✝============================================================✝
I don't know what the Pope tweets -- I never read his tweets, and, frankly, I don't know anybody who does (besides this former Mormon, Jennifer LeClaire, who now claims to be a prophet herself just like Mormon founder, Joseph Smith). Jennifer LeClaire claims she has received her own visions and revelations from God which add a lot of new material to the revelations found in the Bible (concerning, for example, another new covenant she claims was made between God and the founding fathers of the USA).
My first impression on reading about that completely innocuous tweet (as translated from the words of this non-English-speaking, poetic Pope), and the wildly hysterical overreaction of some protestants (and even "prophets" like this "Jennifer LeClaire"), was that it was "much ado about nothing".
To me, the Pope was just saying (in his own different cultural way) that those who do not seek the help of Mary's prayers for themselves and their loved ones "just don't know what they're missing".
It's kind of like it would be if some vegans did not avail themselves of the fine fish meal Jesus miraculously provided for everyone when He fed the 5,000, or if a teetotaler did not partake of the "best wine" Jesus miraculously provided for everyone at the wedding feast of Cana. They just wouldn't know what they were missing!
(The same holds true for those who choose to not take advantage of the opportunity to ask Mary to pray for themselves or their loved ones. They just don't know what they're missing, and as the "Mother of Our Lord", Mary is our spiritual Mother, and those who choose not to take advantage of her intercessory prayers are, metaphorically and poetically speaking of course, choosing to make themselves to some degree "spiritual orphans", in a manner of speaking.)
(Keep in mind that "real" orphans don't just curl up and die. They have many ways of living and coping and enjoying a very successful life. It is just sad that they do not have a mother to pray for them, like other folks do. Now, if someone turns their back on their living mother, and rejects the loving care she wishes to extend to them, they are in a manner of speaking voluntarily choosing to be "orphans".)
Remember too that Jesus (again, in a manner of speaking) is our Brother.
As to your not caring at all about the reliability of a writer who is trying to convince all of us of the points she is asserting, I have to say that is very strange approach to take. That's how President B-O got elected twice -- too many people just did not care whether he was honest, reliable, truthful, honorable, filled with integrity, and kept his word, or if he did NOT do any of those things.
Too many Americans got bamboozled by him, and too many get bamboozled by used car salesmen, insurence agents, other politicians, and various other con artists and scammers, including whacko Moonbat "cult leaders", authors, and speakers.
President B-O
(I hope you didn't get bamboozled and vote for President B-O, did you boatbums?) :-)
It is always better to know the honesty, integrity level, and "truthfulness" reputation of ANY author or speaker you read or hear, concerning ANY subject, and to not remain ignorant, uninformed, and completely in the dark about those authors and speakers, and their viewpoints and prejudices.
As an illustration, consider this imaginary scenario. Picture that you were writing an article about that recent Ferguson shooting, and you wanted to get the perspective of some black men who claimed they were there, and claimed that they witnessed the entire incident. And assume your objective was not to get their opinions, but that you just wanted a factual description of the unfolding events that fateful day, exactly as they witnessed them. Now pretend you have rounded up four black men from that scene who claimed they witnessed the entire episode. Here are those four black men:
 |
 |
 |
 |
If you did not know anything at all about those four people, you might think they are equally honest, reliable, and full of integrity, and that you could trust all of them equally, but if you already knew a little something about them, you would be much better able to judge the reliability and truthfulness level of whatever each of them told you they witnessed that night, even if they each told irreconcilably conflicting versions of the events that night.
Now boatbums, I would strongly urge you to (in the future) start making an effort to learn a lot more about the authors you read, and the speakers you listen to, so you can make a much better assessment of any kind of prejudicial slants or distorting bias they may be putting into their writing or speaking to deceptively sway you. (The Bible tells us there are many false prophets in the world.)
(And I have to point out that the main article this thread posted was not just a factual description of a brief "tweet", but contained several more assertions than merely that one tweet, all with a particular slant and viewpoint.) Check out the obvious difference between your own narrow focus and the entire article here for yourself:
|
|
|
-------------------------------------------------- |
-------------------------------------------------- |
Do you see the difference, when you really take a genuine, sincere, honest look at all of it, instead of just a quick, superficial glance at only a minute portion of it?
Goodnight, and "may the Lord bless you real good".