My wordsdo not change. I am going to give you a clue to share with my people. Satan hates thedoctrine of the mass and the doctrines concerning my Blessed Mother. These are the two areas he has been trying to destroy. The Vatican II Council reaffirmed both of these doctrines. This council was not convened by hell, but by my Holy Spirit. (p.45) 2. As you have read, for many years Masonic and communistic forces have tried to destroy my church. Recently, in your news, masons in Mexico and Italy are openly trying to persecute my church. In your country, the 1960’s brought in a culture of sin and relativism. This brought about a rejection of God and his commandments. This is the lie and the deception, which has caused the problems in your world and my church. It is the cry of Satan: I will not serve.You cannot blame the Second Vatican Council for the increase in thesins of the flesh: homosexuality, abortion, murder, and all the sins of yourage. You cannot blame the Second Vatican Council for the decrease in vocations, lack of reverence and attendance at the Holy Mass. The blame is my people compromising with the world, rebelling against the HolyFather, and believing the lies, deception, and the words of Satan. The problems of today had their beginnings many years prior to the 1960’s.This decade brought the problems into the open. Masonry, in all its diabolical forms, infiltrated my church many years prior to the Second Vatican Council. During those turbulent years, masons were elevated to positions of authority in my church. Those Masonic forces wereunleashed from the pit of hell and caused the problems in your world today. My people, rejection of God establishes the reign of Satan in your midst. Read my word. All of these events were prophesied and are being fulfilled before your eyes. My word must be fulfilled. Satan is clever. He is much more intelligent than you. He is using Vatican II as a deceptive li eto hide the real cause for the division in my church. The real cause for thedivision is the pride of mankind, the rejection of God, and many in my church making compromises with Satan. He knows if the real truth was revealed, the church would be unified, and he would be defeated. This present and continuing purification is exposing the lies and deception of Satan. My church will be as I want it: humble, persecuted, and a light to the world. It will once again follow in my footsteps to Calvary, and to a glorious resurrection. To repeat, the Second Vatican Council is not the cause of the problems in my church. The cause is the pride of my people who compromise with the demon. Those who cause division and schism in my church do not listen or follow them. For heresy can occur from many different directions. Those who deny my church’s teachings,whether labeled liberals or traditionalists, are promoting heresy. (p. 64)
I believe the council was valid. Absolutely! There is fallout however. The 'watering down' of the definition of freemasonry and secret societies is one of them. I think that the Pius X and Pius Vth people are are being duped, but I also think that they have some valid complaints that have not been addressed until recently. Certainly not enough to go into schism. We MUST pray for unity, unity, unity!!
Peter, did you say these messages from this priest were online in English? I don't seems to find them. Could you point the way?? I don't speak Spanish. It makes my heart happy he was a member of the Marian Movement of Priests!
http://english.michelini.in/ Although Fr. Michelini does not quote Jesus as condemning the Council, he does quote Him as condemning some of the results of the Council e.g. the failure of the Church to continue the prayer of exorcism to St. Michael after Mass which was still and even more sorely needed by the Church than when Pope Leo made it mandatory.
And I hope nobody here would disagree with you ... Fr Michelini's locutions are remarkable for their detailed theological argumentation (the Lord's words here being tailored for clergy and theologians). Take this example from vol. 6: this concluding volume 'Humanity on the threshold of its liberation' is badly in need of an adequate English translation, but even in the present version the sense is clear regarding the postconciliar hijacking, indeed betrayal of Vatican II. Just as a matter of personal opinion, my own belief is that one day treatises of systematic theology will be written (if we still need them!) which will take the content of these and other locutions seriously, as there are so many answers to difficult questions of exegesis/hermeneutics here. One of the biggest problems is that the vast majority of systematic theologians (Hans Urs von Balthasar being a notable exception) just don't factor in the mystics at all in their writing. If they did their work might be very different. And I'm not just talking about taking modern visionaries into account but even a St Bridget ... November 15, 1978 CHAOS IN THE DOCTRINE, IN THE MORALITY, IN THE LITURGY Let’s start again my son, I am Jesus, write. In the last messages that have as title “Things and facts of my Church”, I talked to you about chaos and now I want to talk to you particularly about chaos in the doctrine, in the morality and in the liturgy. They have thought of changing everything. Now to change everything in an anticonciliary sense the intention of acting against the Council must remain well hidden.In fact this is the substance of the facts, now you well know what does the word “substantia” mean…the “substance” is beneath the accidents, so you can’t see it, you only see the accidents. So well clear instead it must appear their will of reforming everything in comformance with the Council. As a consequence of this false way of acting the whole work of spiritual regeneration warmly wanted and recommended by the Council has become an action that damages the great patrimony of the Revelation and of the entire Redemption. Then under the most treacherous pretexts they have affirmed a very great number of theological, dogmatic and moral errors by which they have substantially attacked the Bible to the point that it would be enough to accept only some of the so many affirmed heresies to question all the credibility of the entire Bible and after hitting mortally the Bible, logically not even the Gospel with all its content would stand up. So there is chaos in the laws of my Church and not explanations or discoveries of new aspects of the biblical and theological truths. Anyway a single message isn’t enough but it would be necessary an entire treaty to clarify better the number and the substance of all the errors and of all the heresies uttered by a lot of modern theologians! (pdf pp. 781-782)
I don't believe the Council ever asked for the St Michael prayer to be removed.? I think we have to distinguish between the Council itself and the was the Council was interpreted. For instance the complete abandonment of the Tridentine Mass was never part of the Council's Agenda, though it was interpreted as such. Pope John 23rd, for instance, had a deep devotion to St Joseph and had a mention of St Joe inserted into the Eucharistic preface as a small signal to the Church Fathers that the Church liturgy was not, 'Untouchable' . But this is a long, long way from the post liturgical vandalism that ensued. View attachment 1628
I am wowed once again by your messages Verne. I just finished reading your message on the Warning from 11/02/06 about the warning and am in a state of awe right now as to what I am reading. 2 nights ago out of nowhere I decided to pick up my bible and read a bit. I have not read from my bible in awhile and tend to spend my nighttime reading right now in the middle of three different books (Mystical City of God, Rediscovering Cathlocism by Mathew Kelley and the other I can't remember the title right now but it is all about the Popes for Mary). Anyway I mainly read from the New Testatment but decided to start re-reading Isaias for the first time in probably 8 years. So last night I was reading Isaias 6 and 7. As soon as I was done with them I instantly thought that this sounds a lot like the Warning to me as to what happened to Isaias and what will happen to us. Today I pick up where I had left off in your messages and bingo, you message states the same exact thing that I was just thinking last night and referring to those 2 chapters as well! I love when the Holy Spirit works in this kind of way. There are no coincidences!
Para 48 j of Inter Oecumenici (definitely part of the Vat II output) The last gospel is omitted; the Leonine Prayers are suppressed.
http://www.adoremus.org/Interoecumenici.html Inter Oecumenici: Instruction on Implementing Liturgical Norms. Liturgical Congregation of Rites September 26 1964
I have no doubt that Vatican 2 was needed and called for by the Holy Spirit . However, it is obvious that it's intentions were hijacked and is the cause, directly or indirectly, for the great changes/apostasy that have occurred in the body of Christ. Oh I know the documents are beautiful, however Stan is clever and used the "spirit of V2" or ambiguities placed in predetermined spots ( ie.it depends on what the word is means) to promote change. The fact that it was a pastoral council instead of dogmatic council seems to be meaningless. Which gets back to the "new evangelization", how can anyone talk about the "new evangeliztion" and in the same breath talk about the warning, miracle, chastisements. Why even mention this "new evangelization" when one is fixated on 1. the consecration of Russia must happen 2.the warning to bring people back to the faith (I thought the new evangelization was gonna do that) 3. the miracle (see previous note) 4. the chastisement because most people have apostasized and need to repent (isn't that what the new evangelization was gonna do).
An error? That's perhaps being overly charitable. Some involved regarded the belief in an objectively evil force as medieval and others might have had the motives to reduce the defences against an evil force in which they certainly believed - "We have the impression that through some cracks in the wall the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God: it is doubt, uncertainty, questioning, dissatisfaction, confrontation.... We thought that after the Council a day of sunshine would have dawned for the history of the Church. What dawned, instead, was a day of clouds and storms, of darkness, of searching and uncertainties. [Pope Paul VI, June 29, 1972, Homily during the Mass for Sts. Peter & Paul, on the occasion of the ninth anniversary of his coronation] Of course, this was not the only 'unfortunate' fruit of the Council (if only).
