Pope Francis Tosses Out Vatican Constitution. Rewrite Going On Oct 1-3

reply to post by FlyersFan


pope Francis makes definitely the things different. Wish him success and prayers!
Still, much work remains to be done in practice. Don't know if the time will be enough.
Vatican is a good place to start from, and there are 1.2 billion Catholics who have variety of needs too. I believe Francis will be at their help when the time comes to make broader advises than the inner circle only. In fact, many people who are not catholics or non christians expect much from the new pope.

May be it is not a good idea to discuss here Fatima issue. I have 3 or more threads that you might visit, I did my work on that already.

However, the next major event is that one and let me remind you of it. After less than 2 weeks on 10/13 there will be a consecration of the world to the Immaculate heart of Mary. How all of that will fit together?

reply to post by mike dangerously


I don't think it is possible or realistic. The Curia has to obey the pope to remain in its place. There isn't ANY questions or doubts around the conclave either. (as there were in the middle ages with 2 sometimes 3 popes). In other words, if anything happens the worldwide opinion will be on the side of the pope. I don't think it will happen anyway. Moreover, the world expects the changes talked so much in pre-conclave period, to take place. Certainly they are not in the taste of some hi-level or low level hierarchy. But the interests of 1.2 bln catholics and the wider world are much more important than the personal interests of a hundred or so people. I will not comment further scenarios, because I am sure the Curia, the cardinals etc will strictly obey the pope in his new course of changes. Something more - many of them WANT these changes and have been afraid to say it publicly before. As of the married priests, and many others. So, don't be afraid to say what you think because of some medieval mind-control restrictions.

What was this book he co-authored with an atheist?

www.washingtonpost.com... 790-2acb-11e3-97a3-ff2758228523_story.html

popes vision

mystical experience he had the night he was picked to be pope.

“My head was completely empty and I was seized by a great anxiety. To make it go away and relax I closed my eyes and made every thought disappear, even the thought of refusing to accept the position, as the liturgical procedure allows,” he said. “I closed my eyes and I no longer had any anxiety or emotion. At a certain point I was filled with a great light.”

reply to post by FlyersFan


Petrus Romanus?

Going the literal route, this might be a new angle on the papal prophecies. Not sure how much credence I give to the Malachy prophesies, but as prophesies go this one definitely seems better than most.

So Pope Francis tosses out the Vatican constitution. OK....

At some level, no constitution = no country. Therefore the pope and everyone else residing in Vatican City are now residents of Rome.

Now if someone can help me fit the Petrus part of the prophesy name into this, we're off & running.

Wish I knew where though....

Riffrafter
Now if someone can help me fit the Petrus part of the prophesy name into this, we're off & running.

I"m not seeing it fit at all. EXCEPT that every pope is 'Peter' and in Rome.
So if you look at it from that ... it fits. But other wise ... no fit.

The prophecies about the Catholic Church having to appear dead before 'The Warning' or 'The Three Days of Darkness' come from canonized saints. And they used the term 'appear dead'.

Fatima (approved by the Church) never said anything about it.
Garabandal doesn't need to come into the conversation. The Church disapproved of it 3 times.

If this pope is ripping up the Constitution and starting over ... then the old church is dead.
So it very well COULD fit the prophecies.
Then again, the prophecies could refer to something else ...
Or they could be a red herring .. having no meaning ... because they could be false.
Just because someone is a canonized saint doesn't mean that the stop making mistakes.

I personally spoke (many times) to a certain well known older nun who will, no doubt, be declared 'Servant of God' quickly after she dies. She made lots of mistakes in 'prophecy' and other things. So saints make mistakes and that's why it's best not to take what they say as gold. Sometimes it's just wrong.

The Beast is rising, and we will see the grandest overture of peace and prosperity via this man. How can anyone denounce him? Things are falling into place and the people rejoice as prophesied.


I imagine the next couple years will be as none before, the chaos of the world will cause many to scream for peace, and this man will be their Prince of peace. The solution is all waiting in the wings as planned for millenia, and the sheep are so clueless.

Problem - Crisis - Solution

This is all planned folks.

UnifiedSerenity
The Beast is rising,

Pope Francis isn't 'the beast'. He's 77 .. in poor health .. and won't be in the position for more than
a handful of years. He isn't taking people away from God. He's doing the exact opposite. He's
bringing the real message of Christ to people.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Fun stuff to read, I enjoyed the speculation of prophecy as well.

Riffrafter
So Pope Francis tosses out the Vatican constitution. OK....

At some level, no constitution = no country.

He isn't "tossing out the constitution", he is having it revised/rewritten, as it was in 1988 by Pope John Paul II.

This is a matter of legalism, not one of theology or prophecy.

pope knows what he's doing ~ its an agenda.
the stars are correct again, if all goes according to plan, when we enter the age of Aquarius which is not gonna take much long. the churches will fall from dominance.

if you've done your homework you will know what i'm talkin about.
everything is fine.

reply to post by FlyersFan

I"m not seeing it fit at all. EXCEPT that every pope is 'Peter' and in Rome.
So if you look at it from that ... it fits. But other wise ... no fit.

You call that help?

Just teasing of course...

Did a little digging on ATS and found the following post:

Pope Francis' last name

What do you think?

Not sure if it's correct, too much of a stretch or dead-on in a literal sense. If true/correct it would seem we are being beaten on the head in the literal sense as that would make him "Peter of Rome" of, um...Rome.

Jeez....I think I need a cocktail.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Nice find! Just posting so I can come back to it later. S&F!

adjensen

It isn't an empire, it's a church, and the strength of the church for 2,000 years has been its teaching and its consistency across the faith.

Not remotely my reality.

1. 1600 years, not 2000

2. Not much consistency. I have a copy of the Catechism. The authentic tome. What a pile of rationalized complexity justifying whatever is expedient at the time.

3. The fossilized bureaucracy of power-mongers in the name of God are being shaken up. Good.

4. The Vatican has chosen to throw in its lot with the satanic world government globalists and fallen angels [Witness Chris Putnam and Tom Horn's EXO-VATICANA] . . . wherein the theological blathering of the critters is slated to be put above the Bible [if, when "verified!--with not a hint of how mortals would "verify" pontifications of entities purportedly from Alpha Centauri. What nonsense.]

5. I hope Pope Frances succeeds. The old Constitution certainly needs thrown out . . . along with a lot of heretical dogma. There are some wonderful RC Christians. But the rot has been at the core for a long time. Holy Spirit seems to have left that building eons ago.

BO XIAN

adjensen

It isn't an empire, it's a church, and the strength of the church for 2,000 years has been its teaching and its consistency across the faith.

Not remotely my reality.

1. 1600 years, not 2000

What happened in 400AD?

2. Not much consistency. I have a copy of the Catechism. The authentic tome. What a pile of rationalized complexity justifying whatever is expedient at the time.

Feel free to cite any examples, but bear in mind that the Catechism has nothing (well, little) to do with the Vatican Constitution.

3. The fossilized bureaucracy of power-mongers in the name of God are being shaken up. Good.

Agreed, this is a good thing, assuming that it goes through as outlined, up to a point -- if it results in the Catholic church adopting a Congregationalist Polity, no, that would not be a good thing.

reply to post by adjensen


I should have said "1600-1700 years, not 2,000."

When the RCC began.

No. I don't buy for a microsecond the claim that Jesus gave the RCC keys to Peter etc. etc. etc.

I think the Proddy interpretations of that Scripture make much more sense.

Until Constantine, the church was a loose association of house churches . . . certainly without a professional hierarchy lording it over the religious serfs and slaves due only for propagandizing and !CONTROLLING! according to the whims of the bureaucracy.


I'm skeptical that Pope Frances CAN turn the clock back meaningfully but I admire his trying.


Sorry, I'm not up to wading through that again. I don't recall any specifics. It was years ago that I read any of it.

It basically reads like a huge bureaucracy's exhaustive self-justification tome maximizing options and covering all sides; all bets, all rationalizations, all excuse options that MIGHT be needed in any context or eventuality.

I found myself wondering if anyone had ever gone through the whole thing and merely counted the more brazen contradictions and incongruencies.

yamammasamonkey
So could this power structure, instead of having one head, look more like it has seven heads? With ten horns maybe?

Rome was built on top of seven hills. Perhaps the horns were aquaducts.

en.wikipedia.org...

The situation was finally ameliorated when the emperor Trajan built the Aqua Traiana in 109 AD, bringing clean water directly to Trastavere from aquifers around Lake Bracciano.[11] By the late 3rd century AD, the city was supplied with water by 11 aqueducts.

So before then, there were 10 aquaducts supply a city built on 7 hills, with an emperor whose name added up to 666.

And at that time, the Roman empire conquered Israel and Egypt using horse chariots, where the horses had metal crowns.

BO XIAN
No. I don't buy for a microsecond the claim that Jesus gave the RCC keys to Peter etc. etc. etc.

Until Constantine, the church was a loose association of house churches . . . certainly without a professional hierarchy

Unfortunately, history is not on your side -- writings of the Early Church Fathers and the Didache aside, common sense dictates that some hierarchy already existed -- who would Constantine summon to the first ecumenical council if there weren't already Bishops to call?

You might want to take a look at Eusebius' History of the Church, which is generally regarded as a good (though incomplete) write up of how the church came to be.

I found myself wondering if anyone had ever gone through the whole thing and merely counted the more brazen contradictions and incongruencies.

Again, without these "brazen contradictions and incongruencies" being cited, I can make direct no response to you, but the Catechism is the complete official teaching of the church. Yes, it covers a lot of stuff, much of which isn't very interesting to people like you or I, but they are important for the church. Contrast that with a Congregational Polity, for whom the official teaching is whatever the current pastor believes. He might be educated, he might not be; he might profess something that is completely at odds with other pastors; he might teach reprehensible stuff (think Westboro Baptist church); none of that matters -- his teaching IS the church's teaching.

To me, that's craziness.

You are absolutely right. Remember when John Paul II died? There was a plethora of deaths in Italy of people around the case. INVESTIGATORS and REPORTERS were killed as well. It was basically all over money in one way or another, having to do with the Vatican Bank. So I think that if the financial system is tampered with, which it probably should be as it is still highly corrupt, we very well could see people being murdered. Maybe even the Pope himself. It was done before, and they could do it again. "They" being multiple people, some of which were probably involved during the previous assassination I mentioned, and who are still around. But there are probably not that many of these people. But then again, the majority of the Vatican citizens are probably pretty old, lol.