I think sometimes it is even more frightful when someone we don't see as an angry type gets very angry. It is even more unsettling. I can imagine Our Lady getting angry, but at the sin, not at the people. She must be greatly offended at how poorly people are treating her Son. It reminds me of this fateful vision given to Blessed Elizabeth Canori Mora: Mercy Ceases for the World On Christmas, 1816 Blessed Elizabeth saw Our Lady, who appeared extremely sad. Upon inquiring why, Our Lady answered, “Behold, my daughter, such great ungodliness.” Blessed Elizabeth then saw “apostates brazenly trying to rip her most holy Son from her arms. Confronted with such an outrage, the Mother of God ceased to ask mercy for the world, and instead requested justice from the Eternal Father. Clothed in His inexorable Justice and full of indignation, he turned to the world. “At that moment all nature went into convulsions, the world lost its normal order and was filled with the most terrible calamity imaginable. This will be something so deplorable and atrocious that it will reduce the world to the ultimate depths of desolation.” http://www.tfp.org/a-century-before-fatima-providence-announced-a-chastisement/
P., Not really shocked, no. Fear is a huge factor in how people make decisions and since it is believed that Archbishop Vigano is in hiding, Cardinal Burke & Bishop Schneider have sanctions on them and a very questionable list of news sources have been approved by the Vatican, fear is growing rapidly. Plus, I'm certain that the vow of obedience is a big factor for the US Bishops especially the orthodox ones. Here is Father Mark Goring's latest plea to be honest about what is occurring, Here is the latest video from the Vortex, I came across the following a couple of weeks ago and I keep thinking about it and the discussion that some members had about the Fatima seers not smiling. O My Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of Hell and lead all souls to Heaven, especially those who are in most need of Thy mercy. I often ask myself what has the Church done to spread the message of Our Lady of Fatima? What have each of us done to spread the message of Our Lady of Fatima? Are we more shocked to find out that people are unaware of Our Lady's messages than we are active in spreading Her messages ourselves? I apologize that I keep editing this post.
Yes he does. We need more like him. He is like a voice crying out in the wilderness. I was very disappointed to not see a single Bishop in the US bring up the issue of further investigation into Vigano's claims. Silence.
I think Fr Mark quoted three Bishops approvingly. He is a very special young man indeed. So young! So wise! He must pray a very great deal. Bless him. Iw as very surprised Bishop Barron did so very well. It teaches me not to be too quick to judge people. He spoke very,very well. Bless him too. and Bishop Strickland and Archbishop Cordeolone. Also Cardinal Mahoney.
HH, I weep with you. But I do know of faithful Catholic families alive today whose children have grown up and are true to Christ. So it is possible, but in today's evil climate, heroic. So what needs to be done? Here I'm thinking of a wonderful deacon friend who had thought he did the right and noble thing. He raised his five children in the 1970s, they faithfully attended Sunday Mass, they prayed a daily Rosary together during Lent, he made sure they went to Catholic schools believing they would be instructed in the Faith. Today his children are successful in the world, but no longer practice the Faith. He and his wife pray and grieve. Here was the key component of JoeJerk's plan: he only needed one generation to break with the continuity of the Faith. One generation. First, he poisoned the culture in a way that the fruit of that poisoning had not come to full fruition. Thus the children of my deacon friend, ill-formed by a watered down catechesis, would be easily picked off when they went to Catholic colleges which were no longer orthodox. This deacon's children did not raise their children Catholic and now the poison of disbelieving "catholics" is passed on to future generations. Here I'm thinking of a wonderful deacon friend who had thought he did the right and noble thing. To those who are 10-20 years older than myself, you should not beat yourself up as my deacon friend still does at times: "Where did we go wrong?" He and others in his age group were convinced that if they did as their parents had done, their Catholic universe would continue. The loss, however, of that one generation was crucial in JoeJerk's plan because the Catholic family is key. So what are the long term consequences and why will the Church rise again? Because there are now heroic Catholic families bucking the tide! The spiritual hearts of their children are being forged in the midst of a pagan culture. These Catholics have had to deliberately choose to be Catholic and all that the Faith demands. And when the climax of the Trial comes, they may be few, but they will be willing to embrace martyrdom. And the witness of such martyrdoms, will help turn the hearts of many fallen away "catholics" back to God. It will be intense and not as long drawn out as in the days of Rome, but even more effective. For the seed for the Church is the blood of the martyrs! 1 Peter1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. 6 In this you greatly rejoice, even though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been distressed by various trials , 7 so that the proof of your faith, being more precious than gold which is perishable, even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ; 8 and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, 9 obtaining as the outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls.
This brings me to a question of the order. I don't know the history of it. I don't have time to research many things. St Pio was a Capuchin. Is that a branch of Jesuits? I do recall hearing a prophesy that Jesuits cannot or will not be Pope. Of course that was before Francis was chosen. The history of the order is a good subject for research.
No the Capuchins are one of the very, very many , 'reformed' off shoots of the Franciscans. By , 'Reformed', I mean after a while in all the Religious Orders things get a little lax, maybe very lax. Then someone may a saint caomes along to tighten things up. This is often a saint. The Capuchins big hall mark as Reformers is they didn't shave... hence of course they all have beards. St Padre Pio is the most famous Capuchin . Their spirituality is I would say the exact opposite of the Jesuits. Very simple where the Jesuits are intellectuals. Each to their own. I beleive it is correct Jesuits were not supposed to be Popes, In fact I don't think their founder wanted them to go above being priests.
Huge numbers HAVE left throughout the last 30 years. Just ask your non-denominational friends, those to say they are spiritual but not religious. More will?! no doubt
I remember this as well! On a Sunday. That's a very big part of it, yes! You are correct. The evil one has used his 100 years in which to destroy the Church, hasn't he? But I do agree that God is working and that we haven't seen the end yet.
Padraig, I hesitate to outright endorse Cardinal Mahoney's speech. Around the 4:20 mark, he says: Our collegial communion is threatened...we must not allow outside groups of any kind in this country or anywhere else, to interfere with or attempt to break the bonds of our ecclesial union... I am at a loss to figure out to what outside groups he refers. The Vatican's idea of venting Catholic news agencies came to mind. Mahoney mentioned various powers-that-be who threatened the 16th century Church, but left out the particulars of today. Safe in the Barque of Peter.
Funny Terry , the Feast of St Charles Borromeo was just a few days ago and from whom the Caridnal quoted quite extensively. I don;t knwo if you know it but Pope St John 23rd was a big fan of his; in fact he wrote a several voulme life of the saint when he was in BErgmo in the Smeinary there. I was also interested and confused by the reference of the Cardinal. I wasn't quite sure if he was referencing something specific? I will have to go back and listen to it again...I don't think he gave any citations to San Carlo? But certianly any refernece to St Charles and the Council of Trent is upbeat...I think St John 23rd based a lot of his impetus to the Second Vatican Council to the saint. For instance at the dawning of this council he imitated him by having a diocesan synod for the Roman clerics first. Kinda start in cleaning your own back yard first. I believe Cardinal Mahoney was echoing this. Start at home first....but you make a good point.. I did like the Cardinals Spriitual drift and insight though. Very like St Charles.
..I will have to pray about this, Terry..do you understand what he meant? I do recall that Blessed Solaus Casey of Detroit used to warn over and over and over again about the danger of coming Schism in the Church in the USA?
You know Cardinsls like Cupich and Tobin and Wuerl are very,very happy to do what Pope Francis wants them to do..because that is very,very much what they want to do themselves. However when a very ,very different Pope is elected..as I believe very shortly there will be...a Marian Secret..I don't believe for a moment they will obey him. Nor very many other USA or European Bishops. I mean a Pope who is really a Catholic and one who disikes intensely heretics and perversion...and he is waiting in the wings. I am sorry to say it but I strongly suspect many high Churchmen are perverts themselves and just won't stand correcton. No. Not at all. They'll go right into formal schism right away. No doubt about it.
The pendulum will have to swing back. That's how it works. I thought it was most curious that Francis stated he didn't feel he would be Pope very long, not much longer than 5 years. Resign, killed, exile? Will this be ahead of my trip, or not....? His tolerance and openness for what is clearly morally wrong is astounding. I digress and acknowledge. I wonder what my priests would say off the record (away from the pulpit). I recall St Lucia was told Portugal would be the one country to always stay True.
Mario, I also noticed that Michael Voris speaks of Cardinal Mahony in a negative way in the new Vortex video that I posted above. I believe that Voris states that this cardinal cost the Church close to $1 billion dollars sending clergy who were accused of sexual abuse out of the country to hide them from law enforcement. Voris questioned why this retired cardinal would even be in attendance at this meeting. *** I noticed the following yesterday and I thought that I should post it on the forum just in case someone here ever needs it. *** A Silent Vatican in a Time of Crisis The Holy See has become increasingly mute in the face of frequent criticism — an approach which is having a detrimental effect on the Vatican, the papacy and the Church. Nov. 15, 2018 | Edward Pentin | http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/the-dangers-of-a-silent-vatican-in-a-time-of-crisis Whether it be the sexual abuse crisis, the Holy See’s recent landmark deal with China, or allegations raised in Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s testimonies, the Vatican is often being subjected to a barrage of important questions from the faithful eager to have convincing, official explanations and answers. But usually these days, the Vatican’s response to these inquiries is obfuscation or, more commonly, silence. When the Congregation for Bishops issued its unpublished directive to the U.S. bishops meeting in Baltimore this week, instructing them not to vote on two proposals on handling of clergy sexual abuse, the Register contacted six Vatican dicasteries, including the Holy See Press Office, to find out the reasons for their decision. None responded, apart from Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, who gave a brief, one sentence statement most people felt failed to satisfactorily shed light on the reasons behind the decision. This tendency to ignore questions from the media has increased in recent years. The issues are also not trivial, often concerning the very survival of a particular group of faithful, or even more importantly, the well-being of their eternal souls. When a controversy breaks over a doctrinal matter, for instance, the Vatican often fails to reaffirm the Church’s teaching or refute the substance of the claims. An example took place in March this year, when reports emerged of an interview the Pope gave to atheist Eugenio Scalfari. Francis allegedly denied the existence of hell and the story spread rapidly around the world, but the Vatican responded late, and with a vague statement that failed to reassert the Church’s teaching in the face of the claim. Chinese authorities have reportedly been brainwashing four priests into joining the state-run church, and for the fifth time in two years, Bishop Shao Zhuyin of Wenzhou has been arrested. But requests this week for comment or reaction from the Vatican have so far met with no response. Silence Not Always Golden Some examples of other inquiries that have gone unanswered include a request for an official clarification of the Pope’s goals for the Pan-Amazonian synod next year, especially with regard to clerical celibacy; why the Pope has continued to grant interviews to Scalfari, despite the 94-year-old's unreliable accounts of those interviews; why the final document on the recent Youth Synod contained very little on the Church’s moral teaching; and whether there have been any developments on the Vatican investigation into Archbishop Theodore McCarrick. This silence also extends beyond issues concerning the faithful and relates to the well-being of the Pope himself. When Archbishop Viganò called on Francis to resign in his first testimony, the Vatican was silent, neither defending the Pope in the face of such a strong charge nor offering any reaction at all. (Cardinal Ouellet’s response did not appear until two months later, and was in response to Archbishop Viganò challenge to him, made in his second testimony.) The Pope responded to Archbishop Viganò's claims himself when he called on journalists to investigate the veracity of the former nuncio’s allegations — efforts which naturally entailed Vatican cooperation — but the Holy See failed to either comment or be cooperative. At least five possible reasons account for the Vatican’s silences and inadequate responses to the media: it wishes to ignore controversial issues knowing that, in today’s rapid news cycle, they are quickly forgotten; it is unable to provide a response because officials are not privy to the reasons behind whatever action has been taken; it doesn’t want to be transparent because it would expose a hidden agenda; the Vatican is unable or unwilling to defend the indefensible; or it simply does not have the capacity to provide timely and substantive responses to controversial news coming out of the Vatican. (A Rome truism is never underestimate in the Vatican how much can simply put down to incompetence.) Whatever the true reason is, and it is possibly a mix of all of the above, the silence and dearth of adequate responses to the media on so many crucial issues cannot but have a detrimental effect on the Vatican, the papacy and the Church as a whole. It is a truth of social communications that if an institution does not step in to provide a truthful and convincing official response to a relevant matter, particularly during a crisis, then others will fill the vacuum — and usually it will be those who shout the loudest, and may not always be sufficiently informed, who get heard. It is therefore unsurprising that some in the Vatican perceive themselves as under frequent attack and often criticized. In the absence of creating an official and trustworthy narrative, the faithful cannot be blamed if they start to believe there isn’t one, and that the situation is perhaps as bad as it seems.
Correct, he instructed the priests on Malta to conform to his interpretation of Amoris Laetitia, whatever their individual consciences dictated. He is a 'friend of Francis' and, as such will be given preferment and important tasks.
Padraig, No. Regarding the times surrounding the Council of Trent, Cardinal Mahoney specifically mentioned: emperors, kings, and wealthy merchants as outside groups who interfered. But concerning our own time he just says "groups of any kind." I get the feeling that was a coded message to his fellow bishops. Since he knew this would go public I wonder why he didn't state what groups. I'm troubled by that. Safe in the Refuge of the Immaculate Heart!
