Skip to comments.Cardinal Schönborn: There Will Be "Signs and Wonders" From the Pope
Posted on 08/15/2014 4:08:49 PM PDT by ebb tide
"Reforms", the magical magic word was actively worked from Vienna's archbishop in this interview. "Changes" and "pace of change" would also be the "hot potatoes" like the approval of remarried divorcees to Communion and the abolition of priestly celibacy, says the Cardinal. With the only restriction of the little word "perhaps". Schönborn, is so certain of the papal reforms that he spoke of "signs and wonders" that will be "done" by Pope Francis.
(Excerpt) Read more at eponymousflower.blogspot.com ...
“Signs and Wonders” from the Pope?
Interesting choice of words.
The term “signs and wonders” is already mentioned in the Bible and they are not necessarily a good thing.
True, makes me want to stay at least the width of a continent away from this guy.
God is punishing the West. Obama and Francis are the chosen instruments, chosen by the very self-designated elite who hate God.
“The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.”—2 Thess.
As you said, not necessarily a good thing.
I’m taking it as fair warning, intentional or otherwise
“... abolition of priestly celibacy, ...”
The priests have done that already, but will the Pope allow the priests to marry each other or nuns to wed each other (in states where queer marriage is allowed)?
It is Cardinal Schonberg I wonder about. All signs point that he should exit the Catholic Church, since he doesn’t follow the Church’s teaching on marriage and most likely more.
You might be interested in the Louis DeBoer article excerpt on "tyranny" that I have on my profile page.
As Pope Francis would say, “Who am I to judge?”
I note your comments on the meaning of the words “an establishment of religion.”
99.9999% of the time, these words are said to mean that “the government may not establish a church.”
I have long suspected, in light of the fact that many or most of the states in 1789 had an established church, that Congress may not make any law respecting any of THOSE churches. I.e., Congress is prohibited from DISestablishing any church. Which means that, through the 1920s doctrine of “incorporation,” by which the First Amendment forbids any state from establishing a church, the First Amendment has been stood on its head—in this and many other respects.
The Cardinal says it is “frightening” that Western governments are looking “inward” suspicious of their own people. It is frightening. With the continuing decline of morality, countries move closer and closer to dictatorship because their populaces are increasingly untamed by the pursuit of virtue. Our founders knew our founding documents were made only for an upright, moral citizenry. Perverse freedom, license, ironically leads to a new slavery.
As Pope Benedict said and Pope Francis has repeated, “a dictatorship of relativism is being formed”.
Yes! Just look at Pope Francis and his treatment of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.
And then look at the drunkard Timothy Dolan's treatment of Holy Innocents Church and their now ex-pastor, Rev. Justin Wylie.
Could u please give a short description of those two situations
The charge against the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate was that a cult of personality was forming around their leader. I like the Latin Mass but don’t find it sufficient evidence that Pope Francis is fighting against it because of one incident. Some are taking the election of Francis as a sign to war against tradition(sort of the same way they hijacked Vatican II for their agenda).But I don’t think it’s fair to ascribe their actions to Francis. Dolan disappointed me with his positive statement about the person who came out as gay.
All charges against the FFOTI were false. With the leader under house arrest, there was no reason to continue to suppress the offerings of TLMs.
And as far as Dolan, Pope Francis is even more positive about homos.
I didn’t care for Francis’ early “Who am I to judge?” comment but his first encyclical “Lumen Fidei” does say marriage is between a man and a woman in section 52.
But as an archbishop, he encouraged his fellow Argentinian bishops to not challenge a motion for the state to recognize “homosexual unions” in that country.
His fellow bishops rebuffed him; but the law still passed.
He advised the bishops not to oppose civil unions but to oppose gay marriage. I think he made an error in judgment in that case but as you said, the bishops overruled him. And then Argentina went on to legalize gay marriage.