Posted on 11/29/2013 7:33:39 AM PST by SatinDoll
[title cont.: ...Renounces Free Market Economics as “Crude and Naive”]
Since his coronation, Pope Francis has made waves throughout the Catholic community, often shunning generally accepted Papal tradition for a more modern and progressive world. He is, for lack of a better term, a reformer. From refusing the luxurious living quarters traditionally reserved for the head of the Church in the Vatican, to turning Catholic dogma on its head by suggesting it’s OK to be gay when he addressed the issue by asking, “Who am I to judge?” Francis is unlike any popes who have come before him.
By some accounts, he has been a positive influence, as evidenced by a growing interest in Catholicism since he took the reigns of the Church. For others, especially those who have followed the centuries old prophecies of Saint Malachy, his message is being approached with caution and skepticism.
Now, in his first encyclical, a Papal letter sent to Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church, Francis has once again caused an uproar by claiming free market capitalism and trickle-down economics are unproven theories not backed with facts.
“It is no longer simply about exploitation and oppression, but something new,” the pontiff wrote in the 85-page document. “Exclusion ultimately has to do with what it means to be a part of the society in which we live; those excluded are no longer society’s underside or its fringes or its disenfranchised – they are no longer even a part of it. The excluded are not the ‘exploited’ but the outcast, the ‘leftovers’.
The pope also denounced “trickle-down” theories of economics promoted by many conservatives and politicians who espouse an unregulated free market.
“In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world,” he said. “This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting.”
“In addition to restating opposition by the Catholic Church to abortion, the new Pope criticized free market capitalism and advocated wealth redistribution,” notes Kurt Nimmo of Infowars about the Pope’s latest ideas.
While the free market system as it exists today is certainly not ideal, especially considering the elite political machinations taking place behind the scenes on a global scale (including within the halls of the Vatican itself), Pope Francis seems to indicate in his encyclical that the solution is wealth redistribution – on a global scale.
Helping the poor and destitute has always been a tenet of Christianity and Catholicism, but the Pope’s statements become suspect for a variety of reasons, with one of the keys being the notion that he is the fulfillment of a prophecy that claims Francis will be the Pope that ushers in an era right out of the Book of Revelations.
The hesitation for many in subscribing to Francis’ message of reformation is attributed to a document referred to as the Prophecy of the Popes, which was hidden in the vaults of the Vatican for nearly 900 years, but followed closely by insiders:
In 1139 A.D. the Catholic Saint Malachy was said to have experienced visions during a trip to Rome. He subsequently put these visions to paper and penned a document containing 112 short phrases purporting to describe all future popes that would head the Catholic Church. Though not a part of official Catholic dogma or church teachings, this Prophecy of the Popes is well known by Vatican officials and church scholars because it has been remarkably accurate about naming the last 111 heads of one of the world’s oldest and most widespread religions.
According to researchers, theologians and evangelical scholars, the phrases Malachy scribed in his writings offer up the “nature, name, destiny or coat of arms” of every pope in succession and culminate with the naming of the 112th pope.
…
Now, according to prophecy, the 112th Pope will step up to head the Church, and he will be named Petrus Romanus, or Peter the Roman.
Here’s the scary part, and one that has given Catholics and other theologians pause, because according to Malachy’s prophecy, Petrus Romanus is to be the final pope, who will oversee not only the destruction of the Catholic Church, but the world as we know it:
“In extreme persecution the seat of the Holy Roman Church will be occupied by Peter the Roman…”
“Who will pasture his sheep in many tribulations and when these things are finished, the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the terrible or fearsome judge will judge his people.
The End.”
Prophecy of the Popes – Attributed to St. Malachy circa 1139 A.D.
Tom Horn of Raiders News Update and one of the world’s foremost experts on the subject published a book in 2012 with theologian Chris Putnam titled Petrus Romanus: The Final Pope Is Here. In their book, the researches claim that the 111th Pope, Benedict, would resign from his position, something that had not happened for 600 years. Benedict did, in fact, resign less than a year later and was replaced by current Pope Francis.
According to Horn, though Francis’ name does not directly match that of “Petrus Romanus,” he may well be fulfilling the age-old prophecy of Malachy:
Horn has said a pope of Italian descent would fulfill the prophecy, noting Bergoglio is the son of Italian parents and a Jesuit.
…
“Being a Jesuit is a very important aspect of our prediction in our book,” Horn told WND in an email.
…
He also sees significance in Bergoglio naming himself after Francis of Assisi, an Italian, or Roman, priest whose original name was Francesco di Pietro (Peter) di Bernardone, “literally, Peter the Roman.”
What’s more, in a recent interview Tom Horn tied together Malachy’s writings with the research of other Vatican scholars and theologians which indicate that, while Francis himself may not be the biblical anti-christ, he may be the world leader who introduces him, supports his ideas and helps to convince unwitting followers to put their trust in him.
Something big is coming… it does involve the war of wars… and I believe that we’re on the precipice of it right now.
…
I want to talk about the strategems that I believe will be used to initiate it…
It is a war between good and evil… but on the surface it might not appear to be because it’s also going to include believers against believers… and I’m talking about some of the biggest ministries in the world…
Tom Horn Full Interview with Steve Quayle on the Hagmann and Hagmann Report:
*Note: This is a 3 hour interview and worth listening to in full. For those with limited time, we suggest forwarding to about 1:03:00 into the interview where Tom Horn details his research.
Stepping outside of Church dogma by attacking the concept of free market capitalism may soon be revealed to be a politically motivated move by the Pope with much deeper implications.
At this point, while we should not necessarily ignore Malachy’s prophecy or the Pope’s enyclical, some skepticism is certainly understandable.
Until Francis begins to put his support behind world leaders or political movements, it remains difficult, if not impossible, to confirm the Pope has ulterior motives and is, in fact, fulfillment of prophecy. However, the goings on in the world suggest that Tom Horn is on target with his assessment that something big is coming. And the fact that there are over one billion Catholics globally indicates that whatever happens will also involve the Church as well as this pope.
History proves that the Roman Catholic Church has been directly involved in confrontations since its very inception, so its involvement now would not be without precedent.
How often do you pray for those bishops?
Remember, this man was no surprise to his fellow cardinals. They knew exactly what he stood for and what he would bring to the Vatican and the Catholic Church. The Modernists on the left are fully in control, and he is their leader.
But this is only the beginning. I hope I’m wrong, but I fear we are all witnessing the first movements of a full-blown schism that will dwarf the Great Schism of the 11th century, as the Roman Catholic Church breaks into three distinct factions––traditionalism; the far left (Pope Francis); and the far far left (Rev Charles Curran, Richard McBrien).
Condolences.
;-\
“The teaching of the Church has always been that the Grace of Christ is the only path to salvation. Please see... Luke 23:32-43”
That’s what the RCC claims, but they speak out of both sides of their mouth:
From the Catechism:
2010 Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God’s wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions.
Either salvation is all of grace, or it is by merit. It cannot be both, nor can you receive grace as a reward for merit, as Augustine notes:
“For who makes thee to differ, and what has thou that thou hast not received?” (1 Cor. iv. 7). Our merits therefore do not cause us to differ, but grace. For if it be merit, it is a debt; and if it be a debt, it is not gratuitous; and if it be not gratuitous, it is not grace. (Augustine, Sermon 293)
And from the scripture:
Rom_4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
Rom_11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
Where would Jesus be?
when he is done—there will be no more Roman Catholic Church. He will sell the Vatican and all its treasures and open it as a homeless center. Time to find a new Christian Church Folks-—Francis is to the Church what Obama is to America.
Would Augusting made the argument that he could have continued to sin and carry on with the mantra of ‘give me chastity, but not yet’ and been OK?
“Would Augusting made the argument that he could have continued to sin and carry on with the mantra of ‘give me chastity, but not yet’ and been OK?”
An irrelevant question that really reveals how little the RCC understands of these things.
Good works and faith are the result of grace, and not the cause of grace or salvation. We do not say that good works are absent. We merely put them in their proper order. Nothing can be attributed to our own doing, and nothing we receive from God can ever be earned, contrary to what the Papists say. This is what we are talking about. Not whether or not one is free to sin all they like.
As Augustine says, explaining predestination:
“For they think that having received God’s commands we are of ourselves by the choice of our free will made holy and immaculate in His sight in love; and since God foresaw that this would be the case, they say, He therefore chose and predestinated us in Christ before the foundation of the world. Although the apostle says that it was not because He foreknew that we should be such, but in order that we might be such by the same election of His grace, by which He showed us favour in His beloved Son. When, therefore, He predestinated us, He foreknew His own work by which He makes us holy and immaculate. Whence the Pelagian error is rightly refuted by this testimony. But we say, say they, “that God did not foreknow anything as ours except that faith by which we begin to believe, and that He chose and predestinated us before the foundation of the world, in order that we might be holy and immaculate by His grace and by His work.” But let them also hear in this testimony the words where he says, “We have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who works all things.” (Ephesians 1:11) He, therefore, works the beginning of our belief who works all things; because faith itself does not precede that calling of which it is said: “For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;” (Romans 11:29) and of which it is said: “Not of works, but of Him that calls” (Romans 9:12) (although He might have said, of Him that believes); and the election which the Lord signified when He said: “You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” (John 15:16) For He chose us, not because we believed, but that we might believe, lest we should be said first to have chosen Him, and so His word be false (which be it far from us to think possible), “You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” Neither are we called because we believed, but that we may believe; and by that calling which is without repentance it is effected and carried through that we should believe. But all the many things which we have said concerning this matter need not to be repeated.” (Augustine, Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints, Chp. 38)
Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness
Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness
[21] ...For from the time that the Bishop of Rome had gotten to be acknowledged for bishop universal, by pretence of succsession to St. Peter, their whole hierarchy (or kingdom of darkness) may be compared not unfitly to the kingdom of fairies (that is, to the old wives' fables in England, concerning ghosts and spirits and the feats they play in the night). And if a man consider the original of this ecclesiastical dominion, he will easily perceive that the Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman empire sitting crowned upon the grave thereof. For so did the Papacy start out of the ruins of that heathen power.
[22] The language also which they use (both in the churches and in theirpublic acts) being Latin, which is not commonly used by any nationnow in the world, what is it but the ghost of the old Roman language?
[23] The fairies, in what nation soever they converse, have but one universal king, which some poets of ours call King Oberon; but the Scripture calls Beelzebub, prince of demons. The ecclesiastics likewise, in whose dominions soever they be found, acknowledge but one universal king, the Pope.
Part III. Of a Christian Commonwealth.
Chap. xxxviii. Of Eternal Life, Hell, Salvation, and Redemption.
[12] And first, for the tormentors, we have their nature and properties exactly and properly delivered by the names of the Enemy (or Satan), the Accuser (or Diabolus), the Destroyer (or Abaddon). Which significant names (Satan, Devil, Abaddon) set not forth to us any individual person, as proper names do, but only an office or quality, and are therefore appellatives, which ought not to have been left untranslated (as they are in the Latin and modern Bibles), because thereby they seem to be the proper names of demons, and men are the more easily seduced to believe the doctrine of devils, which at that time was the religion of the Gentiles, and contrary to that of Moses, and of Christ.
[13] And because by the Enemy, the Accuser, and Destroyer, is meant the enemy of them that shall be in the kingdom of God, therefore if the kingdom of God after the resurrection be upon the earth (as in the former Chapter I have shewn by Scripture it seems to be), the Enemy and his kingdom must be on earth also. For so also was it in the time before the Jews had deposed God. For God's kingdom was in Palestine, and the nations round about were the kingdoms of the Enemy; and consequently, by Satan is meant any earthly enemy of the Church.
Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness
Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness
Besides these sovereign powers, divine and human, of which I have hitherto discoursed, there is mention in Scripture of another power, namely, that of "the rulers of the darkness of this world," [Ephesians, 6. 12] "the kingdom of Satan," [Matthew, 12. 26] and "the principality of Beelzebub over demons," [Ibid., 9. 34] that is to say, over phantasms that appear in the air: for which cause Satan is also called "the prince of the power of the air";[Ephesians, 2. 2] and, because he ruleth in the darkness of this world, "the prince of this world":[John, 16. 11] and in consequence hereunto, they who are under his dominion, in opposition to the faithful, who are the "children of the light," are called the "children of darkness." For seeing Beelzebub is prince of phantasms, inhabitants of his dominion of air and darkness, the children of darkness, and these demons, phantasms, or spirits of illusion, signify allegorically the same thing. This considered, the kingdom of darkness, as it is set forth in these and other places of the Scripture, is nothing else but a confederacy of deceivers that, to obtain dominion over men in this present world, endeavour, by dark and erroneous doctrines, to extinguish in them the light, both of nature and of the gospel; and so to disprepare them for the kingdom of God to come.
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: with selected variants from the Latin edition of 1668. Ed. Edwin Curley. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994.
>>>I bet he was thinking of Venezuela.>>>
I’ve said that twice on other posts.
Ahhh...I also see...mini ad hominem to take the place of substance?
Could it be that you really don’t know what Scripture says on the subject?
Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness
Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness
[21] ...For from the time that the Bishop of Rome had gotten to be acknowledged for bishop universal, by pretence of succsession to St. Peter, their whole hierarchy (or kingdom of darkness) may be compared not unfitly to the kingdom of fairies (that is, to the old wives' fables in England, concerning ghosts and spirits and the feats they play in the night). And if a man consider the original of this ecclesiastical dominion, he will easily perceive that the Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman empire sitting crowned upon the grave thereof. For so did the Papacy start out of the ruins of that heathen power.
[22] The language also which they use (both in the churches and in theirpublic acts) being Latin, which is not commonly used by any nationnow in the world, what is it but the ghost of the old Roman language?
[23] The fairies, in what nation soever they converse, have but one universal king, which some poets of ours call King Oberon; but the Scripture calls Beelzebub, prince of demons. The ecclesiastics likewise, in whose dominions soever they be found, acknowledge but one universal king, the Pope.
Part III. Of a Christian Commonwealth.
Chap. xxxviii. Of Eternal Life, Hell, Salvation, and Redemption.
[12] And first, for the tormentors, we have their nature and properties exactly and properly delivered by the names of the Enemy (or Satan), the Accuser (or Diabolus), the Destroyer (or Abaddon). Which significant names (Satan, Devil, Abaddon) set not forth to us any individual person, as proper names do, but only an office or quality, and are therefore appellatives, which ought not to have been left untranslated (as they are in the Latin and modern Bibles), because thereby they seem to be the proper names of demons, and men are the more easily seduced to believe the doctrine of devils, which at that time was the religion of the Gentiles, and contrary to that of Moses, and of Christ.
[13] And because by the Enemy, the Accuser, and Destroyer, is meant the enemy of them that shall be in the kingdom of God, therefore if the kingdom of God after the resurrection be upon the earth (as in the former Chapter I have shewn by Scripture it seems to be), the Enemy and his kingdom must be on earth also. For so also was it in the time before the Jews had deposed God. For God's kingdom was in Palestine, and the nations round about were the kingdoms of the Enemy; and consequently, by Satan is meant any earthly enemy of the Church.
Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness
Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness
Besides these sovereign powers, divine and human, of which I have hitherto discoursed, there is mention in Scripture of another power, namely, that of "the rulers of the darkness of this world," [Ephesians, 6. 12] "the kingdom of Satan," [Matthew, 12. 26] and "the principality of Beelzebub over demons," [Ibid., 9. 34] that is to say, over phantasms that appear in the air: for which cause Satan is also called "the prince of the power of the air";[Ephesians, 2. 2] and, because he ruleth in the darkness of this world, "the prince of this world":[John, 16. 11] and in consequence hereunto, they who are under his dominion, in opposition to the faithful, who are the "children of the light," are called the "children of darkness." For seeing Beelzebub is prince of phantasms, inhabitants of his dominion of air and darkness, the children of darkness, and these demons, phantasms, or spirits of illusion, signify allegorically the same thing. This considered, the kingdom of darkness, as it is set forth in these and other places of the Scripture, is nothing else but a confederacy of deceivers that, to obtain dominion over men in this present world, endeavour, by dark and erroneous doctrines, to extinguish in them the light, both of nature and of the gospel; and so to disprepare them for the kingdom of God to come.
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: with selected variants from the Latin edition of 1668. Ed. Edwin Curley. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994.
A friend who reads the Catholic end times magazine has told me there is a link in prophecy to Francis’s last name. I don’t know whether this is from the magazine or not. I’m sorry I don’t have all the facts at my fingertips right now, but I will ask her.
Also the headline says “renounce” when it means “denounce” but the author did not want to use that stronger-sounding word. Francis can only renounce something if he’s been guilty of it himself.
Infowars? Seriously?
Anytime I see Infowars or Alex Jones, my brain just turns off.
Furthermore, Pope Francis is NOT Petraus Romanus.
>also has access to the order of Albino Assassin Monks
>supercomputer underneath the Vatican with all the Protestant names and locations
Good grief! Do you realize how silly this sounds? Are you really serious or are you punkin folks on this thread?
How very pious of you, accusing me of some scriptural deficiency while judging me based upon just 6 typed words. Mind the plank in your own eye, and stop imagining your brother's.
It's much more likely that I merely have no wish to engage a Papal Apologist/Enabler in a dialogue redolent with plasticine collegiality. Yeah, I'm sure that's much closer to the truth. See ya.
;-\
Got a reputable source for that particular outrageous assertion? Now, if you had said they have one third of the extant works of Italian Renaissance painters and sculptors, I might believe you.
Bill Gates could buy and sell the Vatican a couple of times over. And, on a per-capita basis, the Catholic church's wealth pales in comparison to that of the Mormons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.