Who will be the next pope? Your views, please.

originally posted by: hiddeninsite
a reply to: Raggedyman

We have been lied to by the church, by the organization of church led by men - not putting all men in the same basket, I am generalizing.

No you are right, we have been lied to, just many people havnt really searched for the truth, many have just accepted everything they are told with no qualifications

a reply to: 2012newstart

Is this Pope not supposed to be the last Pope according to the secrets of Fátima or some other prophecy buried within the Vatican for centuries?

Or was it that last German fellow that reassigned/gave up the position?

I saw an interesting documentary on Netflix that said Pope John 23 was a prophet who predicted some sort of catastrophe between 2027 and 2033, which accounts for the Malachy "Last Pope" prophesy.

Sal

a reply to: 2012newstart

a reply to: andy06shake

yes it is, St Malachi not Fatima, but many centuries prophecy might have miscalculated somehow, IDK.

a reply to: SallieSunshine

Could you please provide the link? I am really interested

"Who will be the next pope?"

Trump of course.

a reply to: 2012newstart

Aye, St Malachi's the chap.

The thing there through is all prophecy is self-fulfilling.

Simply because the person or persons believe it, and the person's resulting behaviors aligning to fulfill the belief.

originally posted by: Illumimasontruth
Hopefully an honest Christian who forgets religion. Who rebukes the evil of the Catholic Church, worshipping Mary and declaring power to change the Holy Sabbath. Blasphemous beyond words.

Lies and wrong, there have been many evil's but you blame the catholic church for veneration of the virgin Mary, sorry to burst your pagan bubble buddy but it began probably in the first century AD and is a fixture of ALL original Christian church's, Syriac Orthodox (probably THE oldest surviving continuous church in the world that still hold there liturgy in Aramaic) check, Ethiopian Orthodox Check, Coptic Check and of course Catholic, if the Catholic Church was so bad then why did the Syriac Orthodoxy mostly agree to become a part of them in the 1800's, no changes to there traditions or beliefs but because the Catholic's mostly shared what they did AND because they could not forgive the Greek Orthodox for some long standing disagreement's since the time of Byzantium when the Greek Orthodoxy continually tried to rule them even though they were a separate and OLDER church, Syria was the first nation in the world to become a Christian State before Constantine and other names for that church are The Church of St James, the Church of Antioch, it is one of the original Church's mentioned in the Book of Revelation - and has kept it's traditions virtually unchanged since it's founding.

As for the Virgin Mary.

Near the cross of Jesus stood His mother and her sister, as well as Mary the wife of Clopas and Mary Magdalene. 26When Jesus saw His mother and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, “Woman, here is your son.” 27Then He said to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” So from that hour, this disciple took her into his home.

You are kicking Jesus Mother whom through him is your mother just as he through you loves your mother out of your home, how can you or anyone with that attitude and way of thinking even remotely think they are Christian, mend your way's before it is too late.

Behold your mother, she is NOT the Catholic Church AND was born of a MIRACLE birth and was the ONLY Woman through whom god would send his son - so was sent for this very reason - SHE suffered a sword of sorrow - or many - through her heart and if you think she would not have taken her son's place to see him safe then you are mistaken but she knew he had to suffer for us, his birth was OUR birth - and yet we are not worthy to stand in his shadow.

I will tell you whom is EVIL and BLASPHEMOUS a cult founded in the 1500's that caused war, death and massacres, rape, torture and killings and DENIED and IGNORED the unwritten history in favour of a book that was only compiled in the third and fourth century and left many of the writing's of Christendom out of it, the book is NOT flawed or in error but certain interpretations and beliefs that deny the already established Christianity are in grave error, interpretations and beliefs that deny the Christianity that was already founded on the very word of the APOSTLES OF CHRIST himself verbally in teaching and living with those early Christian's.

That said back in the 1500's there were many heretic bishop's, the catholic had many corrupt and evil men in it so the fault is not just that of the NEW protestant re-interpretation or NEW Protestant religion that denied the original Christianity but rather it takes two to tango, meanwhile the Syriac Orthodoxy was at that time a completely independent church though by then over run by Islam, the same with the Greek Orthodoxy and the Coptic Orthodoxy - however the Ethiopian Orthodoxy of which the Europeans knew little or nothing was completely intact and in charge of an actually Christian Empire in East Africa that had been fighting the Islamists back then for nearly a thousand years and would continue to do so until a Protestant English Army sacked them for there gold and religious relic's in the 1800's, guess what go into any Ethiopean orthodox church and you will find the Virgin Mary.

So mend your ways and stop judging your brothers, if God has called you down a path that is for you then walk it but don't DARE cast the first stone at your brothers or else it is your house that will fall Christ will be our judge and our saviour and what is the difference anyway between a corrupt bishop in silk's and a corrupt preacher with a Lear jet, they are both robbing the house of Christ are they not and there are Good (Faithful) and Good (Faithful no one is good except GOD) priests and preachers of all the sect's and denominations of Christendom, it is not me taking the butchers knife to the body of Christ here it is you, you think you will be saved because of your denomination, think again he will call his flock out of all the nations and his own will know his voice.

Trump! Never lies, already has millions of "followers", is the best at everything (just ask him!), Jesus and the Catholics love him here in the states, does what he wants and when he wants. Can't think of a better candidate! Literally sounds like our current Pope ( coincidence?) already

a reply to: Gothar

Jesus loves everyone and that doesn't make everyone pope. The office of the president (any president) is mutually exclusive with the office of the pope or a catholic bishop.

Hi-
Looks like it is no longer on Netflix but I'm pretty sure this is it.

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=prophesy+of+the+popes&qid=1594695893&sr=8-1

I remember it had a lot of interviewees speaking in French with subtitles and the part about Pope John 23 doesn't come until near the end.

Sal

a reply to: 2012newstart
a reply to: SallieSunshine

Could you please provide the link? I am really interested

originally posted by: 2012newstart
a reply to: FlyersFan

...
So I do not agree that Bergoglio was elected only because he is Argentinian with Italian heritage. ...

“Blood taints church in Argentina,” read the headline of the National Catholic Reporter of April 12, 1985. Incredibly, an estimated 10,000 to 30,000 citizens were abducted and killed without trial under Argentina’s previous military government. Yet observers say that thousands of innocent lives could have been spared if the Catholic Church had protested. Instead, states the report, “the Argentine church​—with a few heroic exceptions—​was volubly silent throughout the seven-year terror,” which ended when a civilian government took power in 1983. Worse, some members of the hierarchy collaborated with the military regime.

Why was the church silent? In part, because of fear of reprisals. But the newspaper cites another reason: “The episcopacy also embraced the military as a source of power.” It was granted many privileges. Concludes the report: “The Argentine experience so closely resembles the performance of the Catholic church in Nazi Germany, it again raises the question of whether power is more important to the church than the Gospel imperative to be a witness to the truth.”

This shows the folly of religion’s currying the favor of political powers. It can lead to a compromise of principles. Interestingly, the book of Revelation condemns the linkage of Church and State when it describes the world empire of false religion as a harlot “with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication.” (Revelation 17:2) No wonder Jesus told his followers that they were to be “no part of the world.”​—John 15:19.

I wonder what Bergoglio was doing during that time, working his way up the Roman Catholic Hierarchy I guess.

“Inconsistency on the part of pastors and the faithful between what they say and what they do, between word and manner of life, is undermining the Church’s credibility.”—Pope Francis (Bergoglio).

Indeed. In Argentina clergymen at all levels in the Roman Catholic Church were being accused of inciting “plunder, robbery, assault, kidnapping, crime, bloody fighting, chaos. . . . And all that in the name of Christianity, the Gospels, and Jesus Christ.”

That is the accusation stated in a report entitled “Declaration of Argentine Priests.” The document was signed by 140 well-known clergymen of the Catholic church in 1970.

Who were these priests “of diverse hierarchies and placed at all levels” of the Catholic church that were charged with inciting “kidnapping, crime, bloody fighting, chaos”?

The events leading to such charges had been building up for some time. But in 1970 they came to the fore because of cruel terrorist murders. An editorial in the Buenos Aires Herald reported: “In the past 14 months three prominent Argentines have been assassinated in cold blood. . . . in June last year [1969] Augusto Vandor, Argentina’s most influential trade union leader; the slaying of former President Pedro Aramburu on May 31 [1970] by his kidnappers; and the slaughter of José Alonso,” another union leader, more recently.

What does this have to do with clergymen of the Catholic church? The public press notes the connection. Siete Dias stated: “The presumed ties of priests . . . with the assassination of General Aramburu provoke secret meetings in the bosom of the Argentine Church . . . to analyze the influence of extremism among the clergy.”

Monsignor Juan Carlos Aramburu (not to be confused with the assassinated former president, Pedro Aramburu) regretfully admitted: “The recent events that are of public knowledge, unfortunately, have put to the test and affected the essential value of the priestly mission in being builders of ‘unity of mankind’ founded on love.” And former Interior Minister Guillermo Borda said: “The extreme wing of the Church has exercised a pressure which I am tempted to call decisive in the recent outbursts of intemperance and violence in the country.”

Who made up this priestly group accused of inciting violence and agitation? During the 60's they have been called “progressists,” “rebels,” and in 1970 they became well known as priests of the “Third World movement.” “The movement” takes its name from the Medellín (Colombia) declaration by eighteen ‘progressive’ bishops who called for a ‘third world’ owing allegiance to neither Capitalism nor Communism.

In answer to a question that the publication Periscopio (now Primera Plana) sent to them, priests Jorge Vernazza, Héctor Botán, Rodolfo Ricciardelli and Domingo Bresci, all of the Third World movement, made this remark: “Upon talking of violence it is imperative to distinguish between the oppressor’s violence and that of the oppressed: that one is unjust and condemned, the other can be the only way of being freed from the unjust aggression, and is then a legitimate defense.” Thus, violence is condoned.

The Buenos Aires Herald calls forty-year-old Argentine priest Carlos Mujica the “chief spokesman” for the Third World movement. This priest served as professor of theology in Buenos Aires’ well-known Savior’s University. He claimed that the changes in the last ten years [1960-1970] in the Catholic church are “irreversible,” and that priests must work to bring political and social change. He noted that the Vietnam War had an enormous influence in the formation of public opinion, particularly in the case of youths who see it as a great injustice. He listed other events in Latin America, such as the Cuban revolution and the invasion of Dominican Republic by North American marines, as contributing to the changing of political views among many. The result, he says, is the producing of “a certain conversion to socialism.”

Hence, such priests identify themselves with a movement that works for political and social change even by violent revolution if necessary. And how many such priests are there in the Argentine church? According to Mujica, their number was multiplying with the passing of each day (1970).

In the eyes of many church officials, and in political circles as well, the ideas of the Third World movement seem close to those of Marxism, if not directly Marxist.

a reply to: SallieSunshine

thanks so much! I will watch it later. I heard John XXIII had visions of the Blessed Mother, but nothing official is ever published

a reply to: whereislogic

At the time immediately after the election of pope Francis the question of his past during the military junta in Argentina was put forward in the media. There were two Jesuit priests who were suspended by him for political reasons (they were rather leftists), and who were imprisoned by the junta. Released later, they immigrated to the UK if I remember correctly. One of them died since then. The other one, Jesuit, asked by the media, said the case is closed for him. Card. Bergoglio didn't participate in anything more than that, because if he did surely the media wouldn't miss the opportunity to say it. I don't remember the exact story, and my role is not to defend etc. Im just saying what remember as mainstream news at the time of his election.

originally posted by: whereislogic

originally posted by: 2012newstart
a reply to: FlyersFan

...
So I do not agree that Bergoglio was elected only because he is Argentinian with Italian heritage. ...

“Blood taints church in Argentina,” read the headline of the National Catholic Reporter of April 12, 1985. Incredibly, an estimated 10,000 to 30,000 citizens were abducted and killed without trial under Argentina’s previous military government. Yet observers say that thousands of innocent lives could have been spared if the Catholic Church had protested. Instead, states the report, “the Argentine church​—with a few heroic exceptions—​was volubly silent throughout the seven-year terror,” which ended when a civilian government took power in 1983. Worse, some members of the hierarchy collaborated with the military regime.
...

The same editorial said: “The story of the Catholic church’s failings in Argentina is one of silence and complicity with a ruthless military regime, one of the worst in recent history. . . . Church prelates were thus in positions to speak out and make a difference, perhaps even strip the regime of its religious justification. Yet, almost to the last man, they said nothing. Some, including clerics in military uniform, endorsed the torture and killings.”​

In contrast, the Bible says:

“For though we walk in the flesh, we do not wage warfare* [“We do not wage warfare.” Lit., “we are not doing military service.” Lat., non . . . mi·li·ta'mus.] according to what we are in the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful by God for overturning strongly entrenched things. For we are overturning reasonings and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God.”—2 CORINTHIANS 10:3-5

And Jesus Christ revealed how his true followers would be known, saying: “By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.” (John 13:35)

Early Christians refused to serve in the Roman army, in both the legions and auxilia, considering such service as wholly incompatible with the teachings of Christianity. Says Justin Martyr, of the second century C.E., in his “Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew” (CX): “We who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons,​—our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage.” (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, p. 254) In his treatise “The Chaplet, or De Corona” (XI), when discussing “whether warfare is proper at all for Christians,” Tertullian (c. 200 C.E.) argued from Scripture the unlawfulness even of a military life itself, concluding, “I banish from us the military life.”​—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1957, Vol. III, pp. 99, 100.

“A careful review of all the information available goes to show that, until the time of Marcus Aurelius [121-180 C.E.], no Christian became a soldier; and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service.” (The Rise of Christianity, by E. W. Barnes, 1947, p. 333) “It will be seen presently that the evidence for the existence of a single Christian soldier between 60 and about 165 A.D. is exceedingly slight; . . . up to the reign of Marcus Aurelius at least, no Christian would become a soldier after his baptism.” (The Early Church and the World, by C. J. Cadoux, 1955, pp. 275, 276) “In the second century, Christianity . . . had affirmed the incompatibility of military service with Christianity.” (A Short History of Rome, by G. Ferrero and C. Barbagallo, 1919, p. 382) “While they [the Christians] inculcated the maxims of passive obedience, they refused to take any active part in the civil administration or the military defence of the empire. . . . It was impossible that the Christians, without renouncing a more sacred duty, could assume the character of soldiers, of magistrates, or of princes.”​—The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, by Edward Gibbon, Vol. I, p. 416.

Why do members of the churches of Christendom not view things this way today? Because of a radical change that took place in the fourth century. The Catholic work A History of the Christian Councils explains: “Many Christians, . . . under the pagan emperors, had religious scruples with regard to military service, and positively refused to take arms, or else deserted. The Synod [of Arles, held in 314 C.E.], in considering the changes introduced by Constantine, set forth the obligation that Christians have to serve in war, . . . because the Church is at peace (in pace) under a prince friendly to Christians.” As a result of this abandonment of Jesus’ teachings, from that time until now, the clergy of Christendom have encouraged their flocks to serve in the armies of the nations, although some individuals have taken a stand as conscientious objectors.*

In Jesus’ day, Galilee “was the heartland of ethnic nationalism,” states writer Trevor Morrow. Many Jewish patriots took up arms to gain political and religious freedom. Did Jesus tell his disciples to get involved in such struggles? No. On the contrary, he told them: “You are no part of the world.” (John 15:19; 17:14) Religious leaders have completely departed from Jesus’ command to stay neutral in political affairs. Instead of remaining neutral, however, church leaders developed what Irish writer Hubert Butler describes as “militant and political ecclesiasticism.” “Political Christianity,” he writes, “is almost always also militarist Christianity and when statesmen and ecclesiastics come to terms it always happens that, in return for certain privileges, the Church gives its blessing to the military forces of the state.”

*: Regarding Christian neutrality, the New Catholic Encyclopedia asserts: “Conscientious objection is morally indefensible.”

a reply to: whereislogic

So where do you stand on the JW,.org protecting pedophiles
Condemn everyone else when you can but ignore the evils you have in your own organisation

The Catholics coughed u, confessed and seem to have tidied up a bit but your cult still protects pedophiles

Why not question your own, take the beam out of your own eye

You disgust me with your lack of true self identification

Jw,org pedophile protecting organisation

This young priest from Oslo cathedral St. Olav in Norway celebrates highly inspirational holy masses and homilies. From what I can see and hear, he and his fellow priests in St Olav disperse the stereotype that all priesthood in the northern countries are necessarily ultra liberal. He deserves to be cardinal imo. Sure there are many others like him who stay humble in the shadow. Covid and the need of online masses brought many unknown before holy priests in the light.

I did a mistake by listing the names of more or less famous seers. I know well none of them will ever be elected pope. Because first the Church hasn't approved their alleged apparitions, and second the Church cannot bet its belief that is coming from the public revelation of Jesus Christ during his visible mission on earth, on a contemporary private revelation received in a mystical apparition, even if it is approved as Fatima. We are not required to believe even the approved apparitions in order to be saved, neither they are necessary for our salvation. They may help us though in a concrete historic period. The topic is long and I myself have long threads dedicated to Fatima and other apparitions. But no, I do not expect pope Regis or pope Ferreira.


How about pope Dolan?

Dolan sends book on 'The Next Pope' to cardinals around the world www.ncronline.org...
New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan has forwarded copies of a book that suggests qualities desirable in a future pope to cardinals across the globe, in an apparent break with the longstanding practice that the Catholic Church's highest prelates refrain from publicly lobbying for possible candidates for the papacy.

Criticism of Cardinal Dolan letter 'silly,' Weigel publisher says www.catholicnewsagency.com...

The publisher of a new book by papal biographer George Weigel said Tuesday that it sent Weigel’s latest text to Catholic cardinals as a matter of course, and that it often sends newly published books to Catholic leaders.

“It’s not uncommon for Catholic publishers to send books to Catholic leaders, including cardinals and bishops. It certainly isn’t uncommon for us. But even if it were uncommon, there is nothing scandalous about it,” Mark Brumley, president of Ignatius Press, told CNA, after a July 14 report from the National Catholic Reporter said that New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan had sent the book, entitled “The Next Pope: The Office of Peter and a Church in Mission,” to cardinals.

Dolan, who is known to be a longtime friend of Weigel's, wrote a one-line cover letter when the publisher mailed the book to cardinals, Brumley told CNA. The letter said “I am grateful to Ignatius Press for making this important reflection on the future of the Church available to the College of Cardinals.”

originally posted by: 2012newstart

English mass celebrated by the same priest www.facebook.com...
www.facebook.com...
"for the first time in the history of the Church almost all the churches throughout the world celebrate mass only behind closed doors,and it is painful for us but even more so for you who cannot be here.
Jesus is not in quarantine, He is risen, He is alive"


I suggest there should be a broad review for potential candidates that might well be hidden throughout the world. The status quo is no more satisfactory, having one more liberal candidate and one more conservative candidate from among the cardinals who compete for the 2/3. The Church is really more than THAT. Jesus is neither liberal nor conservative! Jesus is LOVE!

The ultra conservatives who desperately need their candidate to win papacy in order to revert rules centuries back, seem overplayed it.

It is not Only that they lack any majority. They always claim they have the upper hand in keeping the true faith, and thus they expect that the cardinals will be influenced by the Holy Spirit in the next conclave and will elect, against all odds, a more conservative pope. Archbishop Vigano even suggested that a next pope should cancel the last Church Council Vatican II.

In fact they overplayed that moment. They are Not the only true voice in the Church. Rather they are very deluded by assuming that rules (not dogmas) valid in 13-15 century (when people were burned alive for disagreeing with those rules) are automatically valid Today. They are Not!

Not to mention that Jesus never ever created any such "rules" or asked the next centuries Christian congregations to keep the same language and same customs at the time of Peter. ironically, what Vatican II did was to revert the things back to Peter and to circumvent the Dark Ages. Exactly what Today's ultra conservatives don't want to accept.

The issues range from married priests (Peter and most of the other apostles were married as a matter of historical fact) to women deaconesses (what were Mary Magdalene and even the Mother of God?) to other inconvenient issues such as homosexuality (how about the monastic life since early centuries, they all lived in celibacy or what? St Bernard said otherwise).

The conservative catholics especially those in USA emboldened themselves to the level to assume authority above the pope. In that, they spare no effort. They sacrifice family relations and usurp their parental rights to impose on their family members their screwed beliefs. One needs only to get in closer contact with one of the so called "Latin mass communities" (the topic is long).

The big fault they ultimately don't see is their own projected future goes into self-fulfilling prophecy of demise. I will not interpret in length the Third Secret of Fatima (since I have 5 threads dedicated to it). The course is set - a massive martyrdom, one way or another. In the Cold War that was expected to be a Russian invasion in Rome. Today, it could take the form of a limited but deadly thermonuclear exchange with North Korea (who have the device already) or even China.

Or, more likely, in case of a planetary catastrophe (such as asteroid, comet, mega solar flare, etc) the ultra conservatives will be required by self appointed "prophets" and by their absolutely insane leaders to stay home, to cover the windows, to light a candle and to...wait. Wait until their own death, hoping that 'on the third day of darkness God will restore the earth in a primordial pristine state in a blink of an eye'... Well, that could happen in their afterlife of course, because in practice they willingly stay to die in whatever cataclysm comes. As shown in the scene of St Peter's dome collapse in the movie 2012. The ultra conservatives are DOOMED because they have chosen for themselves the fate of martyrs of whatever cataclysm is to come (or war). And together with them, it will be the demise of their cult that the Christianity go back to 13 century as a viable option for the next generations.

I do not know what cataclysm awaits us, but if so many knowledgeable people (such as John Paul II in Fulda, Sr Lucia of Fatima in the latest book published by her nuns talking of a POLE SHIFT, etc.) have hinted at such possibility, it would be ABSOLUTELY UNWISE TO RULE IT OUT. Even MSM wrote about the lurking Planet X and the mega solar flare as scientific possibilities and not conspiracy theories anymore. And that is just the tip of the Iceberg.

With that being said, it remains the hope that somehow we will be offered an ESCAPE ROUTE. Whether the angels will come from heaven (less likely) or God will choose another way using the natural laws and also developed technology to offer His salvation? Like for example, a secret space program? Is Elon Musk one of the 'angels' on Earth? I don't know. I am not supposed to know. But the logic is clear: if a cataclysm is expected for MILLENIA and is not a secret, neither for Sumers nor for Vatican archives (regardless of how little they tell us while spending millions on telescopes to monitor the skies for something to come)..., then the powers above (angelic, others) should give a way to save at least a part of humanity to assure its survival and, not the last, the survival of that religion taught persistently since the time of Moses. If we exclude the option of a physical salvation, we double cross all the Bible, said in other words.

And because we do not know if Jesus comes THIS TIME or rather Not, we'd better get what we have. And here is where the ultra conservatives overplayed it, grossly. Because the 13th century mentality also excludes the option of space flight, or going into deep underground (i.e. "hell" in their views).

Who will be the next pope then? Maybe he will be elected after the cataclysm, in the underground cities, or on another planet. In that way, St Malachi's prophecy might be right - Francis to be the last bishop of Rome, before the dreadful judge comes, without the need to expect that judge to be the Second Coming for which we simply DON'T KNOW.