Fr. Gruner has the videos up.
#51
DK, I'll double sip sip to that.
tim
Reply
#52
Interesting news here.
In Catherine A. Pearson's video toward the end she mentions two things she has only seen on blogs. The two things are Pope Benedict XVI's,  two disappointments from before he was elected. The first being the handling of Bishop Le Fevbre and the other being Fatima, but he said his hand was forced in Fatima. So she said the scholars there should find out Who forced his hand. I'm not a real internet space traveler and the only place I have heard that is right here in the deep end of the tank. So, are we on those great white shark's sonar ??? Enquiring minds would like to know ??? 
tim
Reply
#53
(05-06-2010, 04:27 PM)timoose Wrote: So, are we on those great white shark's sonar ??? Enquiring minds would like to know ???   
tim

I thought everyone knew this was the think-tank for the Right Wing Conspiracy.
Reply
#54
(05-06-2010, 04:27 PM)timoose Wrote: Interesting news here.
In Catherine A. Pearson's video toward the end she mentions two things she has only seen on blogs. The two things are Pope Benedict XVI's,  two disappointments from before he was elected. The first being the handling of Bishop Le Fevbre and the other being Fatima, but he said his hand was forced in Fatima. So she said the scholars there should find out Who forced his hand. I'm not a real internet space traveler and the only place I have heard that is right here in the deep end of the tank. So, are we on those great white shark's sonar ??? Enquiring minds would like to know ???   
tim

I addressed that issue in posting #29 to this thread and explained why I don't find that theory to be supportable. 

I further believe that Fr. Gruner and Fr. Kramer knew about the 1996 comments made by Cardinal Ratzinger, and that they deliberately omitted these comments from their publications because of what Cardinal Ratzinger said about Vatican II:  "In a certain sense, the Second Vatican Council was the realization of the Virgin's message and, in summoning it, Pope John XXIII did the essential in answer to the Virgin's message."  I believe they also omitted the Cardinal Ratzinger quote from EWTN because Ratzinger explicitly stated that any apparitions warning about the Apocalypse would not be from the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Reply
#55
(05-06-2010, 05:19 PM)unknown Wrote:
(05-06-2010, 04:27 PM)timoose Wrote: Interesting news here.
In Catherine A. Pearson's video toward the end she mentions two things she has only seen on blogs. The two things are Pope Benedict XVI's,  two disappointments from before he was elected. The first being the handling of Bishop Le Fevbre and the other being Fatima, but he said his hand was forced in Fatima. So she said the scholars there should find out Who forced his hand. I'm not a real internet space traveler and the only place I have heard that is right here in the deep end of the tank. So, are we on those great white shark's sonar ??? Enquiring minds would like to know ???   
tim

I addressed that issue in posting #29 to this thread and explained why I don't find that theory to be supportable. 

I further believe that Fr. Gruner and Fr. Kramer knew about the 1996 comments made by Cardinal Ratzinger, and that they deliberately omitted these comments from their publications because of what Cardinal Ratzinger said about Vatican II:  "In a certain sense, the Second Vatican Council was the realization of the Virgin's message and, in summoning it, Pope John XXIII did the essential in answer to the Virgin's message."   I believe they also omitted the Cardinal Ratzinger quote from EWTN because Ratzinger explicitly stated that any apparitions warning about the Apocalypse would not be from the Blessed Virgin Mary.

I'm not sure I follow you here, unknown. If the reason Cardinal Ratzinger switched gears had nothing to do with his being forced to, then why? For what reason do you think he decided to do a 180 on Fatima?
"Not only are we all in the same boat, but we are all seasick.” --G.K. Chesterton
Reply
#56
If as Fr. Kramer said, then Cardinal Ratzinger's "hand was forced" is true, then I believe the former Cardinal Secretary of State, Angelo Sodano, would be the one forcing his hand as he did with regard to the Maciel scandal.  Sodano prevented Ratzinger from further investigating Maciel until the latter became Pope Benedict XVI.  Sodano and Dziwizc both received large cash sums from the LC's, which to any outside observer seems like hush money, not to mention money to provide influence.  Believe me, Sodano has great influence and power even today, despite no longer being Secretary of State.  One interesting aside is something I found on wikipedia pertaining to Ven JPII's former personal secretary (Dziwizc):

Information on cooperating clergy

Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz has forbidden a priest from revealing information on clerics cooperating with communist secret services


Now the question remains:  can we trust this source from Fr. Kramer who said that Ratzinger's "hand was forced" with regard to the Vatican line on Fatima on 6/26/00?  We may never know.
Reply
#57
I just listened to one of the crossfire sections of the Fatima Challenge and was quite disturbed that Fr. Gruner believes that B 16 may in fact be that "Bishop dressed in white" if you get my drift, and could happen by 2017 if he does not die before that... Also he stated he agrees that the current Pope will release the true documents on the 3rd Secret before then. He also said it will actually be the next Pope who does the formal consecration. What does every think of these prophecies and should one take that with a grain of salt?? ???

Reply
#58
(05-07-2010, 10:21 AM)crusaderfortruth3372 Wrote: I just listened to one of the crossfire sections of the Fatima Challenge and was quite disturbed that Fr. Gruner believes that B 16 may in fact be that "Bishop dressed in white" if you get my drift, and could happen by 2017 if he does not die before that... Also he stated he agrees that the current Pope will release the true documents on the 3rd Secret before then. He also said it will actually be the next Pope who does the formal consecration. What does every think of these prophecies and should one take that with a grain of salt?? ???

I, too, was quite disturbed by that.  Apparently, Fr. Gruner knows a mystic who has revealed that information to him.  But, and I may be off here, didn't Fr. Gruner also say the same thing about HHPJPII?  Regardless, this sort of prognosticating does NOT help the cause--IMHO.
Reply
#59
He never said John Paul II was going to do the consecration he just hoped he would. If the time limit is indeed 100 years the same as the King of France then Pope Benedict releasing the secret and leaving the consecration to his successor makes sense.Pope Benedict XVI is facing the same enemies as John Paul II. Remember Benedict XVI  appointed the Polish Bishop that turned out to be a commie spy, and the press discovered that John Paul II had brought a few in without knowing.  If the secret is released and it is as explosive as Fr. Malachi Martin said it will be, that will change the balance of power, what is commonly referred as the tipping point. I'm  looking to May 13 when he goes to Fatima to see if and what happens.
tim
Reply
#60
Father Gruner's suggestion for the chastisement was based on 100 years from 1917.  But Our Lady in 1917 said that she would come back to ask for the Consecration of Russia.  She did that in an appearance to Sister Lucy in 1929 and that message from the BVM was only communicated to the Pope in 1930.  So the 100 years could expire in 2029 or 2030.

Interestingly, on April 13, 2029,  an Asteroid called Apophis will fly past Earth only 18600 miles (30000 km) above the ground.  It is set to return for a near pass of Earth on April 13, 2036, which is Easter Sunday that year.  Exactly how the Earth's gravity affects the asteroid in 2029 may determine just how close the asteroid comes in 2036.  I'm just saying...
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)