No, it’s not that I dislike Trump. It’s just that I’m not comfortable with the idea of a restoration in the Church being tied to a temporary political mandate of just four—or possibly eight—years, which could leave the Holy See in the hands of the Democratic Party if they returned to power. Besides, Trump is not above good and evil, nor does he exactly embody the ideal of a committed Christian prince, especially considering how he backtracked on the pro-life issue during his last campaign, and that bizarre AI-generated video he shared last year, which suggested a kind of Nebuchadnezzar complex in a possibly rebuilt Gaza. This runs contrary to the first homily of Pope Leo, who said, “Disappear, so that Christ may appear.” By the way, what Bannon implied was that Prevost was a liberal—not someone Trump would have put in power. What we’re seeing in this pontificate, however, is a ministry so Christ-centered that no Christian could accuse Prevost of being ambiguous about the fundamental dogmas of the faith.
Who cares if the church was restored by a President who has temporary power. If it means it gets cleaned out it gets cleaned out. The Democratic party will never be in power again. The only reason the Democratic party had power was because of the giant tax payer paid propaganda machine which is being dismantled. As for Gaza and pro-life stuff, we only see things on the surface. What goes on behind the scenes pushing the actual reasons for these moves we likely will never know. But we now see Trump wanting to recognize a Palestinian state, which is completely 180 to his previous statements. Trump got rid of federal funding for abortions as well. What happened last year is clearly not happening this year. Also we don't know that Trump wouldn't want Prevost as Pope, to conclude otherwise is an assumption. We saw that Trump was very happy to see that Prevost is now Pope from his statements. https://x.com/AlArabiya_Eng/status/1920852042911822110 https://x.com/JKash000/status/1920531766705586369/photo/1
Those who care are the ones who understand that this would be linked to a temporary mandate—especially since Trump is much older than Pope Prevost. And I don’t believe, not in a million years, that the Democratic Party will never return to power—unless there’s some kind of divine intervention during this pontificate. By the way, I acknowledged that Trump had an excellent first term precisely because of his pro-life stance—the same standard I used to criticize what he did during his second term. I’m not obligated to endorse everything he does, as if he spoke or acted ex cathedra from Washington or from his Twitter account. Still, that doesn’t mean I should accept slander such as, “You don’t like Trump, that’s why you’re concerned about his possible influence in the last conclave.” By the way, what Bannon said and the way Leo began his ministry show that he is above any ideological group—thank God.
I could only find reports in Portuguese about Bannon's criticism of Prevost. If anyone finds something in English, it would be helpful to share it here so everyone can evaluate it.
Time will tell. Because of the fact that you keep making a false dichotomy that somehow it is impossible for an intervention by Trump in the Vatican to be miraculous or a good thing. That somehow this could only be a negative thing. Also, I never said or even implied anywhere that anyone has to believe everything Trump says unconditionally. This is a strawman. Which could be exactly why Trump likes him. Trump wanting a competent Pope seems to be out of the question for you. At any rate, I enjoyed speaking with you Luan. I have zero interest in forcing this any further. Time will tell, and if my intuition is right we will be seeing a lot of positive things in the future for the church and humanity in general.
I feel the same way, but as I mentioned, I don't view the potential economic assistance from the U.S. government to the Holy See favorably, knowing that such support would be a fragile link, subject to renewal every four years. I've come to the conclusion that there are so many contradictory theories about the conclave (such as the claim of Parolin's support for Prevost) that they cancel each other out. Moreover, there are people who read the forum and might lose faith in the Church as a divine institution because of something I'm not even sure is true. Therefore, I believe it's best for me to step away from this debate. Peace be with you.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Trump was involved in the Conclave or influenced the outcome. I find the idea simply preposterous. Now the CIA and/ or the deep state? That’s another question. But they work towards their own agenda, not that of the current administration.
The only proof we have that the deep state interfered in the church comes from the CIA (JFK Files) and this was limited to the US in the 60's, and we are only getting it 60 years later. There is however a whole string of coincidences, which while clearly are not evidence, are compelling none the less in regards to Trump's involvement. If Trump did clear out the Vatican, we will never ever find out.
I don’t see Pres Trump influencing the Pope. He is not even Catholic and doesn’t know doctrine. I pray some day he will. But he does like to poke people. He is always doing that, it’s his sense of humor. And he likes free speech. And he especially likes to create diversions,he moves very quickly. Gets the attention on one thing to make his move on another. A good chess player. He needs to be careful though, and so does our new Pope. Too many bad guys out there.
Don’t expect the Church to be saved by a political system that is opposed to the Church’s teachings. As Marie-Julie Jahenney said, democracy is of the devil.
So it can only be saved by Kings? God hates monarchies yet used them anyway. There is an old saying, "God uses evil for good." I don't put limits on how God will execute His plan.
The entire point of the Great Monarch prophecies is that he’s a French European, not an American, who will rule over most of Europe, not America. He’ll be crowned in Paris, not Washington D.C. He has to be descended from St. Louis, and he is about 40 when he becomes King. So not Trump definitely. And where did you get the idea that Catholicism is opposed to monarchism? That’s certainly not the traditional Catholic position. Monarchism is much more in line with Catholic teaching than “Americanism”. Marie-Julie Jahenny (who is one of the main seers who promoted the Great Monarch prophecy) stated that democracy was directly from satan. It’s also condemned in the Syllabus of Errors. The idea that the American revolution was some great Christian triumph over “tyranny” is simply not true, the founding fathers were heretics and many were Freemasons who denied the divinity of Our Lord. Let’s also not forget the great number of royal saints. Who will save the Church? God alone can. He will directly intervene, and set things right.
Who cares, prophecy is conditional, things change. I was obviously being tongue in cheek, but also somewhat serious. We are currently seeing major moves towards the world's well being from Trump and not a prophesied French King. We could have very well avoided some of the more serious aspects of those prophecies. I said God, not Catholicism. It's directly from God. Right in the Bible. I am not even talking about this or supporting Americanism. MJJ is not a saint, she is a mystic. Very accurate in some respects, but I will take the Bible over her any day of the week. Democracy is likely evil, but how God chooses to operate is up to God. So I do not see how this is relevant. I don't understand how some people think God's intervention and the US saving the Church are mutually exclusive. God can use whomever however He chooses. Did you see the bullets that almost killed Trump last year? That was divine intervention, and there were Marian signs all over it. There is no reason that God couldn't have used the US to save the church. We have seen Marian signs all over Trump since his first presidency. As well it doesn't matter what the founding fathers did, or if they were masons, or if the syllabus of errors condemns the American revolution. None of this disproves that God could have used Trump as a means to save the church.
I asked my Parish Priest one time about some of the seers and modern day prophets. He told me “No one has a hotline to God”. I think my Parish Priest is smarter than me. I’ve always been skeptical of giving too much credence to unapproved prophets. But that’s just me.
This isn’t the time for the Great Monarch. He’ll appear shortly before the triumph of the Immaculate Heart. Some prophecies are conditional, some are not. The Warning and the Miracle aren’t, the Chastisement is, but the Great Monarch and Angelic Pontiff have been promised for over a millennia. They’re not conditional. The verses in 1 Samuel should not be read as God condemning all forms of monarchism, but rather the fact that God did not desire a King for the Israelites YET. God had already told Abraham and Jacob they would have kings for descendants, and Deuteronomy gives instructions for the selection of a King for the Israelites. In Genesis 49, God said that the kings will come from the tribe of Juda. God desired for the people to wait for David, not to select Saul and then have all the destruction he caused. God clearly prefers monarchy, after all he is the King of Heaven, not secular democratic president of Heaven (I’m being a bit humorous here but the point still stands). The Catholic Church has never interpreted the verses in Samuel as a condemnation of monarchism. I never said MJJ was a saint I said she was a seer (which is synonymous with mystic). I’d rather personally accept her visions and the condemnations of many other holy men and women than support the form of government which has supervised the secularization of society and the damnations of millions to eternal hellfire with the doctrine of religious equality. Maybe God is going to use Trump, maybe God isn’t, but he certainly isn’t a holy man and he does not deserve our admiration. He promotes grave sins. Plus we can’t really say that his “miraculous salvation” from a bullet is from Our Lady just because it happened on the 13th of the month. Many things happen on the 13th of every month and we can’t automatically assume it’s somehow tied to Our Lady. Sometimes God just lets things happen. This man can’t even be bothered to convert to the one true religion. If he persists in heresy and sin he is in danger of eternal perdition. No insiders have said Trump interfered in the election. No prophecies say America will save the Church. No, rather it’s Russia who will teach America a lesson in conversion - how much humility will that require on the part of us proud Americans!
I feel pretty much the same. I got my soul in trouble by following a condemned apparition for about 8 years. It was not only a huge waste of time but I’m still healing from my involvement in it.
If it isn't in sacred scripture it is conditional. God also allowed for divorce, doesn't mean he doesn't hate it. God hates monarchies and He is extremely clear about it, and he made it clear directly to a Hebrew prophet. God isn't double minded. God doesn't go around saying that he hates monarchies for Jews, but in reality loves it because he made a promise. He knew that the Hebrews were going to rebel as they always do. In the Bible God points out that he clearly hates monarchies, but not once does it say anything about democracies. Also, the Pope is voted by democracy of Cardinals. Is this evil? Why don't Popes just appoint their next successors? What does this have to do with God choosing to use who he wants? Your preferences do not impact God's Will. There wasn't just one event, there are many. IE the fatima statue in the white house, the ave maria at the white house, the many posts he put out regarding Our Lady. There isn't a politician in modern times who has respected Our Lady this much, and I am only naming a few things. Like I said, if it isn't in scripture it is conditional. Also, just because no seers predicted this doesn't mean anything. As well, everyone calls Americans proud, which they are. But they aren't nearly as arrogant as the rest of the world. Europeans and Canadians are far far more arrogant on average in my experience.
65 "In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son."26 Christ, the Son of God made man, is the Father's one, perfect and unsurpassable Word. In him he has said everything; there will be no other word than this one. St. John of the Cross, among others, commented strikingly on Hebrews 1:1-2: In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word - and he has no more to say. . . because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behaviour but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.27 There will be no further Revelation 67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called "private" revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church. Christian faith cannot accept "revelations" that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfilment, as is the case in certain nonChristian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such "revelations". https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PH.HTM The reason all private revelation is conditional is because the only stuff that isn't conditional, are the prophecies that are related to God's plan of salvation. Even the vast majority of prophecy in sacred scripture was conditional. Every private revelation since the Bible regarding chastisement has always been a do this or get this situation.
