"Br". Dimond's video on St. Malachy's Prophecy of the Popes
The danger is they weave in facts and catch young people looking for tradition. Imagine if you have an inkling something's wrong, and were taught the faith the new and improved way, and stumble on these guys. They are there with all the pre-formed answers. These guys are a danger to earnest seekers. Two Lucies says it all.

(12-30-2013, 08:28 AM)Tim Wrote: Two Lucies says it all.

Alright, Tim, I'm going to set you straight about this.

This can REALLY HAPPEN!  At my local parish yesterday morning, St. Francis de Sales in West Philly, there was the pastor, Fr. John Hand, at the altar, while his DOUBLE was sitting a little behind and to the right of me, wearing a burgundy hoody -- and with his right arm hanging over the back of the pew, no less!  It was his twin brother!

Well, I already knew he had a twin brother.  I found out back in September when I attended the parish spaghetti dinner after the Saturday vigil Mass.  I walk into the parish hall and there "Father" is already, in his street clothes, getting the lasagna ready to serve.  I'm like, what?  How did he get here so fast?  A little later, the REAL Fr. John comes walking in and then I discovered the TRUTH.

Well, like the Patty Duke theme song says, "You can lose your mind."  And I definitely lost mine!  :pazzo:

(12-29-2013, 07:10 PM)anonymoususer2589 Wrote: From the Most Holy Family Monastery,

Br. Dimond made a video about St. Malachy's Prophecy of the Popes.

I don't know if someone already shared the link in this forum, so I apologize if someone already did. 

*Note: Br. Dimond is a Sedevacantist and considers Pope Francis to be an Antipope - a view which I do not share.

Sedevacantism isn't a mere "view."

Bro Dimond isn't a monk or a brother.

Most Holy family Monastery isn't a monastery, nor is it a monastic order.

The so-called prophesies of St. Malachy are iffy at best, and the latter ones are fraudulent at worst.

Now isn't that curious Triumph guy ?? I would think the ones tampered with are from the period the prophecies were lost in the Vatican Library. Those appear to be written by a totally informed person and exactly to the point. Prophecy is not written like that, take a look at Apocalypse. More the last ones are veiled which fits the way prophecy is written.

You are right - the later prophesies are more vague, but they are also fraudulent.
(12-30-2013, 06:02 PM)triumphguy Wrote: You are right - the later prophesies are more vague, but they are also fraudulent.

Why ??

er... 'cos they are made up.
(12-30-2013, 11:56 PM)triumphguy Wrote: er... 'cos they are made up.

I agree. I also think it is hard to call them "prophecies" when these are just a few words and are rather vague and at times downright silly. And somehow they become terribly inaccurate after 1590, and lo and behold they were "discovered" in the Vatican archives in the 1590's.
Dr. Donald S. Prudlo is Associate Professor of Ancient and Medieval History at Jacksonville State University in Alabama. He is also Assistant Professor of Theology and Church History at the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College. He says this:

" When one begins to consider the contents though, the problems multiply. A person who picks up the “prophecies” will be astounded at how spot-on accurate they are until one arrives at 1590.  After that they turn into short, vague utterances that a local horoscope page would be embarrassed to print: “Undulating man,” “Religious Man,” “from a good religion.” These are a selection of the absurd post 1590s entries, which many have correctly called unworthy of the name “prophecy.” To take one egregious example, the phrase “Farm Animal” was supposed to apply to the brilliant light of learning, Benedict XIV. I am surprised the author did not include “Tall Dark Stranger” in his list."



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)