Benedetto XVI Forum
	English Section
		Mainly about BENEDICT XVI, plus relevant items on the Church & the Vatican
			THE CHURCH MILITANT - BELEAGUERED BY BERGOGLIANISM

Pagina precedente | « 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 » | Pagina successiva

THE CHURCH MILITANT - BELEAGUERED BY BERGOGLIANISM

Ultimo Aggiornamento: 03/08/2020 22:50

Autore

Stampa | Notifica email

« Discussione Precedente | Lista | Discussione Successiva »

15/06/2018 04:51

00#451

OFFLINE

Post: 32.018
Post: 14.104

Registrato il: 28/08/2005
Registrato il: 20/01/2009

Administratore

Utente Gold

Marco Tosatti chose to juxtapose the image of a lightning strike on St Peter's dome with images of the crying Madonna in the video below. Signs from heaven, perhaps?

In Costa Rica, Guatemala and Spain,
images of Our Lady have been shedding tears
[But why is this occurring only for Heralds of the Gospel?]
Translated from

June 12, 2018

I was struck by a news item on an information site of the Heralds of the Gospel*. News that has been confirmed by those in charge of the Central American section of that religious institution. With the added information that tests are being undertaken to guarantee a solid scientific basis to the reports of a phenomenon that has occurred in different places.

*[From Wikipedia: The Heralds of the Gospel [Arautos do Evangelho, in Portuguese] is the successor organization to the original Brazilian Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (TFP) which carries on the work of TFP’s late founder, the traditionalist Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira. Created in 1999, the Heralds was recognized as an International Association of Pontifical Right, the first established by the Holy See in the third millennium, in February 2001.

Consisting mainly of young people, this Association is established in 78 countries. Its members practice celibacy, and are entirely dedicated to apostolate, living in separate houses designated for young men and young women. Their life of recollection, study and prayer alternates with evangelizing activities in dioceses and parishes, with special emphasis placed on the formation of youth.]

Here is an excerpt of the report from gaudiumpress.org, where the whole story can be read:

Last April 21, in San Jose City, capital of Costa Rica, while a Herald priest, a lady and a few young people were preparing to hear Mass, they noted with surprise that the pilgrim statue of the Immaculate Heart of Mary appeared to be shedding abundant tears. The young boy who first noticed it informed his ‘formator’ (Herald mentor) of the phenomenon and then informed him that another Marian statue in Costa Rica, had also shed tears, as did another statue in Guatemala. The mentor asked the boy how he knew this with such certainty and the boy answered that a ‘very good lady’ had told him.

All this would have sufficed to move any Marian devotee – but the apparent celestial signs did not stop there. On the same day as the San Jose episode, the phenomenon was reported in four images of Our Lady of Fatima, each belonging to a Herald. Even more unusual, the phenomenon took place again on April 22, 24 and 26 with the same statues, and also witn an image of Our Lady of Good Counsel. All of this was duly reported in written attestations.

Some visitors (not belonging to the Heralds) were present at most of these events and have likewise attested that they saw tears coming from the eyes of the statues.

And in Spain, a small image of Our Lady acquired from the Shrine in Fatima by a girl who attends the ‘formation’ classes of the feminine branch of the Heralds, was also seen by many witnesses to have shed tears but this time, of blood.

All in all, 11 Marian statues have been reported to shed tears since April this year.

Of course, the journalist in me has many obvious questions not addressed in the sketchy report above. Such as how long did the crying last in each case, and how often has it been repeated; whether the tears (or blood in the Spanish case) were/are being collected and how (one assumes that the scientific verifications undertaken includes identifying what the tears are made of); and how it is possible for fluid to emanate from the solid plaster or wood of the images (I will assume that trickery is out of the question). But just as important as the facts is why the phenomenon should be occurring to the Heralds (because so far, we have not heard that this has been happening elsewhere in the past couple of months)... BTW, the video clip narration also says that in San Jose, a statue of St. Joseph was also reported to be in tears.

Easy to imagine Our Lady of Fatima shedding tears for a church under Bergoglio that blithely ignores her message from 1917 about the need for 'penance, penance, penance' and the visions of Hell that she showed the children! Speaking of omens - if that is what the above amounts to - I think this post by Fr Hunwicke is very apropos... I am including some of the combox comments to it.

Slippery slopes

June 13, 2018

"I knew there was something wrong when he first walked out onto that balcony", I heard a priest saying a few months ago at a clerical gathering. Indeed. So one instinctively did.

In my case, it was not so much that PF declined to dress as a Bishop of Rome as his choice of an unheard-of papal name. It was as if he felt the need to dissociate himself from all his predecessors in the Cathedra Petri ... even from the other 'post-conciliar popes'. In other words, it seemed to me that this was at least potentially a proclamation of papal rupture.

But how long it took before such uneasy whispers broke out into the open in the mainstream Catholic blogs! Even when the unappealing side of PF's character ... particularly his propensity to insult and humiliate his fellow clergy on every conceivable situation ... became noticeable, and some humourist decided to make a collection of the genre ... bloggers remained cautious. After all, the Lord Himself said some impolite things about Pharisees and Pilates. We leaned over backwards to make excuses when we could; PF's ambiguous phrases and actions were glossed in as orthodox a sense as writers felt able to invent.

As late as 30 May 2016, I agonised for some time about whether to describe this pontificate as 'dysfunctional'. One's every instinct was and is to avoid writing like this about the Successor of St Peter. One has a habit of affection and, even when that had been worn away, one says to oneself "Could it really be right to use such language?" Or even possibly "Such language might get me into trouble". After much thought and redrafting, I left in my draft for that day a statement that this pontificate had "some dysfunctional characteristics".

I think you might discover (to give just one example) the same sort of caution in Fr Zed; the same long reluctance to engage too directly with what was manifestly dodgy in this pontificate, until such engagement became unavoidable.

It was, in various different ways on the various Catholic blogs, an unwillingness which only gradually got eroded.

Then, of course, and with as much reluctance, we moved into the period of the Five Dubia and the Filial Correction. And now the world has had a spate of books about this pontificate by lay historians.

PF really did have to work enormously hard before the current atmosphere of frank talking was born.

The comments:

[ Amateur Brain Surgeon said...
Dear Father. Many shared your unease from the get go.

The moment when it became obvious to ABS that he was unqualified to be Pope (to say nothing about being a priest), came less than a year into his reign.

When he was exiting the Papal crypt, he espied a young altar boy standing in prayerful recollection and Bergoglio stopped to pry his hands apart.
youtu.be/2QgP0YaOLT4

It struck ABS then that we had a piety-phobic Pope.

Lord have mercy.

Banshee:
Well, I still think he has his good side... But when you look at what he does, you see an even more objectionable picture than when you look at what he says. His objectively good moves seem to be the result of fickle moods or personal nostalgia.

Shrug. I try to take him for what he is. He seems pretty good for the causes of fitting Argentinian saints, even if his reasons might be banal or cynical.

Highland Cathedral:
On March 13, 2013, Rorate Caeli published this quotation:
“Of all the unthinkable candidates, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is perhaps the worst. Not because he openly professes doctrines against the faith and morals, but because, judging from his work as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, faith and morals seem to have been irrelevant to him.”

Lepanto:
I recall reading a blog comment by the mother of a young Down's Syndrome girl who was a great fan of Pope Benedict and who had his picture in pride of place in her room. She was very upset to hear that he would no longer be Pope but was comforted by her mother who told her that there would be a new Pope. She and her mother watched Francis emerge and the little girl burst into tears saying 'but I don't like him!'. 'Out of the mouths of babes.....'

It took me about 5 minutes 'Googling' to come across the outraged comments of one of his flock in Buenos Aires and I became afraid of what might happen, is she were being truthful. It has been much, much worse than she predicted or I imagined.

Liam Ronan:
Amen, Father.

cyrus83:.
Francis is imprecise enough in what he says that one can assign him the benefit of the doubt in many individual cases. It is the cumulative effect of always having to apply that corrective filter that wears down the inhibition to question Francis more directly.

The dysfunction and temperament of the present papacy seems to mirror the age - indifference and overemphasis on immanence at the expense of transcendence.

Liam Ronan:
Just an afterthought. The moment PF was introduced to the world from St. Peter's, I thought his demeanor was funereal, akin to the Grim Reaper. Having thought about it more I am reminded too of the opening sequence for The Alfred Hitchcock Hour where the host accompanied by the music from The Funeral March Of A Marionette eased into an empty silhouette to fill it out. The clip is here (YouTube)if anyone would wish to see what I mean.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fmeb-f4pthA

Randolph Crane:
I always found it extremely shocking when liberal media insulted our Most Holy Father Benedict. I felt disgusted, and it was far from me to ever say anything negative about the Father of all Christians, and the Vicar of Christ.

But, indeed, when PF appeared on the loggia, I knew immediately that something was wrong. In many conversations with my Father Confessor, he told me he felt the same way (he is, as you can think, a faithful priest). It is almost impossible to deny the many bad aspects of this pontificate. And what was unthinkable under Benedict, is now the norm.

Richard Ashton:
When Father Aidan Nichols says in public that the Pope may be teaching heresy, it is time to be alarmed.

Randolph Crane:
@Lepanto: That is the way I felt. For me, there was no natural affection for PF when he entered into the public. Normally, when the Pope comes out, it is "love on first sight" for every Catholic. But with PF, I said "but I don't like him".

The story is heart-breaking, really.

Well, to think how non-judgmental and full of good will I was in the first few hours of Bergoglio as Pope - as though it had been like the first three papal debuts I had lived through before (John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul I) - "We have a new pope, Deo gratias!" and life went on! (There was a marked quantum difference for me when Karol Wojtyla first came out as Pope, and a difference of astronomical magnitude when it was Benedict XVI's turn, a literally life-changing moment for me, a pinnacle of my life experience that was a true bolt out of the blue! Of course, in March 2013, I was certain that none of the pre-Conclave papabili, or anyone in the College of Cardinals, for that matter, had the potential at all to match the impact of a Wojtyla or a Ratzinger.)

I probably was disarmed by the fact that Bergoglio's first words after his icky 'Buona sera!' were for Pope Benedict - though when I thought back on it several hours later, I had the cynical thought that it was probably his way of acknowledging that had B16 not decided to step down as pope, he, Bergoglio, would not be where he was that night! Anyway, my open disposition did not last 24 hours, and I have been downbeat ever since - on a downhill slope of aversion that seems infernally infinite.

Meanwhile, SCHADENFREUDE!