|Back to Back Issues Page|
A Catholic Priest Defends the Revelations Given to Maria Divine Mercy
November 06, 2013
In Defense of “Maria Divine Mercy”: A Response to Dr. Mark Miravalle
by Fr. Jun
This article is a response by the author, a priest based in the Philippines, to Dr. Mark Miravalle’s objections to the prophecies and messages given to “Maria Divine Mercy”.
Dr. Miravalle: Contention 1 (below are the exact words of Dr. Miravalle, as lifted verbatim from his article cited above)
Just a few samples of these widespread and serious errors are as follows:
The assertion that Pope Benedict XVI was the “last true Pope on earth” and “the next Pope” will be the “False Prophet”: “My beloved Pope Benedict XVI is the last true Pope on earth…. The next Pope may be elected by members within the Catholic Church, but he will be the False Prophet” (April 12, 2012).
The message directly contradicts Catholic teaching as to the legitimacy of a validly elected Pope. The message implies that an “anti-pope” can come from a valid conclave, which constitutes a false or “heretical” position. The alleged message goes on to claim, by deduction, that Pope Francis is in fact the “False Prophet.” All of this is a reprehensible rejection of Catholic councils, catechisms, and canon law on the legitimacy of a validly elected Pope and the proper response of a “religious assent of mind and heart to the manifest mind of the pope, even when he is not speaking infallibly” (Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, 25), which every member of the Catholic faithful is obliged to offer to the present Holy Father.
Fr. Jun: Refutation 1(below is the response of Fr. Jun to the above contention of Dr. Miravalle)
No problem with legitimacy We have no problem as to the legitimacy of the elected pope resulting from a valid conclave. But “not everything legal is moral” so to speak. Legitimacy here applies to human rules as an aspiring president can usurp the presidency with a military junta or an aspiring king can assassinate the present king so he can sit on the throne. If they are now in power it becomes legitimate. The real mandate of authority however comes from God of whom the chosen leader shares authority. This mandate of authority from heaven can be overturned by virtue of our free will to choose what we really want through any form of manipulation or blackmail. God will not intervene with our free will. Nevertheless, the fruit of a clean manipulation is still legitimate.
Masons control the Vatican MDM has written quite a number of times that the Vatican is infiltrated with Masons. Just Google it in the internet just like this site: http://www.hazankert.com/200705_vatican_masons.html
It is very awesome that many of the most powerful cardinals, bishops, and priests who work in the Vatican are actually Masons. Mary has already prophesied in Fatima that Satan will sit even in the pinnacle of the Church and many cardinals will sell their red hats to Satan. Sad to say, as there were many good popes in history, there are also equally bad popes and they have been elected or chosen or appointed or whatever the means as to how they landed on the Chair of Peter, and they are all legitimate.
An alleged Masonic pope was even elected into office http://www.whale.to/b/popexxii.html as the case of Pope John XXIII. This is difficult information, but MDM’s messages only substantiate the persistent suspicion on the long period of Masonic influence in the Church even in the papacy. And yet, John XXIII is legitimate. Is there a connection that the same pope said that the secret of Fatima does not deal with his pontificate so as not to release it? Pope John XXIII announced that he was not releasing the secret as specified by Sr. Lucia because it “does not concern the years of my pontificate” (cited in De la Sainte Trinite, M. The Whole Truth About Fatima Vol. III p557)
The Line: Pope Francis is in fact the “False Prophet.” We are yet to see from our very own eyes. The messages of MDM are prophetic and therefore can be proven with the passage of time. But the signs are beginning to emerge. Pope Francis defies Vatican norms and protocols, in fact has defied tradition. It is not in the tradition of the Church that women be represented as apostles in the rite of washing the feet on a Holy Thursday. The defiance could give a positive signal that a crack is opened as to the cause of extreme feminism. This could also be a precursor of a bigger defiance of Catholic tradition in the approval of the ordination of women. JP2 has already closed this issue by saying that “it is not in the tradition of the Church that women are ordained.”
Traditions are so important because they precede even the writing of the holy bible. Catholics were already celebrating the Eucharist even before the Scriptures were codified. Nevertheless, Catholics will still follow the new pope but this time according to the dictates of their enlightened conscience as the papacy is just one portion of the whole big Church. The Church is defined in liturgy as the “community of believers.” The papal hierarchy therefore is just a small part of a big whole. The exact theological explanation is that “we are the Church.”
If a false prophet sits in the Chair of Peter, it does not mean that the gates of hell have already prevailed in the Church. The Church that Jesus built on the foundation of the blood of his apostles is a perfect Church. But the Church is also an institution run by sinful people and this is where Satan can conquer through the use of immense power of control and deceit.
I am a religious and I know that obedience is a vow, but in morality, when you are no longer convinced that theology is sound and correct, then you may act according to the rule of conscience. It would now therefore mean that whatever the pope will say contrary to Catholic faith and morals, the faithful can safely refuse but it does not mean that the faithful will no longer be in unity with the pope. To disagree is not to drift away. And if, the new pope will endorse the unacceptable to become acceptable, then the false prophet is seated. Added to this, it is also very annoying why a Jesuit pope would choose a Franciscan for a namesake. Why not Ignatius of Loyola the founding father of his society?
|Back to Back Issues Page|