Daily Archives: February 28, 2020
If you go here and, once scrolled down to the comments, click on the little image posted by reader “Defensa de la fe”, you will find the transcript of the words of Our Lady to St Bridget concerning a Pope allowing priests to contract marriage. Alas, I did not manage to import the image here, but you will be just fine clicking on the image and letting the image fill the screen.
Note this: a Pope allowing a person who is already a consecrated priest to contract marriage would be infinitely worse than a pope allowing men who are already married to become priests. The first case has never happened and could not possibly happen, as it has always been a tenet of the faith that a priest, once consecrated as such, cannot marry. The second has always happened in exceptional cases in the Western church, and regularly in the Eastern (and then schismatic, and then in part again in communion with Rome) one. I actually know of two Catholic bloggers (one good, one not so much) who are exactly in that situation: marriage first, consecration later.
Still, the text that is reported of the vision to St Bridget does not say at all that a Pope who would do such horrible things would, ipso facto, cease to be a Pope; nor does it say that it would be for every faithful to decide that such a Pope is an Antipope, or a flower vase, or an elephant. No, the words of the vision (those, mind, who can be read in that image) leave the reader in no doubt that such a horrible man (more horrible, no doubt, that even His Heretical Horrendousness, Pachamama Francis) would be subject to blood-curling punishment for being an absolutely horrible Pope. Also, it is clear that God would allow such a pope to lose every spiritual illumination and inspiration, and to be left in a state of complete spiritual blindness, whilst remaining the Pope. No other interpretation is possible, because if a pope carrying out such deeds were to lose his office, most certainly Our Lady would have warned the faithful, via St Bridget, to refuse to recognise him as such!
This, my friends, is exactly the reading that every Catholic raised in the Italian environment (accustomed to horrible popes, and finding the history of the city and surrounding territories scattered with the remnants of their deeds) would think of such a pope; then the idea that it would be for the individual faithful or theologian to establish who is the pope and who is not the pope would be so outlandish as the idea of rewriting the Commandments.
Mind: this is an individual revelation and, whilst St Bridget enjoys enormous prestige, no Catholic is obliged to believe in it. Similarly, there could be more in the revelation than is addressed in the quotation I have linked to.
Still, keep this well in mind: that it is not for you, or for me, or for everybody that is not a sufficiently robust body of bishops and cardinals, to officially declare who is validly a pope.
The sad fact still remain, that this pope is clearly so evidently heretic as the sun is evidently hot; but the heresy would be just as evident in the hypothesis related to St Bridget.
The situation is, if you ask me, brutally simple:
- We live in times of heretical popes (I add here Francis II Cupich and Francis III Tagle for good measure, so you are ready for things getting even worse)
- The heretical popes are God’s punishment for the immense rebellion of Vatican II; they are, in fact, allowed exactly in order for the faithful to get this single point.
- The heretical pope must, in the natural, be deposed by Bishops and/or Cardinals rebelling to the heresy and forcing him to recant, or else declaring him deposed; and woe to those bishops and cardinals who refuse to act!
- This age of heresy will end when God has decided that we have been punished enough, either by inspiring the bishops and cardinals to finally act or through some other extraordinary event.
- it is, cela va sans dire, not for us to decide who is pope in the meantime; particularly when there is no other person even claiming Francis’ job, or declaring him an usurper, or even rebuking him publicly and officially; the person often unwillingly chosen for the role obviously refusing it very publicly and supporting Francis on different occasions.
We live in sad times. But I personally still prefer these times to the fall of the Roman Empire, the Black Death, or the conquest of Constantinople.
We cannot choose the times we have been given to live in. What we can do is to march on with the truth revealed to us, dying in the Catholic faith in the midst of crumbling worlds if needs be.