PROPHETIC STIR CONTINUES OVER DEATH OF ONE POPE AND THE ELEVATION OF ANOTHER

SpiritDaily.com ^ | 04-27-05 | SpiritDaily.com

[dangus]

>> In the paragraph above, it seems that "Several small ships that had fought gallantly for the Pope race to be the first to bind themselves to those two columns" may be symbolizing the reunion of schismatic traditionalist Catholics. <<

That's a nice way of looking at it, but I simply took it as meaning that loyal, fervent Catholics would quickly embrace the new Pope. And they have.

[Knitting A Conundrum]

illustration (not photo) of JPI wearing what looks like the same stole:

[dangus]

Do cardinals take St. Malachy's prophecy seriously? Liberals rallied around their licenstious understanding of "The Glory of the Olives": Cardinal Martini received 40 first-round votes.

[Dominick]

Maria Esperanza of Venezuela is not approved by the Church.

Yes St. Malachy was a good saint, but those prophecies are not his, even though they are attributed to him.

The other connections are tortuous, you rally have to work to get a lot of the Papal predictions to work. I hate repeating myself, but I showed where a number of them are wrong or just will not fit.

You know my opinion, looking for Prophecy to confirm Church action is bad news. We should instead look to as affirmation of the standing of the Church, our Faith in our Cardinals as a Body, with belief in the Promise of Christ, and knowing who holds the Keys of the Kingdom from Peter. These things are what binds out Pope to the Church.

[Salvation]

**Wait - is that Jesus on one side and Mary on the other? **

Yes

[Romish_Papist]

Bump for later read.

[St. Johann Tetzel]

That's a nice way of looking at it, but I simply took it as meaning that loyal, fervent Catholics would quickly embrace the new Pope.

In the ship symbolism, i.e., the Barque of Peter, loyal, fervent Catholics have always been understood to already bo on the Pope's ship.

If there are ships other than the Barque of Peter they could only be those who, by schism or heresy, "jumped ship."

Thus, it could also symbolize the return of any faithful non-Catholic follower of Christ.

[Rutles4Ever]

Techinically, only the site of Betania and the original visions were approved by the local bishop. Her prophecies are not necessarily approved, nor are they condemned.

[Rutles4Ever]

I like visiting Spirit Daily, but Michael Brown needs to be a little more careful about publishing "prophecies" from people like Richard Conte, who's clearly not receiving messages from the Holy Spirit, by virtue of some of his outlandish predictions of when Jesus is going to return, and the "second coming" of the Virgin Mary. Stay far away from him, whether or not he called it for "Benedict XVI". PaddyPower.com called it for Benedict, too, but that doesn't mean they can predict the future of the Church.

[Rutles4Ever]

So was the stole always around or was it designed to reflect the prophetic symbolism... ?

It seems like a bit of a coincidence and nothing more.

[dangus]

Well I certainly understand that interpretation of it better. Thanks.

[Dominick]

Her prophecies are not necessarily approved, nor are they condemned.

The approval was issued 1987. Her "prophecies" continues after that. The Church does not approve people per se.; Sr. Lucia's later visions were not approved or disproved, but left to the discernment of the faithful.

With that, using my OWN discernment, this woman had talked about Jesus crucified in a turban. Use your judgment.

[Rutles4Ever]

Wow - when did she say that?

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Maria Esperanza's visions at Betania were approved.

CONCLUSION

On concluding this Pastoral Instruction, I thank the Lord for He has given to our diocese and to our country the privilege of the visit of the most Holy Virgin; for in this period of our ecclesiastical history marked with a new evangelization, She encourages us to a renewal and deepening in faith, and to a projection of that faith in a complete conversion in prayer and in apostolic commitment; because in this divided world She has come as
RECONCILER OF PEOPLE.

Through the visit of Our Mother, may the Lord grant us that outpouring of the Holy Spirit He granted Elizabeth when She visited her. And if on that occasion She proclaimed: "From now on all generations shall call Me blessed, because the Almighty has done wonders in Me" (Luc 1, 48-49); may Her intercession do wonders in the faithful piously draw near to the place She has chosen to manifest Herself.

Los Teques, November 21st of 1987.
+ Pío Bello Ricardo
Bishop of Los Teques

http://www.mariaesperanza.org/english/pastoral.htm#CONCLUSION


The bishop did not rule on her private revelations, just those things he approved of at the Betania site and events.


I don't know what to call it - partially approved? Definitely involved with something real.

Her bishop gave her this advice when talking about what was going on at Betania:

As guidance to the content of the information you will transmit on such occasions, I convey to you the remark that the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger, made: It is needed to differentiate carefully what has an official sanction from the ecclesiastical authority regarding this issue, i.e. my sanction as Bishop of Los Teques; and, what does not have a sanction.

I understand as a sanction the statement through which the ecclesiastical authority approves and authenticates a fact, or a truth of a doctrine.

Regarding Finca Betania, what has my official approval is what is stated in the "Pastoral Letter on the Apparitions in Finca Betania", issued on November 21, 1987.

I must state that to distinguish between what is officially sanctioned and what is not officially sanctioned does not imply per se that one is more truthful or worthy than the other. But it is pivotal to establish the difference, because in terms of religious phenomena, considering a prudent traditional praxis, the ecclesiastical authority can merely observe, allow, approve, recommend or sanction.

Now then, these qualifications must be clear to the faithful concerning their ecclesiastical discipline.

I beg the Lord to illumine you, and to make your words fruitful when you are placed under the circumstances that I have referred to in this communication.

Sincerely yours in the Lord,

Pio Bello Ricardo

[Knitting A Conundrum]

I suspect it's coincidence, myself. I suspect this stole is one used for certain occasions...like at the selection of a new pope! Looks like JP 1, JP 2 and Benedict all used it. I didn't try to find any earlier pictures.

[Dominick]

Yes I said as much, he Bishop in 1987, about Betania where she was the principal seer, was approved. Her later locutions were not approved. EWTN published the documents.

Just because a seer has one vision, doesn't mean they all are approved. The Bishop also could not appove visions from 1991, with a document from 1987. From the appobation from the Bishop:
Not to admit it, does not constitute a sin against faith.

Still, anyone who acts in such a non-believing manner must, examine his underlying motivations: whether it is prudence and a reasonable critical sense, or if it is a prejudiced attitude consequent to the scientific naturalistic mentality of those who do not admit except what is necessary for them with responsible evidence from mathematical calculations or laboratory experimentation.

I confess the former, as I believe other apparitions. This one, I have see too many things that bother me.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Knowing that the 'Third Secret of Fatima' pointed to a Pope who is gunned down and that it was Pope John Paul II,

It will be nice when this bogus interpretation finally meets the circular file. In all likelihood, Pope Benedict will be the murdered bishop in white. Has anyone picked up on his consistent references to Peter shedding his blood???

[St. Johann Tetzel]

It will be nice when this bogus interpretation finally meets the circular file.

We won't know that for certain until it is seen in hindsight, Deb. It is a possibility.

In all likelihood, Pope Benedict will be the murdered bishop in white.

Until he is, JPII is as good a guess as we've got. He was the "Labor of the Sun" if one believes the St Malachy prophecies, and he was born on a sloar eclipse and buried during one, and the great miracle of Fatima involved the sun.

Has anyone picked up on his consistent references to Peter shedding his blood???

Yes. All these things could also point to future events. But again, we won't know that for certain until it is seen in hindsight.