Skip to main content

John Paul II & Pius XII approved Visionary: "I Hope the Lord will not allow the Pope to Deny any Truth of the Faith and put himself in the place of God," Fatima, the Flood & Same-Sex Marriage

On April 27, 2018, the National Catholic Register in the article "From Contemplating Murder to Honoring Mary: The Marian Apparition at Tre Fontane," explained how Pope Pius XII and Pope John Paul II came to approve of the apparition of the "Virgin of Revelation" to Bruno Cornacchiola:
"The World War II debris lingered as Bruno Cornacchiola, an anti-clerical Protestant, had every intention to murder Pope Pius XII — until the Virgin Mary interfered April 12, 1947, at Tre Fontane ('Three Fountains)."

"She called herself the 'Virgin of Revelation.'”

"Shortly after, Cornacchiola was able to see the Virgin, who was dressed in white, wearing a green mantle with a pink band, and holding the Scriptures."

"...Our Lady also gave a heavenly sign to Pope Pius XII through Cornacchiola, who was asking for confirmation on how to clearly define the dogma of the Assumption in light of his encyclical issued Nov. 1, 1950."

“'My body could not decay and did not decay. My Son and the angels took me to heaven,' were the words from the Virgin given to Cornacchiola for the Holy Father."

"He carried this message to the Vatican. During his audience with Pius, Cornacchiola asked for forgiveness for his hatred against the Catholic Church after his conversion to Protestantism. This is what led him to plot against killing the Pope. He confessed to Pius that he even bought a dagger with the inscription 'death to the pope.'”

“... This place is a place of great conversion, a call to the truth of the Catholic Church,” explained Mother Rebecca Nazzaro, mother superior of the Missionaries of Divine Revelation, a religious order inspired by the message of the Virgin."

“... St. John Paul II named the site ‘St. Mary of the Third Millennium at the Three Fountains.’ This is a prophecy — who knows when it will come true? But the Virgin requested [to Cornacchiola] to have a big sanctuary built here,” Mother Rebecca said."
[http://m.ncregister.com/daily-news/from-contemplating-murder-to-honoring-mary-the-story-of-the-marian-appariti#.W1Ffz99lDqA]

Author Saverio Gaeta wrote the book  “Il veggente. Il segreto delle tre ontane,” (Salani editore, Milano, 2016), in which he quotes the diaries of Cornacchiola where Bruno had a dream of a pope possibly denying the truths of the faith and putting himself in the place of God:

  "Quella del 21 settembre 1988 è la più interessante:"
“[S]pero che il Signore non permetta che il Papa neghi ogni verità di fede e si metta al posto di Dio"  which translates to "I hope the Lord will not allow the Pope to deny any truth of the faith and put himself in the place of God." [http://www.jesusmariasite.org/global-earthquake-nuclear-war-apostasy-invasion-of-italy-destruction-in-vatican/]
This possible prophecy that came long after the apparition should, of course, be taken with a gain of salt, but unfortunately it reminds me of what G. K. Chesterton said:

Original sin is the only doctrine that’s been empirically validated by 2,000 years of human history.


As with original sin, the Cornacchiola prophecy apparently has been validated by recent history. America's most influential journal of religion and public life, First Things' Deputy Editor Elliott Milco appears to be validating the prophecy when he wrote in the article "Francis's Argentine Letter And The Proper Response":

 "The real problem with the Argentine norms is their deviation from this larger and more fundamental principle: that grace truly sanctifies and liberates, and that baptized Christians are always free to fulfill the moral law, even when they fail to do so. Jesus Christ holds us to this standard in the Gospel. It is presumptuous of Francis—however benign his intentions—to decide that his version of 'mercy' trumps that given by God himself."

My niece Anna Nino got me interested in Bruno Cornacchiola because she texted me this YouTube talk called "Our Lady of Revelation part 1- Intro & Conversion of Bruno":  https://youtu.be/o3aIedB9Owc.

It is by a priest whose name I know, but because he prefers not to publish it, I will keep his identity to myself.

His talks which started with "Our Lady of Revelation part 1- Intro & Conversion of Bruno" are the best presentations I have heard of Our Lady of Fatima as they apply to our moment in history. He uses the Cornacchiola Marian apparition at Tre Fontane to talk of Fatima in depth.

The priest mentions that the Sixth Century Jewish commentary on Genesis known as the Midrash says that God sent the Flood to destroy the world because of the legalization of same-sex marriage:

“The generation of the Flood were not blotted out from the world until they composed nuptial songs (until they wrote marriage deeds for males and beasts — i.e. they fully legalized such practices) in honor of pederasty and bestiality.” – Midrash, GENESIS (BERESHITH) [XXVI. 4-5] p. 213

His talks gives a overview of how the Flood and other punishments sent to mankind by God because of sin are related to Fatima and our present time.

This brings us back to Bruno's dream prophecy: "I hope the Lord will not allow the Pope to deny any truth of the faith and put himself in the place of God" and how it applies to Pope Francis.

Some will argue that Francis has taught against same-sex marriage and other sins. But, I argue that his words against homosexuality, same-sex marriage and any sin are meaningless unless he condemns his heresy of the primacy of conscience promoted by Amoris Laetitia.

Pope John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor explains what primacy of conscience is from a perspective of Revelation:

"Certain currents of modern thought have gone so far as to exalt freedom to such an extent that it becomes an absolute... This is the direction taken by doctrines which have lost the sense of the transcendent or which are explicitly atheist. The individual conscience is accorded the status of a supreme tribunal of moral judgment which hands down categorical and infallible decisions about good and evil... But in this way the inescapable claims of truth disappear."[http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/5346/a_malta_laetitia.aspx]

The dissenter perspective of primacy of conscience is explained by gay activist theologian :

"Previous Popes – including John Paul and Benedict – tried to quash
the views of theologians who didn’t tow the party line and promote the moral supremacy of the Church’s teachings...If Pope Francis is indeed promoting the Catholic teaching of the primacy of conscience... It may show people that it’s OK to be both Catholic and part of, say, the LGBT community – because that is what God is instructing them to do in their hearts... The primacy of conscience is the idea that God’s voice lies in your soul, and it is a sin not to listen to it. It is reconcilable with the notion that the Church is a moral authority, though only if it can be fallible and challenged by human conscience, as Pope Francis himself is showing." [https://www.google.com/amp/s/matteogagliardi.com/2014/04/02/the-primacy-of-conscience-the-only-way-forward-for-the-catholic-church/amp/#ampshare=https://matteogagliardi.com/2014/04/02/the-primacy-of-conscience-the-only-way-forward-for-the-catholic-church/]


Pope Francis admits which perspective he is promoting:

"[T]he primacy of conscience, which must always be respected."[https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2017/11/11/pope-francis-reaffirms-primacy-conscience-amid-criticism-amoris-laetitia]

Francis's teachings on conscience are all encompassing because it tells the adulterer, the sexually active homosexual, the abortionist, the murderer, rapist, sex abuser or anyone in objective mortal sin that they are not in mortal sin if they are at "peace" with it, if the sinful behavior is "humanly impossible" to change, "if they can't change their sinful behavior" or don't know it is wrong.

Therefore, Francis's recent words against homosexuality and abortion are empty or meaningless unless he condemns his heresy of the primacy of conscience which is promoted by Amoris Laetitia.

Pope John Paul II condemned Francis's heresy of the primacy of conscience when he said "individual conscience is accorded the status of a supreme tribunal of moral judgment." 


Dissenting liberal theologian  says Francis's heretical primacy of conscience condemns "John Paul and Benedict [teachings of ]... the moral supremacy of the Church’s teachings."

Professor of moral theology at Sacred Heart Major Seminary Mark Latkovic agrees that primacy of conscience is "heterodoxy" in saying:


"Primacy of conscience has been thrust to the fore of Church-wide discussions on marriage, contraception and homosexuality... John Paul II called “a separation, or even an opposition, in some cases between the teaching of the precept, which is valid in general, and the norm of the individual conscience, which would in fact make the final decision about what is good and what is evil. On this basis, an attempt is made to legitimize so-called ‘pastoral’ solutions contrary to the teaching of the magisterium and to justify a ‘creative’ hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by a particular negative precept” (Veritatis Splendor, 56), i.e., a moral absolute."

"... John Paul II warned against as an illegitimate application of conscience... This proposal would not lead to Christian conversion, but confusion; not holiness, but heterodoxy." 
[http://m.ncregister.com/daily-news/propagating-the-primacy-of-conscience-error#.Wy0-099lDqA]


The war in the Church is between Francis's Conscience Supremacists who hold to the supremacy of conscience vs. the Catholics who hold to the supremacy of God and His moral law as taught by the Church. 

As those who hold to the supremacy of whites are white supremacists, those who hold to supremacy of conscience are Conscience Supremacists or Supremacists for short.

The Supremacist's teaching of the supremacy of conscience is a new Gnostic heresy as shown by renowned theologian :

"People are encouraged to discern, on their own, the best course of action, given the moral dilemma they face in their own existential context – what they are capable of doing at this moment in time.  In this way, the individual’s own conscience, his or her personal communion with the divine, determines what the moral requirements are in the individual’s personal circumstances.  What Scripture teaches, what Jesus stated, what the Church conveys through her living magisterial tradition are superseded by a higher 'knowledge,' an advanced 'illumination.'”

"If there is any new Gnostic paradigm in the Church today, it would seem to be found here. To propose this new paradigm is to claim to be truly “in-the-know,” to have special access to what God is saying to us as individuals here and now even if it goes beyond and may even contradict what He has revealed to everyone else in Scripture and tradition." [https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2018/06/07/gnosticism-today/]

Francis's Conscience Supremacists, who hold the new Gnostic heresy of the primacy of conscience or the supremacy of conscience, tell the sexually active homosexual, the abortionist, the murderer, rapist, sex abuser, the person in adultery or anyone in objective mortal sin that they are not in mortal sin if they are at "peace" with it, if the sinful behavior is "humanly impossible" to change, "if they can't change their sinful behavior" or don't know it is wrong.


 The only persons who are not allowed a primacy of conscience are those who uphold "what Jesus stated, what the Church conveys through her living magisterial tradition."

The war in the Church is between the hypocrisy of Francis's Orwellian selective supremacy of conscience vs. the supremacy of God's moral law as taught by the Church as theologian, Crisis magazine writer and Pope John Paul Il expert Jeffrey Tranzillo pointed out:
 

"After a long period of soul-searching, Fr. Weinandy sounded the alarm starkly yet charitably, and he got slapped down for it. So much for the respect we owe to the primacy of conscience and to the process of “discernment.” It seems that the only thing that matters is to maintain a semblance of ecclesiastical unity–a “unity” built on systematic threats, coercion, retribution, and either brutal or more sophisticated PR campaigns designed to calumniate good people. The new “truth” is that which power can get everyone to perceive as true, despite its objective falsity."


"...As we have seen, the only way for the pope and his subversive bishops to implement AL’s diabolical agenda is to feign unity by ruthlessly intimidating, threatening, or smothering every voice that is, in good conscience, rightly opposed to that agenda. We have also seen examples of one of their favorite preemptive tactics: that of hurling at innocent people outrageous accusations whose content actually applies rather conspicuously to themselves."


"But even a deplorable tactic such as that doesn’t necessarily make fully clear to us what we’re dealing with. Right now, there is a titanic, perhaps definitive struggle going on in the Church between good and evil. We are witnessing an intense, revolutionary attempt by the devil and his minions, both human and demonic, to overthrow and destroy all that Christ has willed His Church to do and to be. So it is not surprising that the rhetoric we’re hearing in the Church these days has often a Marxist cast: The Church is guilty of having treated unfairly and discriminated against this or that 'class' of people–especially grave sexual sinners of one kind or another. The people in that class, it is said, have been excluded from ecclesial life, marginalized, and made to feel unwelcome. The 'oppressed' classes must therefore all be 'integrated' into the life of the Church, and the Church must apologize for having oppressed them in the first place.
[29]"

"Marxist atheism demands that the new 'Church' it seeks to fashion fabricate a false god–one that doesn’t insist on the observance of reasonable moral laws that foster human dignity, especially if someone has 'great difficulty' understanding, in 'conscience,' their relevance to his own situation, or if he has 'discerned' that they would not be appropriate to follow at this time. Better yet, this 'god' can ratify in a person’s own conscience his decision to sin gravely, given his personal limitations and concrete circumstances. In the end, moral subjectivism such as this leads to the denial of the existence of any morality at all, and hence to the denial of the existence of its Author."

Tranzillo goes into detail about the war in the Church between the hypocrisy of Francis's Orwellian selective supremacy of conscience vs. the supremacy of God's moral law as taught by the Church in his article: "Amoris Laetitia on Conscience and Discernment: Do those who Preach what it says really Believe what it says?," November 28, 2017. [http://trulycatholicmatters.com/]

John Paul II agreed with Tranzillo that making the conscience the supreme tribunal leads to " denial of the existence of any morality at all, and hence to the denial of the existence of its Author" when he taught in Veritatis Splendor:

"This is the direction taken by doctrines which have lost the sense of the transcendent or which are explicitly atheist. The individual conscience is accorded the status of a supreme tribunal of moral judgment which hands down categorical and infallible decisions about good and evil... But in this way the inescapable claims of truth disappear."


This may be a valid question to ask Pope Francis who is promoting the conscience as the supreme tribunal:

Do you believe that the conscience is the supreme tribunal or do you believe in the Incarnation and salvation, as every Pope and saint in history has believed, since you appear to deny the very words of Jesus Christ and his Church by your theology of conscience?


John Paul II taught that anyone who thinks as you do on the individual conscience being a supreme tribunal is a "explicit atheist."


Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church and that Francis's Conscience Supremacists who hold to the heresy of the primacy of conscience are formally condemned.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Exorcist Fr. Ripperger is asking everyone to say this Prayer until the Election is Resolved"

A good friend of the Catholic Monitor got this from a group message. She said "exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger is asking everyone to say this prayer until the election is resolved": Prayer of Command In His Name and by the power of His Cross and Blood, I ask Jesus to bind any evil spirits, forces and powers of the earth, air, fire, or water, of the netherworld and the satanic forces of nature.  By the power of the Holy Spirit and by His authority, I ask Jesus Christ to break any curses, hexes, or spells and send them back to where they came from, if it be His Holy Will.  I beseech Thee Lord Jesus to protect us by pouring Thy Precious Blood on us (my family, etc.), which Thou hast shed for us and I ask Thee to command that any departing spirits leave quietly, without disturbance, and go straight to Thy Cross to dispose of as Thou sees fit.  I ask Thee to bind any demonic interaction, interplay, or communications.  I place N. (Person, place or thing) under the protectio

High-profile Lawyer Barnes: Amy Coney Barrett would be a Disaster

High-profile trial lawyer Robert Barnes who deals in civil, criminal and constitutional law reported on Twitter that Amy Coney Barrett would be a disaster. The Barnes Twitter report shows that Coney Barrett has " sid[ed] with the government on the lockdowns, on uncompensated takings, on excusing First Amendment infringements & Fourth Amendment violations... [and] exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps... [and] hid behind precedent... to prohibit pro-life activists from exercising their free speech ." The Avvo.com lawyer directory reports that attorney "Robert Barnes embraces the challenge to defend the little guy and stand up for what is right. This is why he left the prestigious Yale Law School, whom publicly stated their unwill

If Kamala Harris' Father is part White & part Jamaican African and her Mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black?

  Is Joe Biden's running mate really Black? If Kamala Harris' father is part white and part Jamaican African and her mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black? Reason.com tries to figure it out: Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's pick to be the Democratic Party's vice-presidential nominee, is the daughter of an Indian immigrant mother and a Jamaican immigrant father. Her father, as I understand it, has ancestors of both European and African origin. [Welcome new Volokh readers. FYI, I've been working on a book on the American Law of Race, with this forthcoming article the first relevant output. My own opinion is that Ms. Harris should be deemed American, period, but there is no such box on government forms, and if you decline to state your race, someone will decide for you… First things first. There is no multiracial or mixed-race category in American law in any jurisdiction. Nor is there an Indian category. So Harris cannot be legally Indian, nor can she b