Fake Monk Bianchi Declares That Fatima Is a Fake

Fatima Perspectives ^ | December 17, 2015 | Christopher A. Ferrara

[ebb tide]

When Pope Francis was elected, I was entirely positive about the new pontificate, focusing in my commentary on the new Pope’s apparent devotion to the Blessed Virgin and his respect for the Fatima event, as shown by his request to the Patriarch of Portugal to consecrate his entire pontificate to Our Lady of Fatima. But I confess that at the time I knew next to nothing about the former Cardinal Mario Bergoglio. I did not know, for example, that he was “famous for his inconsistency.”

After two-and-a-half years of experience with this pontificate, however, I was not the least surprised to learn that Francis had named the fulminating, anti-Fatima, anti-Marian heretic Enzo Bianchi as a consultor to the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity. This phony “monk,” a layman who calls himself “Prior” of the phony interdenominational “monastery” of the “Bose Community,” was rightly denounced by Monsignor Antonio Livi, former dean of the faculty of philosophy at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome, as “substantially atheist” and a “prophet of the end of Catholicism” whose speeches are “a rhetorical device for his propaganda in favour of a humanism that is nominally Christian but substantially atheist.”

The heretic Francis has appointed to a pontifical council detests Marian devotion and despises the Message of Fatima. Mary, says the phony monk, “can not be the reference point for the advancement of women in the Church.” As for Fatima, Bianchi pronounces Our Lady’s apparitions there a “swindle.” Why? Because according to him, any God “who talks about the persecuted Christians, but forgets the six million Jews annihilated in Germany is not a credible God.”

So, Francis has elevated to Vatican prominence a layman in a monk’s costume who dares to declare what God would had to have included in the Fatima prophecies in order to maintain the divine credibility. But as Vito Messori has observed: “Bianchi should remember that Communism (Lenin seized power in 1917) has at least 100 million deaths on its conscience, and there would not have been Hitler, if there had not previously been Lenin.” In fact, Nazism — that is, National Socialism — is precisely the outcome of the spread of the “errors of Russia” that Our Lady predicted, it having arisen in pre-World War II Germany as a rival to Marxism-Leninism. And during WWII the Hitler-Stalin Pact, pledging mutual non-aggression, ended only when Hitler invaded Poland.

For Bianchi, notes Msgr. Nicola Bux, a Consultor to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “the deconstruction of the papacy in its present form is an especially important concern…” That being so, Bianchi’s appointment to a pontifical council is entirely in keeping with the ongoing deconstruction of the Church by its diabolically disorientated leadership, which seems intent (if it were possible) on committing ecclesial suicide.

Put the rise of this enemy of Our Lady of Fatima — by the Pope’s own hand — into the file marked “Third Secret.”

[HossB86]

Read post 299. Your problem is solved there.

To claim the two are exactly the same is intellectually dishonest.

Funny. You're the only one making that claim; you must REALLY like straw men! Seems like I said "interrelated."

Please. You've out-logiced yourself enough.

Hoss

[metmom]

Yes, they can.

And while I haven’t seen anyone yet actually dispute that SOMETHING happened, the debate is over what exactly it was rather than whether it really happened.

So far Catholics don’t seem to have gotten that. They are still debating as if others don’t believe an event occurred.

So while something happened, it’s the source of it that is under dispute. Any apparition, no matter who they claim to be, that does or says anything that glories or exalts anyone but Jesus, is demonic.

If y’all believe everything you’ve been told, I have some land in FL to sell you, real nice beach front property. Honest.

[metmom]

Wide is the road and broad is the path that leads to destruction and many there are who find it.

Yes, LOTS of people believing the same thing can be wrong.

[vladimir998]

“Read post 299. Your problem is solved there.”

It’s YOUR problem and it’s not solved there or anywhere else. You posted two DIFFERENT definitions. When called on it you said one essentially is a “sub-set” of the other which really doesn’t work since you posted the more restrictive definition before the broader one and even insisted on telling me that I had been told this before. Then you claimed the two definitions are interrelated. They are still two DIFFERENT definitions. There is no logical way to get around that. Again, horses are mammals but not all mammals are horses. Salvation is a spiritual concern but not all spiritual concerns are salvation. It’s undeniable that you posted TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS.

“Funny. You’re the only one making that claim;”

The “claim” is true. If I’m the only one making it it only means that I am the only one telling the truth. You posted two DIFFERENT definitions. You said one was a subset of the other - which makes no sense since you posted the subset then BEFORE what you claim is the real definition. Yet you also claim I had been told the “subset” before. The only possible explanation is that you posted two DIFFERENT definitions.

“you must REALLY like straw men! Seems like I said “interrelated.””

You did. But before you said that you said: “Sola Scriptura, as you’ve been told, means that Scripture alone is sufficient for salvation.” So you said sola scriptura is “Scripture alone is sufficient for salvation.” Thus, you are saying that sola scriptura is ONLY about salvation and that scripture = salvation. Quibble all you want BUT THAT IS WHAT YOU WROTE. Then you wrote: “sola Scriptura has to do with the sufficiency of Scripture as our supreme authority in all spiritual matters.” Then you claimed one was the subset of the other. Then you claimed the two are interrelated. Which is it?

“Please. You’ve out-logiced yourself enough.”

Nope. You posted TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS. That’s all there is to it. You even told me I had been told the former definition before and then posted a different definition after that. There’s no getting out of this: you posted TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS.

You have repeatedly proved the point I made in post 248: “The problem is with Protestant anti-Catholic apologists the meaning sometimes changes from post to post...That is one of several definitions I have been given here over the years. Just one of several.”

[MHGinTN]

How many Mormons are there? ...

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Any apparition, no matter who they claim to be, that does or says anything that glories or exalts anyone but Jesus, is demonic.

Yes. There is no reason to think that these apparitions were demonic. Otherwise the devil's kingdom is divided against itself.

Regardless, Catholics are not obligated to believe any apparition, even public apparitions approved by the Church.

And you're free to regard the apparitions any way you wish. Just don't expect Catholics to take your non-biblical rejection of the teaching authority of Christ's Church, or your non-biblical dogma of "the Bible alone" seriously.

[MHGinTN]

The rising hysterics indicates the degree of desperation to shun the truth of what the Word of God declares, in favor of standing on the magicsteeringthem dictates.

The Scriptures are in fact sufficient because it is the Author of them Who awakens the reliance upon the truth of what The Word of God declares.

The point of explaining the analogy approach in the bread and wine is lost to one so steeped in the magicsteeringthem that actual truth of what Jesus was teaching is lost to that one. In such a state of blindness, all manner of blasphemies and heresies are palatable to the catholic or Mormon mind. The Mormons have a similar 'authority' to the magicsteeringthem. They too have inveigled to the degree of deep blindness to truth of what The Word of God declares.

[MHGinTN]

Um, the devil's kingdom IS divided against itself. It is coming to an end. Haven't you heard? Continuous lying can only result in being divided against itself. If it were able to make positive advances it would not need continuous lying!

[metmom]

People cannot come back from the dead.

Apparitions, no matter who they claim to be, are demonic posing as real people.

Satan himself can appear as an angel of light.

So, yes, Satan’s kingdom IS divided, hence it will not stand.

[HossB86]

Like I said -- post 229 solves your problem.

You're welcome, and Merry Christmas.

Hoss

[MHGinTN]

Oh now you’ve done it! The poster can harp on two different posts pointed to! LOL

[vladimir998]

“Like I said — post 229 solves your problem.”

Like I said — the fact that you posted TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS of sola scriptura is YOUR problem not mine.

“You’re welcome, and Merry Christmas.”

You’re welcome, Christmas is Catholic. Enjoy our holy day. Christmas = Christ’s Mass.

[MHGinTN]

Bwahahahahaha ... how revealingly presumptuous of a catholic! LOL, Happy Holidays, vlad.

[HossB86]

Oh, please. Now that is just funny. And sad. So very, very sad.

Hoss

[MHGinTN]

http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/Christmas_TheRealStory.htm

A little educational reading for you Vlad, to spur your Holiday forward perhaps.

[HossB86]

Yup -- Vlad was impaled on his own stake... or hoist on his own petard. Take your choice.

:D

Hoss

[MHGinTN]

Are you sure you want to own this, vlad?

Some of the most depraved customs of the Saturnalia carnival were intentionally revived by the Catholic Church in 1466 when Pope Paul II, for the amusement of his Roman citizens, forced Jews to race naked through the streets of the city. An eyewitness account reports, “Before they were to run, the Jews were richly fed, so as to make the race more difficult for them and at the same time more amusing for spectators. They ran… amid Rome’s taunting shrieks and peals of laughter, while the Holy Father stood upon a richly ornamented balcony and laughed heartily.”

As part of the Saturnalia carnival throughout the 18th and 19th centuries CE, rabbis of the ghetto in Rome were forced to wear clownish outfits and march through the city streets to the jeers of the crowd, pelted by a variety of missiles. When the Jewish community of Rome sent a petition in1836 to Pope Gregory XVI begging him to stop the annual Saturnalia abuse of the Jewish community, he responded, “It is not opportune to make any innovation.”[6] On December 25, 1881, Christian leaders whipped the Polish masses into Antisemitic frenzies that led to riots across the country. In Warsaw 12 Jews were brutally murdered, huge numbers maimed, and many Jewish women were raped. Two million rubles worth of property was destroyed.

[MHGinTN]

Are you sure you want to own this, vlad?

Some of the most depraved customs of the Saturnalia carnival were intentionally revived by the Catholic Church in 1466 when Pope Paul II, for the amusement of his Roman citizens, forced Jews to race naked through the streets of the city. An eyewitness account reports, “Before they were to run, the Jews were richly fed, so as to make the race more difficult for them and at the same time more amusing for spectators. They ran… amid Rome’s taunting shrieks and peals of laughter, while the Holy Father stood upon a richly ornamented balcony and laughed heartily.”

As part of the Saturnalia carnival throughout the 18th and 19th centuries CE, rabbis of the ghetto in Rome were forced to wear clownish outfits and march through the city streets to the jeers of the crowd, pelted by a variety of missiles. When the Jewish community of Rome sent a petition in1836 to Pope Gregory XVI begging him to stop the annual Saturnalia abuse of the Jewish community, he responded, “It is not opportune to make any innovation.”[6] On December 25, 1881, Christian leaders whipped the Polish masses into Antisemitic frenzies that led to riots across the country. In Warsaw 12 Jews were brutally murdered, huge numbers maimed, and many Jewish women were raped. Two million rubles worth of property was destroyed.

[vladimir998]

“Bwahahahahaha ... how revealingly presumptuous of a catholic! LOL, Happy Holidays, vlad.”

Christmas = Christ’s Mass. It’s not presumption. It’s just what the word means. Deny it all you like, but that’s what the word means.

[vladimir998]

“Oh, please. Now that is just funny. And sad. So very, very sad.”

It’s not sad. It’s just true: Christmas = Christ’s Mass. That’s what the word means. What is sad is that someone would post TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS of sola scriptura and then claim they were not different.