Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Sedevacantism Proven Wrong by La Salette  (Read 249572 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Sedevacantism Proven Wrong by La Salette
« Reply #70 on: December 16, 2025, 08:51:56 PM »
https://www.cathinfo.com/the-sacred-catholic-liturgy-chant-prayers/vatican-council-says-there-will-be-shepherds-'usque-ad-consummationem-saeculi'/210/

My view: the "antichrist" is the spirit of a vast apostasy foretold in Scripture that invades the church via "locusts" (Apoc. 9:1-3), an army of false "prophets - popes, bishops, etc. - with an anti-Gospel, not a single man, though there may be a leader of them, who is just a figure head, or a point man for the discessio, the revolt, the apostasy. The "single man" thing just causes divisions, finger pointing, false claims, claims not capable of being substantiated, etc.

We see the heresy, and the many that espouse it. They have "encompassed the camp of the saints, and the beloved city." Apoc. 20:8. The remedy and relief will come with Christ appearing in the fire of judgment. Apoc. 20:9.

Look to the sacraments if you can get them, the Rosary, and Scripture.

No human calvary of a "good pope" or any other man or men is coming.

I disagree that there isn't a good pope on the way.  Obviously we don't now when, and this isn't the same as the Q deception, which too many people fell for, but there's a significant amount of credible Catholic prophecy which foretells the arrival of a Holy Pope and Great Monarch, who together bring about a Triumph of the Church, via a consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which will come late, but that it will result in a sudden, immediate, and full conversion of Russia, which will then be used by God to spread the faith to the rest of the world (which I suspect means also taking down China).  Then after that there will be a period of peace, after which Anti-Christ.

There's also too much both prophecy and just interpretations of Sacred Scripture by Church Fathers that do indicate that Anti-Christ will be a single individual.

I personally believe it will present as an Alien, causing nearly everyone to lose faith, as he will change appearance, and then claim that Christ, Moses, Muhammed, were all aliens, sent to benefit mankind, and he will be attempting to replicate the miracles of Christ in order to prove the claim, and then gets struck down while attempting to mimic Our Lord's Ascension into Heaven.

BTW, Struthio's basic blunder on that thread, and I'm not sure if anyone called him out the entire time ... was, yeah, he was focused on the Latin ... but then mistranslated the Latin constantly, assuming that it was correct.  saeculum does NOT mean "the world", but rather an epoch of time, an age, and era, so that "end of time" is a perfectly legitimate translation, but it could also mean the end of an epoch, as in one of the ages of the Church.  Yet by context, if at the consummation (completion or filling out or perfection) of this age, Christ returns, then it's more than just the end of any epoch, but in fact the final epoch or the larger epoch that includes all of human history (my personal favorite), so IMO "end of time" might just actually be the best translation.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Sedevacantism Proven Wrong by La Salette
« Reply #71 on: December 16, 2025, 08:53:37 PM »
The man on the bier was not Ratzinger. Totally different profile. Nose, chin, forehead do not match that of Ratzinger.

But the real evidence is in the prophecies. The 70 years since John XXIII failed to announce the Third Secret BEFORE 1960 is almost up. And the Pope with the "same name" as Guiseppe [Joseph] Sarto is not Bergoglio or Prevost.

It should be obvious who the Holy Father who had "much to suffer" was. It was Benedict XVI, who was forced to "resign" so that Bergoglian revolution could be finalized before God said His "enough."

This reminds me of another alleged prophecy about a 150-year-old Montini returning.

What fantasies people entertain just to avoid sedevacantism ... since ultimately that's what this is about and what drives this.

As for the 70 years, assuming that's a solid number ... could also be from the time that Pius XII died and/or the Anti-Pope Roncalli died.

So ... how about Giuseppe Siri, eh?  He was the Pope legitimately elected instead of Roncalli and uncanonically forced out.  But the same name could also be a Pius, and could also be someone yet to come.

2029 is a good time for something to happen, since it'll mark 100 years since Our Lady requested the consecration of Russia, and would be just a bit over 70 years since Roncalli usurped the papacy


Offline Angelus

  • Supporter
Re: Sedevacantism Proven Wrong by La Salette
« Reply #72 on: December 16, 2025, 08:54:19 PM »
Garabandal is beyond suspect, so that is a bit of a problem.

Garabandal is just an extension of the other well known Marian prophecies. The Warning is Biblical. The Miracle relates to the Consecration/Era of Peace discussed by Fatima. 

You are not required to believe anything. But you would do well to at least learn about the Warning so you are prepared for it. It is the event that will "come like a thief in the night." Watch and pray.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Sedevacantism Proven Wrong by La Salette
« Reply #73 on: December 16, 2025, 08:56:50 PM »
Garabandal is just an extension of the other well known Marian prophecies. The Warning is Biblical. The Miracle relates to the Consecration/Era of Peace discussed by Fatima.

You are not required to believe anything. But you would do well to at least learn about the Warning so you are prepared for it. It is the event that will "come like a thief in the night." Watch and pray.

Says you.  Garabandal was a diabolical parody of Fatima.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Sedevacantism Proven Wrong by La Salette
« Reply #74 on: December 16, 2025, 08:57:14 PM »
So who founded the Conciliar Church and how does that fit in your, shall we say, interesting understanding?

That was Bergs, don't ya know?