We will have a mirror site at http://nunezreport.wordpress.com in case we are censored, Please save the link

Monday, October 28, 2013

Is the pope systematically undermining Church teachings and replacing them with new world order doctrines

As Petrus Romanus the Final Pope is Here co-written by myself and Thomas Horn was recently released in a new edition, recent actions by Pope Francis necessitate a response. Of course, his arrival was controversial. Pope Benedict XVI’s February 11, 2013 announcement was unprecedented because the last pope to resign was Gregory XII in 1415 nearly six hundred years ago. We did not venture this hypothesis uninformed. In his book, Pope Benedict XVI Light of the World, when asked if he thought it appropriate for a pope to retire he responded:

“If a pope clearly realizes that he is no longer physically, psychologically and spiritually capable of handling the duties of his office, then he has a right and, under some circumstances, also an obligation to resign.”

We correlated Pope Benedict’s predisposition to retire with the work of the Jesuit scholar Rene Thibaut who predicted the final pope on Malachy’s list would arrive in April of 2012. Of course, the year 2012 came and went with seemingly no fulfillment. Consequently, we were a little disappointed when it seemed like Thibaut was mistaken. As it turns out, Thiabut was far more correct—astoundingly so—than anyone would ever imagine until February 2013! According to the NY Times:

That the resignation was long in the planning was confirmed by Giovanni Maria Vian, the editor of the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, who wrote on Monday that the pope’s decision “was taken many months ago,” after his trip to Mexico and Cuba in March 2012, “and kept with a reserve that no one could violate.”

In other words, Pope Benedict officially and secretly resigned right when Thibaut—and we—speculated he would in 2012, and then his February 11, 2013 public affirmation was quickly punctuated by a dramatic lightning bolt striking St. Peter’s basilica. Indeed, it came to pass and many former skeptics began to take Petrus Romanus seriously.

According to the prophecy of St. Malachy, Peter the Roman has arrived. Pope Francis, formerly known as Jorge Mario Bergoglio the son of Italian immigrants to Argentina, has assumed the 112th position on Malachy’s famous list. While shallow skeptics were quick to point out “his name is not Peter” their complaint betrays ignorance and a lack of imagination. 

We stated from the beginning that the title “Peter the Roman” was symbolic. All popes claim apostolic succession from Peter and for this reason it is called the Petrine office. They claim to sit on the chair of St. Peter and in this way all popes are Peters. For instance, this Tom Horn interview by World Net Daily prior to Pope Francis election:

Regardless, Horn said he’s always maintained that it doesn’t take someone whose Christian name is Peter to fulfill the prophecy. “In fact, if any Italian is elected, that would be a fairly transparent fulfillment,” he said. Moreover, he argued, “in a very general sense, every pope could be regarded as ‘Peter the Roman,’ and in that sense, this could be the last one.”

Scholars who study the prophecy unanimously come to a similar conclusion—that the title “Petrus Romanus” (Peter the Roman) was symbolic and not indicative of a birth name. Over 60 years ago, Thibaut similarly rejected the possibility of a pope literally named Peter and wrote that the name symbolized the totality of the papacy:

We therefore reject the Roman appointed Peter as the impossible Peter II. There is only one Peter, the first of the Roman pontiffs, and he saw in his many successors. He still to serve in the final as in the first persecution. We believe Petrus Romanus represents all the Roman Pontiffs from St. Peter to the recipient Gloria Olivae.

In Thibaut’s reckoning all the ambitions and pretensions of the papal dynasty are now encompassed in one man, Pope Francis. Could this be the case? Perhaps it actually marks the dissolution of the papacy as Rome is judged in accord with “City of Seven Hills will be destroyed” at the culmination of the Malachy prophecy.

The Argentine Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio has chosen Francis as his papal name, a first in tribute to Francis of Assisi. 

It is noteworthy that St. Francis of Assisi’s long Italian name is Francesco di Pietro di Bernardone, a title that can accurately be viewed as “Peter the Roman” from the final line in the Prophecy of the Popes. Since the phrase that supplanted the birth name Giovanni is Francesco diPietro, and that by sainthood, it is safe to say that by choosing Francis of Assisi’s name, he in effect chose Francesco di Pietro, and he is unlikely to prefer truncation of the Pietro element since Catholicism esteems Peter as the rock of the church and spuriously maintains he was the first pope. 

Rome was an empire and a city so Bergoglio’s Italian ancestry arguably meets the Roman aspect in a similar way. Accordingly, many argue that Bergoglio has fulfilled the Peter the Roman title with his choice of papal name.

As the 2013 conclave concluded Bergoglio said he chose the original papal name Francis after St. Francis of Assisi when Cardinal Claudio Hummes exhorted him to “remember the poor.” The reader might recall that our book Petrus Romanus cited an apocalyptic prediction by Pope Francis’ namesake, made soon after St. Malachy’s Prophecy concerning a Final Pope:

“At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavor to draw many into error and death… Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it…for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.”

Was there something uncannonical about the election of Pope Francis? Well for starters, Pope Benedict XVI’s retirement makes for an unprecedented situation. When a pope is elected, the Church expects that he will remain in office until his death. I wonder what its like to be infallible one day and wake up fallible the next? Before now, only five popes unambiguously resigned with historical certainty, all between the tenth and fifteenth centuries. Arguably, that makes Bergoglio’s election suspect but, apparently, not a violation of cannon law. While Pope Francis represents many firsts, overall, the most interesting aspect is his status as the first ever Jesuit Pope.

The whistle blower insider, Malachi Martin, former Jesuit and advisor to three popes, who wrote a best-selling expose, The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, accusing the order of systematically undermining Church teachings and replacing them with new world order doctrines. The first lines of the book state:

A state of war exists between the papacy and the Religious Order of the Jesuits—the Society of Jesus, to give the Order its official name. That war signals the most lethal change to take place within the ranks of the professional Roman clergy over the last thousand years. And, as with all important events in the Roman Catholic Church, it involves the interests, the lives, and the destinies of ordinary men and women in their millions.

It seems rather obvious that the first Jesuit pope (Pope Francis) indicates the Jesuits won that war and to the victors go the spoils. Most probably a new level of ecumenism that will culminate in the one world religion, after all, the word catholic means “universal.” 

We suggest he could be the biblical false prophet “Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon” (Revelation 13:11). In regard to “horns like a lamb,” we expect Pope Francis may first usher in a new liberalized ecumenism rather than hard core old line papal domineering. New details are coming out daily but as of this writing, the media are reporting that Cardinal Bergoglio supported homosexual unions in Argentina as a “lesser of evils” solution to that countries homosexual lobby.

Interestingly, the Pope also criticized conservative Catholics for protesting abortion and same-sex marriage. When asked about homosexual priests who had infiltrated the Roman system he replied,“Who am I to judge?” startling words from the so-called vicar of Christ. He also implied atheists can be saved by obeying their conscience. 

As a result, secular humanists, abortionists and homosexuals are beside themselves with joy. Even more offensive to traditional Catholics, Pope Francis gave communion to infant holocaust perpetrators Joseph Biden and Nancy Pelosi. A priest expressed his disgust, “At a Mass during which our new Pope emphasized the duty public officials – and all the rest of us – have to protect the weakest among us, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi have the audacity to receive Communion while publicly renouncing their responsibility to protect the weakest among us.” Yet, it is not the audacity of the two baby murdering politicians that is in question; it is the utter lack of resolve displayed by Pope Francis. Perhaps, in a supreme irony, Petrus Romanus will mark the dissolution of the papacy into limp wristed liberalism?

Credit to Cris Puttnam

No comments:

Post a Comment