Countdown to the Kingdom

Father M has said several specific things that are more cut and dry than the October event message. In light of the current conversation on the October event I wanted to post the following.

When I was into what Father M had to say I put together a timeline based on things he said such as “they will have money but no food”. According to his words I pieced together the following:

1. Famine (at least 3 months) - markets crash - civil unrest
   
   
2. Pope Francis then Benedict martyrdom- warning - civil unrest - martial law - nuclear war - Holy Eucharist and abomination

I’m still not sure how 1 and 2 would fit together but from everything he said famine comes first and it must come soon. It’s a very real possibility that we will see civil unrest next month but that wouldn’t look like the fulfillment of Father Ms prophecies to me since he gives a definite order to the events.

He also talked about events within the church. I don’t have those written down but it was along these lines... the church will go through its own passion and there will be the 3 denials of Peter. Does anyone happen to have those available?

 

New material has been released today in Rome - in the new documentary a homosexual man called Mr Rubera who gave fresh revelations about a telephone call he received from the Pope and the support he got from him (see earlier transcript).

These details have been given as part of the plan to promote the documentary, of course.

This is all part of a documentary called Francesco, by Oscar-nominated director Evgeny Afineevsky released this week.

So the Pope's position contradicts what John Paul II Benedict VI taught in this regard.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...th_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html#fn4

 

The “new material” is in a documentary that took time to produce. It was “new” when it was decided to then make the documentary. Having the documentary released now can portray this as “new” simply because the release of said documentary is what is current. Is there anyone else out there who knows what I am trying to say...help, please!

 

I know what you are trying to say. He supported civil unions before -- and this is affirmed in the new documentary.

But new information on the Pope's developed thinking has been released -- the information from Mr Rubera has only been released today.

The pope, who early in his papacy made the now-famous "Who am I to judge?" remark about homosexuals trying to live a Christian life, spoke in a section of the film about Andrea Rubera, a gay man who with his partner adopted three children.

Mr Rubera said in the film that he went to a morning mass the pope said in his Vatican residence and gave him a letter explaining his situation.

He told Francis that he and his partner wanted to bring the children up as Catholics in the local parish but did not want to cause any trauma for the children. It was not clear in which country Mr Rubera lives.

He said the pope telephoned him several days later, telling him he thought the letter was "beautiful" and urging the couple to introduce their children to the parish but to be ready for opposition.

"His message and his advice was really useful because we did exactly what he told us. It's the third year that they (the children) are on a spiritual path in the parish," Mr Rubera said in the film.

"He didn't mention what was his opinion about my family so (I think) he is following the doctrine on this point but the attitude towards people has massively changed," Mr Rubera added.

So here the Pope not only shows support for 'gay' unions he develops further saying he supports them raising children and participating in parish life. He clearly accepts that this is a family.

No mention of the sinful relationship nor the psychological damage the children will suffer as a consequence of being raised by two men who share the same bed.

 

This is becoming an exaggerated soap opera. Good grief....Fatima replied to a question re: red flags to see or not to see. He apparently doesn't have your red lens on his glasses and merely has judged the matter differently. Simply permit him to differ. Frankly I think you are projecting your own kind of unyielding upon others.

Actually, if you truly look at the whole in fairness there are more red flags re: the bishop/s in this history than the background of the priest under them. What a dereliction of duty! And yet, as it is stressed to always include within proper discernments.....the fruits of the mission, still allowed btw, continue. If the man is not to be believed or encouraged re: the claimed mystical experiences, why allow the main part (that is built on the rest) that itself is from the mystical experiences and messages involved, to continue and flourish? That alone speaks to the real reason for separation, not on the claimed personal dislike and "disavowal", but rather to rid oneself of the personal attention now being made public and requesting answers from the authorities.....authorities who personally dislike the topic/s in question, finding them quite distasteful to their liking! Simple....just eliminate the connection of the authorities to the man in question. More like Pilate washing his hands of the whole thing and hoping the people will then accommodate him. Nothing new. In fact, more of the norm when it comes to mystical experiences these days that arrive at the bishop's doorstep suddenly.

The study of such reactions has a looooong history in the Church. Some people here seem to be novices on this history. It always plays out as it should in the end.....God's Will!

Re: the news of the Pope, this is actually something repeated by the Pope more recently. Some of the reports mention that he offered something similar in Argentina which of course he did....and which he has said that he attempted to do in order to stave off the legalization of marriage there which he found to be worse, choosing the lesser of two evils. But of course he was run over there. Argentina was the first country in SA to legalize gay marriage. If anything one might think there is a character flaw of naivete and trusting, over and over, the wrong people. That occurs too often today to those who don't wish to be categorized as "rigid" or "uncaring". Unfortunately he's boxed himself in on a lot of social (as well as liturgical) questions. One day he most likely will be asked to go to the limit and put his stamp of approval on that end goal of the left. Then we will see what happens. Perhaps a line too far for him? And that is what our prayers can play a part in.

 

Okay, I ask for your patience, please. So, am I to understand that that there was some new statement just made from Mr. Rubera commenting on the documentary? Or, was his statement made within the newly released documentary itself? This is what I’m really trying to get cleared up.

 

The statements by Mr Rubera were made within the documentary released today in Rome so it is new material. He wrote a letter to the Pope. The Pope phoned him supporting him.

We now know that Pope Francis holds the same position as Fr James Martin. That homosexual unions are fine and that they have a right to have children and a family. And access to parish life.

 

Earth,
I am only ever obdurate about something when I believe it’s true. About my “projecting” anything onto anyone, thanks for checking in with my inner psychology, but I already have a good handle on that.

 

Okay. What it then seems is that this is yet another instance where the Pope never comes out and says something specifically, yet he allows the words/actions he does say/do to be filtered through other voices and, subsequently, out to the world. In other words, we are all free to make of it what we will. This may be one of the reasons why he never directly answered the Dubia. Regardless, the only weapons we have to course correct are prayer and fasting.

Update:
This live now:

 

There are several "messengers" who relate a future time when famine will be a result of poles shifting and weather changing causing crops in areas of normal growth to be effected and causing famines in various places. I remember the reference of Fr. M to having 3 months supplies for this fall which an awful lot of people are now doing based just on the current circumstances of the near election and the violence on the left in order to get their desires accomplished. We've already seen the break in delivery systems of goods to store shelves just from the COVID chaos. To see such of the same, earlier than most, re: the election period chaos was a help to many who were able earlier to stock up. I didn't see that as a reference to any specific 3 months famine coming from Fr. M. All the rest are also projected to some time in the future, one seeming to logically follow the other. But that too has been spoken of elsewhere in different forms. He also was rather general in the remark of "great things" happening in Oct. Some people have taken that and created their own pictures of specific wars, etc., to happen all at once within one month alone! Ha! Also, that wasn't stated necessarily as something that had to be only negative. Rather we are now having the appointment of an unbelievable gift from God to our Supreme Court. Perhaps we are also experiencing the exposure of evil from the left within the opposition party running a crime family (where they go one they seem to have gone all!!) to lead this God designed country. And the mention now as well of a possible scandal involving SCOTUS, to the top, who has also done much harm to the Constitution. One expert of the eschatology field has stated that the book of Revelation was named that because, indeed, such things will be "revealed" in full only as they happen! We hope to follow the Holy Spirit in such areas while waiting to see the actual Will of God take place before us.

 

If he works this way then this makes me wonder what kind of a man is he?

Let your Yes be Yes and your No be No.

 

Just got done watching Dr. Marshall on YouTube. Fabulous!

 

I put this together based totally on Father M’s words. I wasn’t worried about how this ties in with other seers. If Father M is right why bother with other messages?

I know he used the word famine. That goes hand in hand with his statements to have 3 months of food stored. By telling people they only had a window in the summer to prepare the logical assumption would be that you will need the food soon.

Otherwise you can work backwards from what he said. That civil unrest will lead to martial law and that martial law would be the start of the nuclear war.

He doesn’t give a full timeline but does make definitive statements when he relates certain events to each other. They are not random and I think that matters. He also states that he was told by God that there is no more time.

Even though I no longer think his messages will come true I understand what you are saying about the supply chain, etc. I would never tell someone not to have extra food or not to worry about using the sacraments, etc.

 

But if you're referencing Fr. Michel and are characterizing his talks you can't leave out his own mention of other sites since he spends a whole talk on the correct interpretation of Knock; he mentions the sign promised at Garabandal and extends it to also happen at Medjugorje and Guadalupe Shrine. Another talk gives his unique and unexpected experiences during his pilgrimage to Medjugorje which he originally wasn't all that interested in until certain things happened that got him to go. When he does mention them he speaks to some similarities and confirmations of what he has received. That shows a certain humility that his own experiences don't stand alone, or just with him. This is really important in discernments of any PR appearing on the scene....if it fits into the general consensus. One doesn't pick any particular seer to follow with blinders against any other revelations throughout history. The then children of Medjugorje at time of first apparitions were surprised to hear of other places in the world and history that also mentioned much of what they were experiencing which gave them a broader perspective of their own experiences. We're all united so that one PR that may cover a limited or targeted area, like a country, or certain future punishments, is complimented by those meant for another region of the world. And now they all seem to be converging as our awareness of the greater world is more easily obtained via technology.

 

I responded to your comment about learning what other people think which, if I'm not mistaken, was in response to comments about that website. Just as you're not telling people to follow the website, I'm not telling them to avoid it. I merely gave the reasons why I avoid it.

I agree with you that being wrong about one thing doesn't mean a person is wrong about everything, although that might depend on what they got wrong. It seems to me that the cancel culture which should be of greatest concern to Catholics is the assault on the Deposit of the Faith by those whose duty it is to defend it and the compliance of those best qualified to recognise and draw attention to it.

You must have special insight to know what passes for mainstream Catholic thinking these days. Lacking any special insight and based only on what I see around me and from what I read in Catholic media, mainstream thinking is "be a Good person". That's usually followed with something about conscience which more often than not bears a remarkable similarity to situation ethics, an unspoken "if it's Good with me it must be good with God" or "Jesus would agree with me if he lived in these times" or "if it's legal it must be good but only if I like the law". It seems to me that they take their lead from more than a few Bishops, including the "True Magisterium" vs. "Institutional Church" line, the "Institutional Church" in the Bishops' case being the doctrines that they decide need "developing" to make them more popular or perhaps to align with dissent they held privately and see an opportunity of discarding. "Grown up spiritually" can cover a multitude.

I wouldn't be too hard on Mark Mallett. He has a family to support and may well be suffering financially due to a lack of speaking engagements at retreats or other events during the covid restrictions. And, in the grand scheme of things, there is far worse being promoted by ordained clergy who are free of such burdens. Some of us regularly urge caution against unapproved private revelations. If people are taken in by false prophets, they will have to bear the responsibility for anyone they led astray. All we can do is urge them to be careful but we aren't baby sitters. I'm flabbergasted that people actually buy blessed grapes.

 

Thanks for explaining your thoughts, Dolours. I agree with most of them! As to special insight, mainstream for me is EWTN. As to Mark Mallett, I don't have a thing against him or his family or his personal life. However, he and his colleagues have demanded attention for their seers and lately, for "essential oils." Well, they've gotten it. Surely, there is better way to earn money than claiming an oil formula--the same one sold in the Middle Ages to protect against the plague--will work against Covid.

 

That is also the definition of an echo chamber, that every revelation is related to the others.

"I am the Immaculate Conception" was new and startling to hear from a peasant girl. So was the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus to a nun in the 1600s. St. Faustina's Diary revealed previously unrevealed depths of love and charity, and the Divine Mercy insights included the hope of mercy lasting into death. These were not part of any previous "prophetic" consensus. The idea of communism was introduced at Fatima--that had never been explicitly explored before in private revelations.

God is ever ancient, ever new. Not ever repetitive.

 

Father M’s words stand on their own when it comes to Father M. He’s either right or he’s not. All I wanted to do was provide a linear timeline based on his own words.

He himself says there will be famine (this could be meant to overlap with later events) then the money will crash then civil unrest.

He also says Pope Francis and Benedict will be killed, then we will have the warning, then civil unrest that will lead to martial law, then Nuclear war.

Part of the message is not just events unfolding but they way in which they will unfold.

 

I am wondering, with all this prophet talk, if any of them have considered that their "insights" are conditional? We are in some rough waters but we just don't know if any of the seers insights will come to pass. They might be wrong. They might have been interpreted incorrectly. Many times I look at things going on and make a wrong conclusion. And maybe there is a lot of prayer going on right now that might change the "seen" outcome. I know the people in the US are praying quite a lot for a good resolution and for protection of Trump and his family and admin. There are people doing the opposite also but the uptick in visible prayer is quite stark from say 4 or 5 years ago. God is listening. Maybe circumstances will be mitigated. We may never know that as we are in linear time.

Not a fan of CTTK or in prophecy in general. I have posted limited times on this because I just don't trust my discernment on modern seers. I listen to the approved ones and I have read some of the yet to be approved ones but I am just not confident about some of this. I guess I will be held accountable but it seems to me that there are many other things going on around us we are not aware of and so some of these dire predictions might not come to pass. Just me thoughts.

 

The consensus also includes scripture, what can "fit" into it, and those "new" messages and declarations were approved because they DID conform to scripture and the development of it by other Church teachings that easily would be considered as leading up to and laying the groundwork for the Holy Spirit's greater clarifications. They weren't completely "alien" to what had already been given, from the beginning. He chooses the times for those revelations. The consensus is not repetitive but complimentary and gives emphasis to what "appears" as something "new" within the limitations of the world when left to itself. And the "connections" benefit those living in different parts of the world....who may never have even heard of anything other than what is repeated within their locality. The declaration, formally, by heaven, of the "Immaculate Conception" caused the further development of what was already contained within scripture or it would not have been accepted by the Church. Jesus Himself told us that there were too many things to be explained all at once and that we would need the further help of the Holy Spirit into the future. For instance, we are now experiencing certain "new" confirmations of the "older" messages given at Fatima within some current/ongoing PRs.....as reminders of what has been forgotten as well as what the Church still must accomplish....and the signs given within these "copy" or bring back to the people the miracle/s that had occurred in that history. God is very good in reminding and renewing what has yet to be accomplished.