FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: The prophecy of St. Francis
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Shortly before he died, St. Francis of Assisi called together his followers and warned them of the coming troubles, saying:

1. The time is fast approaching in which there will be great trials and afflictions; perplexities and dissensions, both spiritual and temporal, will abound; the charity of many will grow cold, and the malice of the wicked will increase.

2. The devils will have unusual power, the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff and the Roman Church with loyal hearts and perfect charity. At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavour to draw many into error and death.

3. Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it.

4. There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the immense mercy of God.

5. Then our Rule and manner of life will be violently opposed by some, and terrible trials will come upon us. Those who are found faithful will receive the crown of life; but woe to those who, trusting solely in their Order, shall fall into tepidity, fo rthey will not be able to support the temptations permitted for the proving of the elect.

6. Those who preserve their fervour and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and, persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent men from the face of the earth. but the Lord will be the refuge of the afflicted, and will save all who trust in Him. And in order to be like their Head, [Christ] these, the elect, will act with confidence, and by their death will purchase for themselves eternal life; choosing to obey God rather than man, they will fear nothing, and they will prefer to perish rather than consent to falsehood and perfidy.

7. Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days JESUS CHRIST WILL SEND THEM NOT A TRUE PASTOR, BUT A DESTROYER."

(Except for breaking up the narrative into numbered paragraphs and adding bold print for emphasis, the prophecy is presented without any alteration, as given in the Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi, Washbourne, 1882, pp. 248-250)
Very interesting.

In all the prophecies I have ever read, I have never seen this one by St. Francis. 

Sounds very much applicable to today.  Especially this:

(01-21-2011, 07:55 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]7. Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days JESUS CHRIST WILL SEND THEM NOT A TRUE PASTOR, BUT A DESTROYER."
(01-21-2011, 08:34 PM)MaterLaeta Wrote: [ -> ]Sounds very much applicable to today.  Especially this:
(01-21-2011, 07:55 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]7. Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days JESUS CHRIST WILL SEND THEM NOT A TRUE PASTOR, BUT A DESTROYER."

Prophetic, indeed.
Yeah, this is an interesting one. I think it's easy to jump to the conclusion that it relates to our time--I admit doing so the first time I read it. However, looking at it more closely, the relative immediacy of it as well as the parts about people being put to death made me think of the schism under the anti-pope Clement VII, known as "the Executioner" for certain massacres he carried out. So I actually looked this up in the book cited in the OP and, sure enough, there is a footnote that says. "Mark of Lisbon and others think that this prophecy received its accomplishment in the great schism which desolated the Church after the election of Urban VI in the year 1378." (Urban VI's contentious election was opposed by the antipope Clement VII). The same footnote does note however that it could refer also refer to some future event.

However, there may be an issue with the reliability of this prophesy in general. The intro to the book in the OP says this book is a translation for devotional purposes of Luke Wadding's compilation published in 1650 (technically it is a translation of an 1848 German translation of Wadding's work). The problem is, according to Fr. Paschal Robinson's introduction to his 1905 translation of St. Francis' works, the Wadding work contains spurious texts found in second-hand sources. Robinson specifically mentions Mark of Lisbon's compilation as being especially problematic in this regard.

The biggest offender in regards to producing spurious material were the Spirituals, a grouping of heretical sects of Franciscans (including the Fraticelli, Celestines, etc.)--this text may be from them given specific events of their history. Unfortunately, after St. Bonaventure's death, the Franciscan order became a mess with a lot of division. The Spirituals accused the Franciscan order of betraying their rule and the Church at large for abandoning the Gospel. After certain controversies with Rome, under St. Celestine V's reign they were actually given permission to do what they wanted without interference. When he resigned, Boniface VIII was elected and papal opposition to their order was renewed and they were excommunicated. They in turn rejected his rise to the papal throne as uncanonical. From his election through the papacy of John XXII, who definitively condemned their heresy that absolute poverty was necessary for sanctity and that the Church could not own property (and who they called a heretic and antichrist), severe measures were taken to stamp them out, the Dominicans playing an important role in this as inquisitors. A relative many were burned at the stake during this period.

The prophesy in the OP fits these events (if the events are viewed from the Spirituals' point of view) pretty much exactly. There was a major split in the Franciscan Order. They were considered schismatic and heretical when they believed it was the mainstream Order and Church who had fallen into error. They were "persecuted" by a Pope elected under unusual circumstances (which they expressly declared uncanonical) and by another who they called antichirst, and they were put to death by the authorities as a result of their resistance. This gives me a suspicion that some Spiritual may have concocted this prophecy to legitimize their actions--it just fits too perfectly.







(01-22-2011, 08:04 AM)SaintSebastian Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, this is an interesting one. I think it's easy to jump to the conclusion that it relates to our time--I admit doing so the first time I read it. However, looking at it more closely, the relative immediacy of it as well as the parts about people being put to death made me think of the schism under the anti-pope Clement VII, known as "the Executioner" for certain massacres he carried out. So I actually looked this up in the book cited in the OP and, sure enough, there is a footnote that says. "Mark of Lisbon and others think that this prophecy received its accomplishment in the great schism which desolated the Church after the election of Urban VI in the year 1378." (Urban VI's contentious election was opposed by the antipope Clement VII). The same footnote does note however that it could refer also refer to some future event.

However, there may be an issue with the reliability of this prophesy in general. The intro to the book in the OP says this book is a translation for devotional purposes of Luke Wadding's compilation published in 1650 (technically it is a translation of an 1848 German translation of Wadding's work). The problem is, according to Fr. Paschal Robinson's introduction to his 1905 translation of St. Francis' works, the Wadding work contains spurious texts found in second-hand sources. Robinson specifically mentions Mark of Lisbon's compilation as being especially problematic in this regard.

The biggest offender in regards to producing spurious material were the Spirituals, a grouping of heretical sects of Franciscans (including the Fraticelli, Celestines, etc.)--this text may be from them given specific events of their history. Unfortunately, after St. Bonaventure's death, the Franciscan order became a mess with a lot of division. The Spirituals accused the Franciscan order of betraying their rule and the Church at large for abandoning the Gospel. After certain controversies with Rome, under St. Celestine V's reign they were actually given permission to do what they wanted without interference. When he resigned, Boniface VIII was elected and papal opposition to their order was renewed and they were excommunicated. They in turn rejected his rise to the papal throne as uncanonical. From his election through the papacy of John XXII, who definitively condemned their heresy that absolute poverty was necessary for sanctity and that the Church could not own property (and who they called a heretic and antichrist), severe measures were taken to stamp them out, the Dominicans playing an important role in this as inquisitors. A relative many were burned at the stake during this period.

The prophesy in the OP fits these events (if the events are viewed from the Spirituals' point of view) pretty much exactly. There was a major split in the Franciscan Order. They were considered schismatic and heretical when they believed it was the mainstream Order and Church who had fallen into error. They were "persecuted" by a Pope elected under unusual circumstances (which they expressly declared uncanonical) and by another who they called antichirst, and they were put to death by the authorities as a result of their resistance. This gives me a suspicion that some Spiritual may have concocted this prophecy to legitimize their actions--it just fits too perfectly.

Thanks for doing the research on this.  My gut reaction was this "prophecy" was a spurious one introduced by a schismatic group and I was interested to see that this is a real possibility.
(01-22-2011, 11:26 AM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-22-2011, 08:04 AM)SaintSebastian Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, this is an interesting one. I think it's easy to jump to the conclusion that it relates to our time--I admit doing so the first time I read it. However, looking at it more closely, the relative immediacy of it as well as the parts about people being put to death made me think of the schism under the anti-pope Clement VII, known as "the Executioner" for certain massacres he carried out. So I actually looked this up in the book cited in the OP and, sure enough, there is a footnote that says. "Mark of Lisbon and others think that this prophecy received its accomplishment in the great schism which desolated the Church after the election of Urban VI in the year 1378." (Urban VI's contentious election was opposed by the antipope Clement VII). The same footnote does note however that it could refer also refer to some future event.

However, there may be an issue with the reliability of this prophesy in general. The intro to the book in the OP says this book is a translation for devotional purposes of Luke Wadding's compilation published in 1650 (technically it is a translation of an 1848 German translation of Wadding's work). The problem is, according to Fr. Paschal Robinson's introduction to his 1905 translation of St. Francis' works, the Wadding work contains spurious texts found in second-hand sources. Robinson specifically mentions Mark of Lisbon's compilation as being especially problematic in this regard.

The biggest offender in regards to producing spurious material were the Spirituals, a grouping of heretical sects of Franciscans (including the Fraticelli, Celestines, etc.)--this text may be from them given specific events of their history. Unfortunately, after St. Bonaventure's death, the Franciscan order became a mess with a lot of division. The Spirituals accused the Franciscan order of betraying their rule and the Church at large for abandoning the Gospel. After certain controversies with Rome, under St. Celestine V's reign they were actually given permission to do what they wanted without interference. When he resigned, Boniface VIII was elected and papal opposition to their order was renewed and they were excommunicated. They in turn rejected his rise to the papal throne as uncanonical. From his election through the papacy of John XXII, who definitively condemned their heresy that absolute poverty was necessary for sanctity and that the Church could not own property (and who they called a heretic and antichrist), severe measures were taken to stamp them out, the Dominicans playing an important role in this as inquisitors. A relative many were burned at the stake during this period.

The prophesy in the OP fits these events (if the events are viewed from the Spirituals' point of view) pretty much exactly. There was a major split in the Franciscan Order. They were considered schismatic and heretical when they believed it was the mainstream Order and Church who had fallen into error. They were "persecuted" by a Pope elected under unusual circumstances (which they expressly declared uncanonical) and by another who they called antichirst, and they were put to death by the authorities as a result of their resistance. This gives me a suspicion that some Spiritual may have concocted this prophecy to legitimize their actions--it just fits too perfectly.

Thanks for doing the research on this.  My gut reaction was this "prophecy" was a spurious one introduced by a schismatic group and I was interested to see that this is a real possibility.


I second Jayne's thanks for doing this research.  It is one of my pet peeves to see things taken out of context - probably from my protestant background. 

It is good to know the actual circumstances - Thank you. :) :)
Besides fitting the events of the Great Schism, all the seven points fit the events of our times as well.

The only dubious point is no.2 which speaks of a man not canonically elected being raised to the Pontificate, thus an anti-Pope. The only way this squares with our situation is to delve into sedevacantism/sedeprivationism/sirianism but these topics are not allowed to be discussed here.
(01-22-2011, 02:55 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]Besides fitting the events of the Great Schism, all the seven points fit the events of our times as well.

The only dubious point is no.2 which speaks of a man not canonically elected being raised to the Pontificate, thus an anti-Pope. The only way this squares with our situation is to delve into sedevacantism/sedeprivationism/sirianism but these topics are not allowed to be discussed here.
I suppose if you lived during the Protestant rebellion, when millions of Catholics were ushered into protestantism and corruption in the CHurch was rampant, you would have applied this prophecy to back then. But a scan of Church history (From the Catholic Encyclopedia) reveals that in the century following the death of St. Francis there were multiple schisms and antipopes:

Pope John XXII (1316-34) was opposed by Nicholas V, antipope (1328-1330).
Urban VI (1378-89) was opposed by Robert of Geneva ("Clement VII"), antipope (1378-1394).
Boniface IX (1389-1404) was opposed by Robert of Geneva ("Clement VII") (1378-1394), Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), antipopes
Innocent VII (1404-06) was opposed by Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), antipopes
Gregory XII (1406-15) was opposed by Pedro de Luna ("Benedict XIII") (1394-1417), Baldassare Cossa ("John XXIII") (1400-1415), and Pietro Philarghi ("Alexander V") (1409-1410), antipopes
Eugene IV (1431-47) Opposed by Amadeus of Savoy ("Felix V"), antipope (1439-1449)

A century after that, Fr. Martin Luther led many Catholics away from the Church and was identified the pope as being the antichrist. So every generation will find ways of force-fitting propheciesand private revelation to their own day..
Welcome back Vetus Ordo!

Great to see you here again!

I know we have had our differences in the past, but I always respected your wisdom.

Are you back in the Catholic Church now?
(02-24-2014, 02:01 PM)Old Salt Wrote: [ -> ]Welcome back Vetus Ordo!

Great to see you here again!

I know we have had our differences in the past, but I always respected your wisdom.

Are you back in the Catholic Church now?

The posts of Vetus here are from 2011.


C.
Pages: 1 2