Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/init.php on line 43 Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/init.php on line 91 Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/init.php on line 95 Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/init.php on line 103 Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/init.php on line 114 Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/init.php on line 118 Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/init.php on line 126 Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/init.php on line 195 Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/init.php on line 402 Strict Standards: Declaration of vB_Database_MySQLi::db_connect() should be compatible with vB_Database::db_connect($servername, $port, $username, $password, $usepconnect) in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/class_core.php on line 1106 Strict Standards: Declaration of vB_Database_MySQLi::select_db_wrapper() should be compatible with vB_Database::select_db_wrapper($database = '', $link = NULL) in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/class_core.php on line 1106 Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/class_core.php on line 2330 Deprecated: Function set_magic_quotes_runtime() is deprecated in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/class_core.php on line 1505 Strict Standards: Non-static method vB_Session::fetch_substr_ip() should not be called statically, assuming $this from incompatible context in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/class_core.php on line 1589 Strict Standards: Non-static method vB_Shutdown::init() should not be called statically, assuming $this from incompatible context in /home/ronconte/catholicplanet.net/html/forum/includes/class_core.php on line 2333 The Date of The Miracle [Archive] - CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group

PDA

View Full Version : The Date of The Miracle


daytonafreak
21st January 2015, 03:07 AM
I would like to open a discussion as to when you think The Miracle will happen and thus The Warning. I would like to start with a question.

It was my understanding that one of the visionaries at Garabandal said something to the effect of "The Great Miracle will not be on a feast day of Our Lord or Our Lady?" Can anyone confirm this?

Ron Conte
21st January 2015, 04:38 AM
I would like to open a discussion as to when you think The Miracle will happen and thus The Warning. I would like to start with a question.

It was my understanding that one of the visionaries at Garabandal said something to the effect of "The Great Miracle will not be on a feast day of Our Lord or Our Lady?" Can anyone confirm this?

Yes, that's right.

daytonafreak
21st January 2015, 02:23 PM
Yes, that's right.


And concerning this point it is my understanding that the visionary (I am almost certain that it was Conchita) made this statement after looking at a liturgical calendar, but I am assuming it was a liturgical calendar from Spain. Or What is probably more likely is that she just made this statement from memory. i.e. she knew the day of The Miracle and she knew that she was not required to attend Mass that day.

Now, I know that different countries have different Holy Days of obligation. I see that at the current time The Ascension is not a Holy Day of obligation in Spain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_day_of_obligation

I am assuming that in 1963, around about the year Conchita might have made this statement, The Ascension was not a Holy Day of obligation in Spain. But maybe someone who speaks Spanish can confirm this?

Ron Conte
21st January 2015, 03:37 PM
The assertion is not that the day of the miracle is not a holy day of obligation. I believe the assertion was made by the Virgin Mary to Conchita, not by Conchita after looking at a liturgical calendar.

The Virgin Mary's point was, in my interpretation, to indicate that the day of the Miracle was May 12th rather than May 13th (our Lady of Fatima).

Blessed Imelda died on May 12th, but since her death occurred on the day before the Feast of the Ascension (May 13th that year), at the end of the vigil Mass for that Feast, her feast day is celebrated on May 13th. So either May 12th or May 13th could be interpreted as the day of her feast.

daytonafreak
21st January 2015, 04:51 PM
The assertion is not that the day of the miracle is not a holy day of obligation.

Ok, so that was never the assertion, I understand that, but what I am getting at is the person who made the assertion most likely meant "holy day of obligation", see below.

I believe the assertion was made by the Virgin Mary to Conchita, not by Conchita after looking at a liturgical calendar.

The Virgin Mary's point was, in my interpretation, to indicate that the day of the Miracle was May 12th rather than May 13th (our Lady of Fatima).

Ok, so your example here is Our Lady of Fatima. Our Lady of Fatima, for example, is only a minor feast day and was only put on the universal calendar in 2002. I don't think that whoever made the original assertion intended to rule out minor feast days of Our Lord and Our Lady, for the liturgical calendar is absolutely riddled with minor feast days of this type.
http://www.catholictradition.org/Mary/marian-feasts.htm#MAY

Including this one: Our Lady of Power May 12 [Aubervillers, France]


Rather, my opinion is that whoever made the assertion was speaking through the eyes of a little girl who lived in a remote village in Spain, figuratively. and most likely knew nothing of minor feast days, only holy days of obligation, and further more, only holy days of obligation in Spain.

My point in all this is that I believe it is much more likely that The Miracle occurs on a very prominent day, and that "the assertion" that we are talking about makes much more sense when interpreted as above.

daytonafreak
21st January 2015, 05:04 PM
So, my opinion as of right now, is that The Miracle occurs on May 13th 2021.

That day is:

The Ascension (not a holy day of obligation in Spain, but it is in other places)
Our Lady of Fatima
Our Lady of the Most Blessed Sacrament
Dedication of Our Lady of Martyrs Basilica, Rome
Bl. Imelda Lambertini

There is a strong connection between all of these feast days, for Bl. Imelda died on The Ascension, Her feast day also coincides with Our Lady of Fatima, and she is a Martyr of The Most Blessed Sacrament.

daytonafreak
21st January 2015, 05:51 PM
Dedication of Our Lady of Martyrs Basilica, Rome
http://romanchurches.wikia.com/wiki/Santa_Maria_ad_Martyres

"Traditionally the consecration was on 13 May, which was then celebrated as the feast-day of all Roman martyrs not specially celebrated by name. Pope Gregory III (731-41) consecrated a chapel with the same dedication at the old St Peter's, and this was the origin of the 1 November date. The 13 May celebration was suppressed, but it is still kept in this church as the dedication date."

Our Lady of the Most Blessed Sacrament (also see St. Peter Julian Eymard)
http://tomperna.org/2013/05/13/mondays-with-mary-our-lady-of-the-most-blessed-sacrament/

Ron Conte
21st January 2015, 06:42 PM
There are a couple of problems with your proposal. First, there is no basis for changing "not a feast day" of our Lord or our Lady into "not a holy day of obligation". The Ascension is a holy day of obligation under Canon Law in the Latin Rite (though Bishops can exempt from this obligation). It is a feast day of our Lord, and May 13th is a feast day of our Lady (of Fatima).

Second, the late timing of your proposal, in 2021, does not have support from any other points of your eschatology. You don't have a comprehensive eschatology to support that year, or any year. Basically, you are working from too few pieces of information as your starting point.

daytonafreak
22nd January 2015, 02:12 AM
There are a couple of problems with your proposal. First, there is no basis for changing "not a feast day" of our Lord or our Lady into "not a holy day of obligation". The Ascension is a holy day of obligation under Canon Law in the Latin Rite (though Bishops can exempt from this obligation). It is a feast day of our Lord, and May 13th is a feast day of our Lady (of Fatima).

Put yourself in the shoes of Conchita at that time, she doesn't know the difference between major or minor feast days. All she knows is that there are certain days besides Sunday that she is required to attend Mass, and in Spain she is not required to attend Mass on Ascension Thursday. Our Lady of Fatima is a minor feast day which was only approved by the local bishop in Portugal in 1930 and then not added to the main calendar in 2002. Again, Conchita knew none of this. I think whoever made the assertion is putting it in a way that Conchita would understand.

Second, the late timing of your proposal, in 2021, does not have support from any other points of your eschatology. You don't have a comprehensive eschatology to support that year, or any year. Basically, you are working from too few pieces of information as your starting point.

You are absolutely right Ron, I do not have a comprehensive eschatology, but you do and I have read nearly everything you have written on the subject. I believe it is just a matter of tweaking a few of your ideas which I will briefly go through here.

1. One of your reasons for picking an earlier date was the age of Joey Lomanagino, but he is now deceased. So that point is mute.
2. Another reason was the three Popes prophecy but I believe it needs to be taken in the proper context. Consider this video at 1:21:12
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoqpuYK826o
"Conchita said to her mother, Pope John is dead, Our Lady told me now that there will be only three more Popes and then it will be the end of time but not the end of the world" First notice the context, "Pope John is dead" it is not "his reign has ended" but "Pope John is dead". Benedict XVI reign is over, but he is not dead. Also consider the rest of the wording "and then it will be the end of time", well, it is not the end of the world, so end of what time? I think it is the end of the time to repent before The Warning. Also, we all know the controversy about the three Popes prophecy. About how it is possible that Conchita is not counting Pope Paul I due to his short reign. See this link:
http://whatisgarabandal.blogspot.com/2009/03/some-little-known-information-regarding.html

about halfway down, point number three which I will post below.

daytonafreak
22nd January 2015, 02:13 AM
3. The four Popes after Pope John XXIII rather than three… This is rather startling news to those who had read only about “three more Popes…” Actually this was reported in a book in the German Language published in the early 1990’s, but it seems that most followers of the Garabandal drama were not aware of this and apparently are still unaware of this. Conchita said at the time of the death of Pope John XXIII that Our Lady had told her that there would be three more Popes and then would come the end of the times.
Mr. Albrecht Weber, the author of the book in German mentioned above, had become involved in Garabandal in 1963 and became friendly with Conchita. On November 14, 1965, the day after the last apparition of Our Lady in Garabandal, Mr. Weber interviewed Conchita at her home in the presence of her mother. There was also present with Mr. Weber an interpreter. During that interview, it came out that when Conchita had spoken on the very day that Pope John XXIII died of “Three more Popes and then would come the end of the times,” her mother had asked her several questions.
In response to one of her mother’s questions, Conchita responded that Our Lady had actually said that there would be four more Popes but that She was not counting one of them. When Conchita’s mother heard that she strictly forbade Conchita to repeat that again as her mother feared there would be erroneous interpretations and much gossip. People might wrongly believe that one of the Popes might be false or bad, etc. During that conversation with her mother, Conchita also said that Our Lady had told her that one of the Popes would have a very short reign.

daytonafreak
22nd January 2015, 02:36 AM
So the three popes that need to be deceased are:

Paul VI
Pope John Paul II
Pope Benedict XVI

Pope Emeritus Benedict is 87 years old and will be 88 this April. Can he live another 5 to 6 years? I will let you decide. But, the prophecy that we are discussing just says that after these three Popes will have passed. We do not know how much time there might be between the death of Pope Benedict and the death of Pope Francis. Do you see what I mean? This prophecy can be interpreted a number of different ways, so I am not sure? Are you?

Lastly, regarding the claim that if The Warning is in 2021 it would not leave enough time for the remaining events of the Tribulation, well, all I can say is this,

Mathew 24:22

{24:22} And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh would be saved. But for the sake of the elect, those days shall be shortened.

I think this passage refers to the second part of the tribulation but the first part is a reflection of the second part.

Since eschatology is speculative these are just my opinions.

Brother
22nd January 2015, 04:17 PM
So the three popes that need to be deceased are:

Paul VI
Pope John Paul II
Pope Benedict XVI

I don't understand well why Pope JP1 is not counted. Is it because he had a very short reign?

If we count him, there would be three popes who passed to a better life counting after John 23.

Paul VI, JP 1 & 2.

tapinu33
23rd January 2015, 05:29 PM
Does it say the Popes have to be in sucession? What if Pope Francis died before Benedict, anything could happen.

Hands of Truth
17th February 2015, 12:12 AM
Does it say the Popes have to be in sucession? What if Pope Francis died before Benedict, anything could happen.

Based on the above idea, is it possible that Pope Francis dies or is assassinated BEFORE Pope Emeritus BenedictXVI dies and subsequently Pope Emeritus BenedictXVI is re elected as pope? or could he automatically become pope again in such a scenario. Would this be an event rarely seen in the Church? I may be way off though.

Ron Conte
17th February 2015, 01:42 AM
Based on the above idea, is it possible that Pope Francis dies or is assassinated BEFORE Pope Emeritus BenedictXVI dies and subsequently Pope Emeritus BenedictXVI is re elected as pope? or could he automatically become pope again in such a scenario. Would this be an event rarely seen in the Church? I may be way off though.

He would not automatically become Pope. Also, if a man is elected as Pope he can decline the office.

Conchita made the three popes prophecy after Pope Paul VI was elected. But obviously, at the present time, we can assume that the count of three popes does not include Paul VI. Otherwise, we would be past the count of three. So the expression "three more" must refer to the next three, after the pope in office at the time (Paul VI). And that conclusion leaves us with the following list of the subsequent 3 popes:

1. Pope John Paul I
2. Pope John Paul II
3. Pope Benedict XVI

So the tribulation begins during the reign of the subsequent Pope (Pope Francis), and the "three Popes" represent the interim period between Paul 6 and the Pope who reigns at the start of the tribulation.

Hands of Truth
17th February 2015, 11:41 AM
He would not automatically become Pope. Also, if a man is elected as Pope he can decline the office.

Conchita made the three popes prophecy after Pope Paul VI was elected. But obviously, at the present time, we can assume that the count of three popes does not include Paul VI. Otherwise, we would be past the count of three. So the expression "three more" must refer to the next three, after the pope in office at the time (Paul VI). And that conclusion leaves us with the following list of the subsequent 3 popes:

1. Pope John Paul I
2. Pope John Paul II
3. Pope Benedict XVI

So the tribulation begins during the reign of the subsequent Pope (Pope Francis), and the "three Popes" represent the interim period between Paul 6 and the Pope who reigns at the start of the tribulation.

I understand that but I am throwing in another consideration: The tribulation begins during the reign of Pope Francis, Pope Francis is assassinated or dies, Pope Benedict XVI is reelected (to steady the ship). That scenario would still not negate the three popes prediction. It would also be an exceptionally rare event. Has a pope ever been reelected?

Ron Conte
17th February 2015, 12:30 PM
I understand that but I am throwing in another consideration: The tribulation begins during the reign of Pope Francis, Pope Francis is assassinated or dies, Pope Benedict XVI is reelected (to steady the ship). That scenario would still not negate the three popes prediction. It would also be an exceptionally rare event. Has a pope ever been reelected?
No Pope has been reelected. I don't see any indication that Benedict will be reelected. The rules for electing a Pope do not prohibit it, but there's no way that it would happen. Benedict resigned because, in his words:

"I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry…. in order to govern the barque of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me."

So he lacked the strength in mind and body. He would not be elected by the Cardinals. He would not accept if elected.

I think that Pope Francis will eventually resign, then Cardinal Arinze will be elected (Pope Pius XIII). Then in a short time, three Popes will be killed. Pius 13 will be captured during WW3 and will die in captivity. I'm not sure how Francis and Benedict, each having resigned, will die.

tapinu33
18th February 2015, 08:46 PM
Do you think Ron that we will have 2 Pope Emeritus's at the same time? Why would Pope Francis resign? In light of the threat from Isis to attack Rome maybe Pope Francis will be captured? I pray for the Holy Father.

Ron Conte
18th February 2015, 09:31 PM
Do you think Ron that we will have 2 Pope Emeritus's at the same time? Why would Pope Francis resign? In light of the threat from Isis to attack Rome maybe Pope Francis will be captured? I pray for the Holy Father.

I think that Pope Francis will teach doctrines, true but liberal doctrines, and will make decisions on discipline (whether wise or unwise, I don't know), resulting in many conservatives leaving the Church, including a few Cardinals, more than a few Bishops, and quite a few priests. There will also be much controversy. Eventually, this conflict over his teachings and decisions may result in his resignation. He is a humble and holy Pope.

No, I don't believe Pope Francis will be captured. His successor (Pope Pius 13) will be captured during the War.

Pope Pius X saw a vision of a successor of his, who had the same name (i.e. Pius), fleeing Rome over the dead bodies of members of the clergy. This vision agrees with my interpretation of Sacred Scripture, that a Pope during the first part of the tribulation will flee Vatican City and Rome because of World War 3.

Contrition
14th October 2015, 03:57 PM
Blessed Imelda died on May 12th, but since her death occurred on the day before the Feast of the Ascension (May 13th that year), at the end of the vigil Mass for that Feast, her feast day is celebrated on May 13th. So either May 12th or May 13th could be interpreted as the day of her feast.[/QUOTE]

Ron:

I was reading from a Facebook page that the Saint in question was a boy martyr.
The person cites the following information to back up his claim:

Book title: "She went in Haste to the Mountain" Book 3 Ch 7


I don't have the book, so I was wondering what your thoughts are?

Ron Conte
14th October 2015, 04:48 PM
that point is explained in my booklet:
http://www.amazon.com/Warning-Consolation-Miracle-2016-ebook/dp/B00QL8AP78/

in the section called "Vision of a Martyr"