Pope Leo's Prediction II

  • Thread starter Thread starter jrgiancola
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jrgiancola

Guest
As one who reads the prayer can see, Pope Leo XIII seemed to foresee and predict the great apostasy; and he seemed to p(name removed by moderator)oint that this apostasy would be led from Rome – Rome which alone is “the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world.” Pope Leo foresaw that this place (Vatican City in Rome), where had been set up the Chair of Peter by the first Pope, St. Peter himself, would become the throne of Satan’s abominable impiety, with the “iniquitous design that when the Pastor (the true Pope) has been struck, the sheep (the Catholic faithful) may be scattered.” These are Pope Leo XIII’s words.

Pope Leo XIII was predicting the implementation of an apostate, counterfeit Catholic religion from Rome, in which “the pastor” (the true pope) is replaced by a usurping antipope (as has occurred at times in Church history), with the iniquitous design that “the sheep may be scattered.”

In 1934, Pope Leo’s striking prayer (given above) was changed without explanation. The key phrase referring to the apostasy in Rome (the Holy Place, where the See of Peter has been set up for the light of the world) was removed. Around the same time, the use of Pope Leo XIII’s longer Prayer to St. Michael after each Low Mass was replaced by a shorter prayer, the now famous abbreviated Prayer to St. Michael. This prayer goes as follows:

“St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil; may God rebuke him, we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all evil spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.”

There is nothing wrong with this prayer to St. Michael; in fact, it is very good and efficacious. However, the point is that it’s not the longer Prayer to St. Michael that Pope Leo XIII composed. The shorter prayer was, in the view of many, promoted as a substitute, so that the faithful would be unaware of the incredible content of the longer prayer, as described above.

Pope Leo XIII’s longer Prayer to St. Michael also fits perfectly with Our Lady of La Salette’s famous appearance and prediction in 1846: “Rome will lose the faith and become the Seat of the Antichrist… the Church will be in eclipse.” Pope Leo’s words suggest that Antichrist himself, or at least the forces of Antichrist, would set up their seat in Rome: “In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter… they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety…”
 
jrgiancola said:
As one who reads the prayer can see, Pope Leo XIII seemed to foresee and predict the great apostasy; and he seemed to p(name removed by moderator)oint that this apostasy would be led from Rome – Rome which alone is “the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world.” Pope Leo foresaw that this place (Vatican City in Rome), where had been set up the Chair of Peter by the first Pope, St. Peter himself, would become the throne of Satan’s abominable impiety, with the “iniquitous design that when the Pastor (the true Pope) has been struck, the sheep (the Catholic faithful) may be scattered.” These are Pope Leo XIII’s words.

Pope Leo XIII was predicting the implementation of an apostate, counterfeit Catholic religion from Rome, in which “the pastor” (the true pope) is replaced by a usurping antipope (as has occurred at times in Church history), with the iniquitous design that “the sheep may be scattered.”

In 1934, Pope Leo’s striking prayer (given above) was changed without explanation. The key phrase referring to the apostasy in Rome (the Holy Place, where the See of Peter has been set up for the light of the world) was removed. Around the same time, the use of Pope Leo XIII’s longer Prayer to St. Michael after each Low Mass was replaced by a shorter prayer, the now famous abbreviated Prayer to St. Michael. This prayer goes as follows:

“St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil; may God rebuke him, we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all evil spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.”

There is nothing wrong with this prayer to St. Michael; in fact, it is very good and efficacious. However, the point is that it’s not the longer Prayer to St. Michael that Pope Leo XIII composed. The shorter prayer was, in the view of many, promoted as a substitute, so that the faithful would be unaware of the incredible content of the longer prayer, as described above.

Pope Leo XIII’s longer Prayer to St. Michael also fits perfectly with Our Lady of La Salette’s famous appearance and prediction in 1846: “Rome will lose the faith and become the Seat of the Antichrist… the Church will be in eclipse.” Pope Leo’s words suggest that Antichrist himself, or at least the forces of Antichrist, would set up their seat in Rome: “In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter… they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety…”
Click to expand...
We better keep Obama out of Rome.

God Bless
 
Right now, I’m just investigating web sites. The Sedevacantists believe all the Popes from John 23 through Benedict are antipopes. I don’t know about the first three, but I know JPII was a holy man and is a saint; I loved him all my life. But I must admit I’ve had my doubts about Benedict from almost day one of his papacy. Could he be the first of the antipopes leading to the apostasy predicted by Our Lady of La Salette? I’ve been reading as much as i can find of Ratzinger’s writings to see what I can find. The websites on the La Salette vision are clear: An antichrist will occupy the See of Peter. Right now, I’m just in my information gathering stage so I really can’t give any data yet.
 
Obama wants to stop giving tax breaks to the rich, he wants all Americans to have health care coverage, he wants to protect the poor and needy with Medicaid, he wants to protect our seniors with Medicare and Social Security, he wants to stop the pharmaceutical and health care companies from ripping us off, he wants to go from oil to fuels that no long will pollute our air and water. Funny, sounds just like what Jesus preached and would want us to do now in our time.
 
jrgiancola said:
Right now, I’m just investigating web sites. The Sedevacantists believe all the Popes from John 23 through Benedict are antipopes. I don’t know about the first three, but I know JPII was a holy man and is a saint; I loved him all my life. But I must admit I’ve had my doubts about Benedict from almost day one of his papacy. Could he be the first of the antipopes leading to the apostasy predicted by Our Lady of La Salette? I’ve been reading as much as i can find of Ratzinger’s writings to see what I can find. The websites on the La Salette vision are clear: An antichrist will occupy the See of Peter. Right now, I’m just in my information gathering stage so I really can’t give any data yet.
Click to expand...
What makes you suspicious of Benedict XVI? I love and trust him, regardless of his pontificate. I’m currently reading a collection of his quotes entitled The Virtues; very edifying. If anything, Benedict is more conservative than Blessed JPII, who, while definitely a Saint, was a little too understanding and accepting of things non-Catholic for me, haha. But that’s just me - he has served the Church, as well as outsiders and potential converts, extremely well. Benedict, too, is hardly going to oppose Christ and let the gates of hell prevail against the Church anytime soon. Indeed, this is impossible; it will never happen. The Church is the Church; it has its ups and downs (look at the renaissance period). Nevertheless, there’s little or no excuse for Sedevacantism - at least from where I stand.
 
I don’t think I fit the Sedevacantist category. I don’t want a return to pre-Vatican II, and I absolutely do not believe JPII was an antipope. But I do have my questions re Benedict and I want to do some investigating. I’ll post what I find questionable. The church has never repudiated the message of Our Lady of La Salette, and it has never repudiated Pope Leo’s prophecy.
 
We must realize that Satan will always war against the Church. Wars ebb and flow. The enemies of the Church are usually withhout, but sometimes within. It does take time to realize just who is an enemy and who remains a champion of our Faith.

I am no expert, but I had 6 years of Catholic School grades 7-12 BEFORE Vatican II. There is no Pope in the past 60 years that causes me even the smallest iota of worry that we are being lead down the wrong path. What worries me is when Bishops and local pastors do not make it a point to teach their flocks what the Popes have taught in the name of Jesus. We must be carefully taught or we will go astray.

Blessed Pope John Paul II had Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, as his second in matters of Faith and Morals for nearly 25 years as the Prefect of the Congregation of Faith. I cannot imagine anything JP II said or did that would worry me. He trusted Ratzinger as they worked closely for so long.

To express legitimate worry about either man, one would have to present a consistent theme in their writings and speeches that is contrary to the teachings of Christ. Expressing unfounded worry is not helpful at all, except to create doubt.

What exactly, if anything, have these two Popes expressed that worries anyone?

That said, I love the St Michael prayer. And I would like to see the longer prayer. Perhaps it was shorten so that it was more useful to the faithful.
 
jrgiancola said:
Right now, I’m just investigating web sites. The Sedevacantists believe all the Popes from John 23 through Benedict are antipopes. I don’t know about the first three, but I know JPII was a holy man and is a saint; I loved him all my life. But I must admit I’ve had my doubts about Benedict from almost day one of his papacy. Could he be the first of the antipopes leading to the apostasy predicted by Our Lady of La Salette? I’ve been reading as much as i can find of Ratzinger’s writings to see what I can find. The websites on the La Salette vision are clear: An antichrist will occupy the See of Peter. Right now, I’m just in my information gathering stage so I really can’t give any data yet.
Click to expand...
I think that is a bunch of hogwash, but I know people with similar thoughts were honing in on Pope Benedict XVI’s Encyclical from June 29, 2009:
  1. In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect[146] and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago. Such an authority would need to be regulated by law, to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek to establish the common good[147], and to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth. Furthermore, such an authority would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for rights[148]. Obviously it would have to have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums. Without this, despite the great progress accomplished in various sectors, international law would risk being conditioned by the balance of power among the strongest nations. The integral development of peoples and international cooperation require the establishment of a greater degree of international ordering, marked by subsidiarity, for the management of globalization[149]. They also require the construction of a social order that at last conforms to the moral order, to the interconnection between moral and social spheres, and to the link between politics and the economic and civil spheres, as envisaged by the Charter of the United Nations.
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html

God Bless
 
jrgiancola said:
Obama wants to stop giving tax breaks to the rich, he wants all Americans to have health care coverage, he wants to protect the poor and needy with Medicaid, he wants to protect our seniors with Medicare and Social Security, he wants to stop the pharmaceutical and health care companies from ripping us off, he wants to go from oil to fuels that no long will pollute our air and water. Funny, sounds just like what Jesus preached and would want us to do now in our time.
Click to expand...
All these endeavors quatrupled our national debt. Messiah Obama supports financing planned-parenthood, an organization founded by a female speaker for the woman’s branch of the KKK, who argued it was needed for the reduction of undesirable races. Even today, all planned parenthoods are in minority neighborhoods.

Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act, which would have protected babies that survived late-term abortions. That same year a similar federal law, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, was signed by President Bush. Only 15 members of the U.S. House opposed it, and it passed the Senate unanimously on a voice vote. Both the Illinois and the federal bill sought equal treatment for babies who survived premature inducement for the purpose of abortion and wanted babies who were born prematurely and given live-saving medical attention. When the federal bill was being debated, NARAL Pro-Choice America released a statement that said, “Consistent with our position last year, NARAL does not oppose passage of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act … floor debate served to clarify the bill’s intent and assure us that it is not targeted at Roe v. Wade or a woman’s right to choose.”

But Obama voted against this bill in the Illinois senate and killed it in committee. Twice, the Induced Infant Liability Act came up in the Judiciary Committee on which he served. At its first reading he voted “present.” At the second he voted “no.” The bill was then referred to the senate’s Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired after the Illinois Senate went Democratic in 2003. As chairman, he never called the bill up for a vote.

Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse who was the prime mover behind the legislation after she witnessed aborted babies’ being born alive and left to die, testified twice before Obama in support of the Induced Infant Liability Act bills. She also testified before the U.S. Congress in support of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. Stanek told me her testimony “did not faze” Obama. In the second hearing, Stanek said, “I brought pictures in and presented them to the committee of very premature babies from my neonatal resuscitation book from the American Pediatric Association, trying to show them unwanted babies were being cast aside. Babies the same age were being treated if they were wanted!” “And those pictures didn’t faze him [Obama] at all,” she said.”

humanevents.com/article.php?id=18647

God Bless
 
jrgiancola said:
Obama wants to stop giving tax breaks to the rich, he wants all Americans to have health care coverage, he wants to protect the poor and needy with Medicaid, he wants to protect our seniors with Medicare and Social Security, he wants to stop the pharmaceutical and health care companies from ripping us off, he wants to go from oil to fuels that no long will pollute our air and water. Funny, sounds just like what Jesus preached and would want us to do now in our time.
Click to expand...
Jesus did not preach nor support killing children in the womb.
 
Originally Posted by jrgiancola View Post
Obama wants to stop giving tax breaks to the rich, he wants all Americans to have health care coverage, he wants to protect the poor and needy with Medicaid, he wants to protect our seniors with Medicare and Social Security, he wants to stop the pharmaceutical and health care companies from ripping us off, he wants to go from oil to fuels that no long will pollute our air and water. Funny, sounds just like what Jesus preached and would want us to do now in our time.
Click to expand...
Jesus said “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s…”, never did he mention that rich people should pay at a higher rate (newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/09/19/media-myth-debunked-millionaires-dont-pay-less-tax-percentage-agi-low). As far as I know, Jesus never talked about the environment, the only thing relating to the environment that I know is genesis where humans were to rule over the Earth. Jesus preached charity of one’s own money, not spending other people’s money. Jesus was against perverting religious buildings as businesses, never did he mention companies that overcharge. I don’t think Jesus even remotely supported any of those things. Plus Jesus wouldn’t kill babies.
 
jrgiancola said:
Obama wants to stop giving tax breaks to the rich, he wants all Americans to have health care coverage, he wants to protect the poor and needy with Medicaid, he wants to protect our seniors with Medicare and Social Security, he wants to stop the pharmaceutical and health care companies from ripping us off, he wants to go from oil to fuels that no long will pollute our air and water. Funny, sounds just like what Jesus preached and would want us to do now in our time.
Click to expand...
Don’t trust him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top