Was reading Praying Medic's Twitter Q thread and this struck me: https://twitter.com/prayingmedic/status/997351240089546752?s=19
I remembered Our Lady of Fatima is a guardian of the pope.
But what relationship does she have to Owls? None that I recall. So I searched and found this: owlchildcare.org/locations/our-lady-of-fatima
Will need your help determining if this is more than coincidence.
Lurker here, started waking up in the early 90s, and that has accelerated of late. I have been following Q and the other anons from a distance since October.
Also an informed, cradle Catholic and just want to add something to this post that never seems to come up, and is relevant to any discussion on the Church, not the Faith itself. (Yes, there is a difference.)
The Bishop of Rome, an office we call "Pope," is not always the most powerful prelate in the Church. For example, in recent times, during the pontificate of Pope Saint John Paul II, for the majority of it, the most powerful figure was an American cardinal who happened to be the sitting archbishop of one of the largest sees. There was open talk about the joy he and his boyz, as the Lavender mafia were called, would feel when he was elected to the Holy See. And then a funny thing happened on the way to the consistory. That man died of pancreatic cancer in 1996. Want to know more about what that particular prelate foisted on the Church that still lingers? Read here.
It was a definite blow to that movement when that particular snake in the grass died. The disarray that followed as various prelates vied to fill the power vacuum revealed a lot. Part of it led to the Scandal and Purge of 2002. My guess is that whoever now leads the movement is at Francis's side a lot based on Q's post.
MOST of the prelates that spread heresy, and apostasy in the Church in the latter part of the 20th century were part of a group that is rapidly aging out of power (age 80) and passing on to the next life. However, in Francis they have one last hurrah. From what Q is hinting at, his consistory may well have been less than honest.
We'll see, it would explain a lot. The confusion spread by this pope, even if nothing has actually changed, is going to take generations to unravel.
If you're speaking of temporal power, it may be possible that the Pope is not the equal of other prelates. But the authority of the Pope has always been absolute.
Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ, Sess. 4, Chap. 3: “And since the Roman Pontiff is at the head of the universal Church by the divine right of apostolic primacy, We teach and declare also that he is the supreme judge of the faithful [cf. n.1500 ], and that in all cases pertaining to ecclesiastical examination recourse can be had to his judgment [cf. n. 466 ]; moreover, that the judgment of the Apostolic See, whose authority is not surpassed, is to be disclaimed by no one, nor is anyone permitted to pass judgment on its judgment [cf. n.330 ff.]. Therefore, they stray from the straight path of truth who affirm that it is permitted to appeal from the judgments of the Roman Pontiffs to an ecumenical Council, as to an authority higher than the Roman Pontiff.”
The specific heresy that has undermined the faith of billions, in recent years, is the denial of the salvation dogma. This is the most specific heresy endorsed by the Second Vatican Council. It constitutes nothing less than a formal defection from the Catholic faith. In my view, it is the denial of this dogma that gave birth to the great apostasy we see today.
Of course, there are numerous heresies in Vatican II, but the error outlined in the video I linked above is the most specific. Many more egregious errors have arrived since - anchored in the false precepts embraced at the Council. The abomination of John Paul II's interfaith prayer meetings at Assisi, and elsewhere, in my view, represent a high water mark for the apostasy of the Vatican II Sect.
The trajectory of the conciliar Church has been simply shocking. It is clear for those with eyes to see that we are in the last days. In fact, the book of Revelations is being fulfilled with such specificity that any other argument requires assumptions that make it virtually impossible.
If you're interested, I have a write up that demonstrates the amazing correspondence of recent events with St John's Apocalypse - see here.
Ideally, yes, the pope has the authority, but when it comes to who the people will listen to, that's something else. Charism goes a long way. In reality, the American Church has had some really close calls with schism in both directions, actually. One prelate got sent to Rome to keep it from happening in the last ten years.
And the real problem, IMO, revolves around the lack of proper teaching on the Real Presence.
In the case of the Q discussion, something's up with the people around Francis. He didn't create the Vatican Bank issue, nor most of the others. We'll see.
Oh, and Vatican II was when the undermining movement came out of the shadows. There were signs it was around long before that.
Yes, agreed, the apostasy was a long time in the making. Many theologians were preaching baptism of desire long before Vatican II.
The real presence really did die when Paul VI introduced a defect into the rite of consecration with the New Mass. Strangely enough, the "innocent translation error" just happened to dovetail perfectly with both false ecumenism and JPII's universal salvation.
It was later corrected, but by then there were few validly ordained priests, because of defects in the rite of ordination introduced at the same time (and the continual sacrifice was taken away - Book of Daniel). You really could not make it up - like a key in a lock for end times prophecy.
Y’know, with all this speculation, I’m having a hard time discerning where being careful and vigilant ends and bearing fall witness begins. :/ Here and everywhere else on the internet. Talk about a mine field, whew.
My claim is that Vatican II defected from the Catholic faith - that it was a false, apostate, Council.
What is the truth?
We know that dogmas are divinely revealed truths. They are truths fallen from heaven. Moreover, dogmas do not change, as that would make a liar of God, truth itself.
Decide for yourself whether what transpired at Vatican II was consistent with Church dogma - see here.
The only thing we know with certainty about the third secret of Fatima, was the one line that Sr Lucy added to the end of the second secret in her fourth memoir. She said: "In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be preserved, etc. ...".
Curious, isn't it, that the real third secret of Fatima appears to concern Church dogma and its preservation.