Pope says evolution, Big Bang are real

Profile: Pope Francis (01) feature

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis has waded into the controversial debate over the origins of human life, saying the big bang theory did not contradict the role of a divine creator, but even required it.

The pope was addressing the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which gathered Monday at the Vatican to discuss “Evolving Concepts of Nature.”

“When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,” Francis said.

“He created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment.”

Francis said the beginning of the world was not “a work of chaos” but created from a principle of love. He said sometimes competing beliefs in creation and evolution could co-exist.

Pope Francis tells an audience that the Big Bang does not contradict the “creative intervention of God”. He says, “on the contrary, it requires it”. Rough Cut (no reporter narration). Newslook

“God is not a divine being or a magician, but the Creator who brought everything to life,” the pope said. “Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”

Unlike much of evangelical Protestantism in the U.S., Catholic teaching traditionally has not been at odds with evolution. In 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed there was no opposition between evolution and Catholic doctrine. In 1996, St. John Paul II endorsed Pius’ statement.

Some wondered if Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI wanted to change that when he and some acolytes seemed to endorse the theory of intelligent design, the idea that the world is too complex to have evolved according to Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection.

Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn of Vienna, a close associate of Benedict, penned a widely noticed 2005 op-ed in The New York Times that said “Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense — an unguided, unplanned process … is not.”

Giovanni Bignami, a professor and president of Italy’s National Institute for Astrophysics, welcomed Francis’ comments, saying he had buried the “pseudo theories” of creationists.

“The pope’s statement is significant,” Bignami told Italian news agency Adnkronos. “We are the direct descendants from the Big Bang that created the universe. Evolution came from creation.”

Giulio Giorello, professor of the philosophy of science at Milan’s University degli Studi, said he believed Francis was “trying to reduce the emotion of dispute or presumed disputes” with science.

Francis made his speech while unveiling a bust in honor of Benedict, his predecessor, at the Vatican.

“Benedict XVI was a great pope: great for the power and penetration of his intellect, great for his significant contribution to theology, great for his love of the church and of human beings, great for his virtue and piety,” he said.

SOURCE: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/10/28/pope-francis-evolution-big-bang/18053509/

All Major Religions Are Paths To Same God; according to Pope Francis!

Profile: Pope Francis (01) feature

Beware of Wolves Dressed in Sheep's Clothing
A new video has just been released in which Pope Francis very clearly expresses his belief that all of the major religions are different paths to the same God.

He says that while people from various global faiths may be “seeking God or meeting God in different ways” that it is important to keep in mind that “we are all children of God”.

This is the most recent example that shows that the Pope has completely abandoned any notion that a relationship with God is available only through Jesus Christ.

As he has done throughout his papacy, he continues to lay the groundwork for the coming one world religion, and yet hardly anyone seems upset by this.

When I first heard of this new video, I was so stunned that I thought that it might be a joke. But the truth is that this video is very real. The following comes from an article that was put out by Catholic News Agency…

The Popes first-ever video message on his monthly prayer intentions was released Tuesday, highlighting the importance of interreligious dialogue and the beliefs different faith traditions hold in common, such as the figure of God and love.

Many think differently, feel differently, seeking God or meeting God in different ways. In this crowd, in this range of religions, there is only one certainty that we have for all: we are all children of God,

Pope Francis said in his message, released Jan. 6, the feast of the Epiphany.

But it isnt just Pope Francis speaking in this video. In fact, one section of the video features leaders from various global religions expressing faith in their respective deities. The following comes from an article about this new video that was posted on Christian News Network…

The video then features clips of those from different world religions declaring belief in their various deities.

“I have confidence in Buddha,” a female lama announces.

I believe in God,” a rabbi affirms.

“I believe in Jesus Christ,” a priest states.

“I believe in Allah,” an Islamic leader declares.

Are you shocked yet?

The Pope closes the video with an appeal for people from every religion to talk with one another and to work with one another. Here is more from Catholic News Agency…

Later on, after the Pope affirms that all, regardless of their religious profession, are children of God, the faith leaders state their common belief in love.

Pope Francis closes the video by expressing his hope that viewers “will spread my prayer request this month: that sincere dialogue among men and women of different faiths may produce fruits of peace and justice. I have confidence in your prayers.”

Of course this is not the first time that Pope Francis has done something like this. Very early in his papacy, he authorized “Islamic prayers and readings from the Quran” at the Vatican for the first time ever.

And as I documented in a previous article entitled “In New York, Pope Francis Embraced Chrislam And Laid A Foundation For A One World Religion”, during his visit to St. Patricks Cathedral in Manhattan he made it very clear that he believes that Christians and Muslims worship the same God. The following is how he began his address…

I would like to express two sentiments for my Muslim brothers and sisters: Firstly, my greetings as they celebrate the feast of sacrifice. I would have wished my greeting to be warmer. My sentiments of closeness, my sentiments of closeness in the face of tragedy. The tragedy that they suffered in Mecca.

In this moment, I give assurances of my prayers. I unite myself with you all. A prayer to almighty god, all merciful.

In Islam, one of Allahs primary titles is “the all-merciful one”. If you doubt this, just do a Google search. And this certainly was not the first time that Pope Francis has used such language. For example, check out the following excerpt from remarks that he made during his very first ecumenical meeting as Pope…

I then greet and cordially thank you all, dear friends belonging to other religious traditions; first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you. I really appreciate your presence: in it I see a tangible sign of the will to grow in mutual esteem and cooperation for the common good of humanity.

Are you starting to get the picture?

Pope Francis believes that all religions are different paths to the same God, and he is working hard to lay a foundation for the coming one world religion.

After watching this most recent video, I dont know how anyone can possibly deny that.

However, there are some religious people that Pope Francis does not like. Just recently, he referred to Christian fundamentalism as “a sickness”, and he made it clear that there was no room for it in Catholicism.

So precisely what is “fundamentalism”?

Google defines it as “a form of a religion, especially Islam or Protestant Christianity, that upholds belief in the strict, literal interpretation of scripture.”

Does this mean that Pope Francis is against any Christian that believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible?

That does appear to be what he is saying, and without a doubt those would be the Christians that would be against the kind of one world religion that he appears to be promoting.

Nearly 2000 years ago, the Apostle John warned us that a one world religion was coming, and now we can see that it is coming to fruition.

4cminews Acknowledgements: Thanks to JF Western Australia for making us aware of this issue

2016, January 18. | By Economic Collapse Blog / Michael Snyder | Source: prophecynewswatch.com "Pope Francis Says All Major Religions Are Paths To Same God"


Date: 2016, January 9
By: Heather Clark
Source: christiannews.net
Title: “‘Pope Francis’ Calls for Collaboration With World’s Religions, Those Who ‘Meet God in Different Ways’”
Date: 2016, January 11
By: Michael Snyder – End Of The American Dream
Source: infowars.com
Title: “One World Religion: Pope Francis says ALL Major Religions are ‘Meeting God in Different Ways’”

Date: 2016, January 7
By: Elise Harris | Vatican City |
Source: catholicnewsagency.com
Title: “In first prayer video, Pope stresses interfaith unity: ‘We are all children of God'”
Date: 2016, January  7
By: Carey Lodge | Christian Today Journalist
Source: christiantoday.com
Title: “Pope Francis releases emotional new video: Regardless of religion, we are all children of God”

Moriel Statement on Pope Francis

Profile: Pope Francis (01) feature

Jorge Mario Bergoglio alias Pope Francis

The Religious Charlatan Whose Hypocrisy Knows No Apparent Limits

As Pope Francis[1]Jorge Mario Bergoglio Pope Francis From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia arrives in the USA, the Vatican characteristically expects the media, the Congress, and the public to simply ignore the fact that when Cardinal of Buenos Aires, Francis staunchly refused to meet with the children sexually victimized by his priests and nuns and with their families.

His pedophile sex criminal clergy were protected as the defenseless little children were raped and he refused to even meet them or their parents.

So the College of Cardinals in a convocation that included multiple protectors and de facto enablers of baby raping sexual deviants frocked in their vestments, habits, and cassocks, including Los Angeles Cardinal Mahony and Boston Cardinal Law, elected Bergoglio pope and said he is ‘the ‘Vicar of Christ’.

But didn’t Christ say that “It is better to have a millstone tied to one’s neck and be cast into the sea rather than harm a helpless little child”?

Now this same Francis is coming to the land of Mahony with his lies and baloney, and of Law, who rather proved himself to be utterly law-less.

These reprobates who shielded dangerous sexual deviates at the expense of the children whose molestation and sexual and homosexual violation these servants of Lucifer helped facilitate are among those who helped elect Bergoglio, so why wouldn’t George (Jorge) Bergoglio cum Pope Francis come to the USA?

How can such a disgusting pretender misrepresent himself as the vicar of a Christ whose very Words he nullifies and whose example he shuns in favor of a public relations motivated charade packaged in pseudo sanctimonious pomposity of the very same brand Jesus flagrantly condemned in the Gospel of St. Matthew chapter 23?

It is obvious to any honest observer that Bergoglio’s only real god is the centuries old Vatican idol of theocratic politics that millions of former Roman Catholics who have accepted the real Christ, including now regenerate priests and nuns, can readily testify to.

The real Jesus did not double talk or engage in the legalistic practice of pilpul in their attempt to defend the indefensible.

Jesus appealed to the spirit of the law and did not engage in the pilpul of disputing about words Bill Clinton style as in: “it depends on what the definition of ‘is’ ‘is'”; or ‘ “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky” (when he performed acts other than intercourse). Jesus issued clear unambiguous moral dictates in response to hypocritical religious rhetoric looking for technical loopholes to avoid what in substance amounted to perjury or in practice amounted to transgression despite religio-legal attempts to camouflage it with pilpul and the Gospels are emphatic that He did so ‘speaking as one with authority not like the scribes’ (Matthew 7:28-29).

There was no ambivalence or uncertainty as to what He meant. What Clinton was in the White House however, Pope Francis is in the Vatican.

We see a return to the pilpul condemned by Jesus in The Sermon on The Mount.

Concerning the issue of homosexuality Pope Francis stated “if two men are in a committed relation – who am I to judge“?

The point is that Jesus Christ has judged the matter already and the Judeo- Christian Scriptures say so plainly (Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, Romans 1:26-27, 1 Timothy 1:10, 1 Corinthians 6:9).

If the Scriptures judged it and he claims to speak for Christ (which he most certainly does not nor does any other Pope), why does he not simply uphold the teaching of Scripture judging it wrong?

What we see from Pope Francis is the pilpul that Jesus taught against and was a well defined alternative to.

In Pope Francis we see a Pharisaical faker magna cum laude.

Indeed, after his wife Laura and his former Vice President Dick Cheney (who daughter is in a lesbian marriage) appeared on YouTube urging Republican Party support for same sex marriage, former president George W. Bush stated with regard to homosexuality “I have to remove the log from my own eye“, as if his out of context citation of that verse from Scripture justified his ignoring that God’s Word strongly calls homosexuality morally abominable.

The Sanhedrin may have invented pilpul but phony unprincipled politicians have perfected it with media spin, and as is solidly evident Pope Francis is nothing more than just another such politician whose theological roots are not in the Jesus whose vicar he fraudulently pretends to be, but in the Sanhedrin who collaborated with the Roman government to turn the Jewish people against their own Messiah and have Him murdered.

It is of course a factually ridiculous legally and doctrinally false contention to corporately blame Israel and The Jews for the death of Jesus.

Jesus stated that He laid His life down and no one took it from Him.

The Hebrew prophet Isaiah informs us in chapter 53 that it was His Father’s will to slay Him as an atonement for our sin when He took our sin on Himself and thus in the larger sense we are all His killers.

Moreover , all of His initial followers and the New Testament authors were themselves Jews with Jewish belief in Him as Messiah reaching a very high percentage of the Jewish population by the early Second century.

Juridically, all four Gospels and the earliest Creeds of the church dogmatically profess that He was crucified by the Roman government under Pontius Pilate.

Yet, although He forgave His executors – and us – from the cross, there is no question that the pagan Roman government and Sanhedrin conspired to kill him and they are still conspiring to kill Him.


• The Roman authorities are the “Roman Catholic Church”

• The Sanhedrin are the “College of Cardinals” and “Papal Curia”.

• And Pontius Pilate is now called the “Pope”.

My own family is a combination of Jewish and Roman Catholic backgrounds, and as such I would not be surprised if the pedophile protecting Roman Catholic church gambled for His cloths at a Bingo game.

Like all such phony politicians be it a Clinton, a Bush or otherwise, Francis has his media spin.

His PR machine saysHe has not changed the moral teaching of the church, only the emphasis“.

He has done this in two ways.

» The first is divert away from inconvenient issues by changing the narrative. Thus we see Francis railing about capitalism and global warming in a cheap ecclesiastical version of ‘Occupy Wall Street’.

» The second, as we have stated is to engage in a Roman Catholic imitation of pilpul. So when Francis concerning homosexuality publicly asks “who am I to judge”?

The liberal wing of Roman Catholicism can claim that pope has modified the Roman Catholic opposition to homosexuality and he no longer will say it is flatly wrong; he says “who is he to judge”?

Simultaneously, the traditionalist hypocrite wrong of Roman Catholicism reacts by saying “the Pope has not officially changed the opposition of the church to homosexuality“.

For the sake of political expediency he placates everybody but offers no clear moral direction.

This Jesus did not do according to St. Matthew, yet this impostor Francis claims to be The Lord’s personal vicar acting vicariously on Christ’s behalf.

Another example is his liberalization policy on the issuing of marital annulments.

To begin with the term itself as it is used colloquially or legally is not found in the New Testament.

The only New Testament basis for the nullification of a marriage is only where in God’s eyes there was no valid marriage to begin with due to one partner already being married (John 5:17-18).

In Roman Catholicism an annulment may amount to nothing more than a mere euphemism for divorce.

Apologists for Roman Catholicism of course conventionally resort once again to pilpul; the strategic use of semantics is of course pivotal in pilpul.

In the political hypocrisy that we witness in the parlance of international diplomacy we encounter this all of the time where a synonymous or ambiguous phraseology can be interpreted by two different parties to mean two different things in order to forge a meaningless agreement or concordat that eventually breaks down.

In ecumenical dialogue between Roman Catholic and supposedly ‘Protestant’ theologians we see the same hypocritical idiocy.

Both panels of theologians sign a joint declaration stating “we agree both Catholic and Protestant that we are saved by grace“, when in fact the Protestant understanding of grace is unearned and undeserved favor deriving from the Greek and Hebrew definitions of the term etymologically, while the perverted Roman Catholic definition is an ethereal substance , (be it actual or sanctifying grace as they describe it) that is ritualistically earned by sacraments even in the ex opera operato case of infant baptism (which in fact most Reformed, Anglican, and Lutheran Protestant denominations absurdly an unscripturally share).

Both can agree they are saved by grace and issue a worthless proclamation to that effect that has no capacity to do anything but deceive, yet in actuality they have two fundamentally variant definitions of what grace is.

While this fails theologically and spiritually, it works politically.

It is little wonder St. Paul condemned such semantically charged dialogue involving disputes about words in circumlocution of the divinely intended meaning of Holy Writ (1 Timothy 6:4).

The Roman Catholic church engages in this kind of stupid semantic dialogue without reference to what the Scriptures actually state concerning the issue divorce by a convoluted argumentation that declares a marriage invalid for considerations that are extra biblical and grant annulment when in fact they are simply calling a divorce by another name.

For many centuries popes routinely granted European monarchs annulments to remarry when it was in the political and or economic interests of the papacy to do so.

Thomas Moore, the notorious villain who was party to the horrific persecution of regenerate Christians during the Reformation was executed by King Henry VIII not because Moore opposed Henry’s divorce and remarriage, but rather because the pope did not approve of it for political reasons.

Pope Francis did not invent this ‘divorce by another name’ practice of the papacy.

He is just making it easier to do in order to be ‘seeker friendly’ to trim his falling mass attendance numbers.

Likewise with the majority of reported cases of clerical pedophilia by his priests and nuns being of a homosexual and lesbian nature, Francis knows that without homosexuals and lesbians the already thin ranks of religious vocations in the Roman Catholic clergy would be much thinner still and he would not have enough priests and nuns for his religious system to function.

It is all pilpul and all politics from homosexuality to annulment to pedophilia.

“Gorgeous George” Bergoglio has changed his name to “Frank the Phony”. But he is no Vicar of Christ.

Like his papal predecessors he is just another anti-christ and as he visits New York and Washington, the other crooked politicians will roll out the red carpet for him and listen to his pilpul.

And why should they not?

He is the only politician in the world who can give the other politicians in the congress, White House and at the UN lessons in hypocrisy and how to connive.

Pope Francis is truly a religious charlatan whose hypocrisy knows no limits.

When he changed his name from George (Jorge) , instead of Francis he should have called himself Caiaphas or maybe Pontius.

But he should not be calling himself ‘The Vicar of Christ’. What he does, Christ did not do.

James Jacob Prasch
May The Lord Jesus graciously continue to save Roman Catholic souls and deliver them from the demonic clutches of the pedophile cult and anti-christ false religious system of Roman Catholicism. Please pray for the salvation of Roman Catholic people and for their clergy who mislead them with lies and hypocrisy and destroy their children.

By James Jacob Prasch | September 18, 2015 | Source: MORIEL MINISTRIES "Moriel Statement on Pope Francis"


1 Jorge Mario Bergoglio Pope Francis From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Franklin Graham Condemns Obama’s Guest List for Papal Welcome as ‘Sinful’

Profile: Obama (01)

(PHOTO: REUTERS/GARY CAMERON) The White House is illuminated in rainbow colors after today’s historic Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage in Washington June 26, 2015.

Evangelist Franklin Graham has called President Obama’s guest list for Pope Francis’ welcome this week “disgraceful and obviously inappropriate,” even as the Vatican has reportedly objected to the White House invite to transgender activists, an openly gay bishop and supporters of abortion and euthanasia.

The guest list for a planned event at the White House’s South Lawn to welcome the pope on his first full day in the U.S. on Wednesday includes Sister Simone Campbell, executive director of Network, a “Catholic social justice lobby” which allegedly supports abortion and euthanasia; Bishop Gene Robinson, former Episcopal bishop of New Hampshire who is the first openly gay Episcopal bishop in the country; Mateo Williamson, a former co-head of the transgender caucus of Dignity USA; and also activists from the LGBT group GLAAD.

“This is disgraceful and obviously inappropriate,” Graham wrote on his Facebook page Saturday. “Is there no end to the lengths the president will go to in order to push his sinful agenda?”

Graham, who leads the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, said it is wise of the Vatican to “question President Obama’s guest list” and that the list of guests “should raise a lot of eyebrows.”

The Vatican has taken offense, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The presence of some figures is especially irritating, a senior Vatican official, who was not named, was quoted as saying. The Holy See worries that any photos of the pope with such guests could be interpreted as an endorsement of their activities. The official also wondered if the White House has invited any representatives of the U.S. anti-abortion movement.

Speaking to reporters, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Thursday he didn’t know who all have been invited. He added that no one should draw any conclusions on specific guests “because there will be 15,000 other people there too.”

Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh wrote on his website  noting that “some people are saying that this is perfectly Obama.”

“He’s got the pope coming, and he wants to insult the pope, put pressure on the pope, and challenge the pope, ’cause the Catholic Church — and Obama’s a leftist, and leftists hate the Catholic Church,” he wrote. “Do not doubt me on that. The Catholic Church is in the top five of all-time biggest enemies for the American left and the worldwide left. And so here is, in one possibility, it is a designed effort to humiliate, challenge, make nervous, make uncomfortable the pope.”

In June, after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage will be legal across the country, Graham said Obama is leading the nation on a sinful course.

The president called the ruling a “victory for America.” Prior to the court’s decision, Obama had said, “There has been an incredible shift in attitudes across the country.”

“But it is definitely not a shift for the good of America. The shift in attitudes he refers to is the moral decline we are seeing manifest daily around us,” Graham wrote on his Facebook then.

“Accepting wrong as right—accepting sin as something to be proud of. Yes, that’s definitely a shift. Should we be surprised that he thanked the LGBT community for all that they had helped him accomplish during his time as president?” Graham added, noting that Obama said, “A lot of what we’ve accomplished over these last six and a half years has been because of you.”

September 20, 2015 by Anugrah Kumar , Christian Post Contributor | Source: christianpost.com "Franklin Graham Condemns Obama's Guest List for Papal Welcome as 'Sinful'"

Papal peacemakers! ?

Profile: Pope Francis (01) feature
First Published 18 December - mercatornet.com Authors Andrew Liaugminas and Sheila Liaugminas

After 53 years of frozen relations between the United States and Cuba, American President Barack Obama and Cuban President Raúl Castro have forged a historic agreement. The two countries have agreed to exchange prisoners, relax embargo laws, and re-open diplomatic relations after a half century of fossilized opposition. During his speech announcing the radical shift in relations on December 17, President Obama explained what led to today’s breakthrough:His Holiness Pope Francis issued a personal appeal to me and to Cuba’s president, Raúl Castro, urging us to resolve [the case of Alan Gross] and to address Cuba’s interests in the release of three Cuban agents, who’ve been jailed in the United States for over 15 years.It turns out that Pope Francis intervened personally with President Obama during the President’s visit to the Vatican this past March, and then followed-up with private letters to Presidents Obama and Castro, calling on them personally to take action. Intensive work at the Vatican this Fall, with the cooperation of Canadian diplomats, worked out the fine details of the agreement that became official on Wednesday.

While the Holy See has diplomatic relations with around 180 sovereign states and is party to numerous other international agreements, it is not always the case that the Pope and the Holy See receive a global spotlight for the behind-the-scenes work they do daily across the world.

This is not the first time Pope Francis has attempted to intervene on such an important issue of international relations. Last year he wrote a personal letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin, and this Spring he hosted a meeting of Shimon Peres and Mahmoud Abbas in the Vatican. The scale of Pope Francis’ success in the present US-Cuba agreement, however, is greater than any of his previous international diplomatic interventions.

But an intervention on that level by the Pope is itself not unprecedented.

John Paul II with Argentine and Chilean negotiators of the Beagle Conflict in 1979

It’s late December, 1978, and Chile and Argentina are on the brink of war. Their dispute is over three small islands at the southern tip of South America – islands that would be unremarkable if it were not for their strategic location where the Atlantic and Pacific oceans meet in the Beagle Channel. Both countries make impassioned cases for their claims before the world community. Yet, time after time, the talks between the two countries break down. The situation deteriorates so far that the military junta of Argentina draws up an invasion plan and orders its execution just days before Christmas 1978. Argentine troops are about to cross the border into Chile when, out of the blue, the Argentine junta calls off the operation completely. Within days, Chile and Argentina are at the table, agreeing on the first step in solving the conflict: bring in the Vatican.

What happened? John Paul II, Pope for just over two months, had personally intervened and prevailed upon the Argentine junta to allow the Holy See to broker the accord between the two nations, which at last they signed in 1984. Archbishop Ubaldo Calabresi, Papal Nuncio to Argentina at the time, was instrumental in these negotiations.

Fast forward to today: December 17, 2014. That the first Pope from Latin America has brokered the historic agreement between Cuba and America has been noticed by the Press. USA Today, Time, The Guardian and others have acknowledged the pivotal role the Holy See, and the Pope personally, played in working out this agreement, pointing out the Latin American connection.

But in the Latin American world, Cuba and Argentina represent opposite ends of the geographical, cultural, linguistic, and political spectrum. Far closer to home for Pope Francis would have been the powerful witness of Pope John Paul II in his successful intervention between Bergoglio’s native Argentina and its neighbor Chile in the Beagle Conflict.

At the end of today’s speech, President Obama again acknowledged the role of Francis in the present agreement: “In particular I want to thank his holiness Pope Francis, for [trying to make the world] as it should be, rather than as it is.”

To that, history should also add acknowledgement of John Paul II for setting the precedent, and Archbishop Calabresi—a key negotiator in the Argentine/Chilean agreement—who oversaw Bergoglio’s ascendancy to the episcopate in 1992. (The two bishops are pictured, left.)

While Bergoglio was initially reticent to accept the call from Pope John Paul II to become a bishop—on the grounds that being a bishop would conflict with his vows as a Jesuit—John Paul II, through Calabresi, addressed Bergoglio’s concerns, and at last prevailed upon him to accept the call. Had that negotiation failed, only history would know if Wednesday’s historic agreement—overseen by the Pope from Argentina—would have ever come about.

Fr. Andrew Liaugminas is a priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago, and a doctoral student at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. Sheila Liaugminas is Fr Andrew’s mother and the author of MercatorNet’s Sheila Reports blog.

via MercatorNet: Papal peacemakers.

Pope Francis Prays in Turkey's Mosque, Head Bowed Toward Mecca

About Islam Religion feature
Francis prayed alongside the Grand Mufti of Istanbul, Rahmi Yaran, in the 17th-century Sultan Ahmet mosque - See more at: http://pamelageller.com/2014/11/pope-prays-in-istanbul-mosque-in-new-outreach-prays-facing-mecca.html/#sthash.NdWpje17.NIY2ZyD8.dpuf

Francis alongside the Grand Mufti of Istanbul, Rahmi Yaran, in the 17th-century Sultan Ahmet mosque – source: pamelageller.com

A day after calling for inter-religious dialogue to end Islamist extremism, Pope Francis on Saturday visited a 17th-century mosque in Istanbul and spent several minutes in a silent prayer with his head bowed in the direction of Mecca.

The pope made the gesture to promote Christian-Muslim relations at the Sultan Ahmet Mosque, known as the Blue Mosque, on Saturday, the second day of his three-day Turkey visit, according to the Vatican Radio.

His head bowed, eyes closed and hands clasped in front of him, Francis prayed alongside the Grand Mufti of Istanbul, Rahmi Yaran, in the 17th-century Sultan Ahmet mosque, shifting gears to religious concerns on the second day of his three-day visit to Turkey. - See more at: http://pamelageller.com/2014/11/pope-prays-in-istanbul-mosque-in-new-outreach-prays-facing-mecca.html/#sthash.NdWpje17.dpuf

His head bowed, eyes closed and hands clasped in front of him, Francis prayed alongside the Grand Mufti of Istanbul, Rahmi Yaran, in the 17th-century Sultan Ahmet mosque, shifting gears to religious concerns on the second day of his three-day visit to Turkey. – source: pamelageller.com

He removed his shoes before entering the mosque with blue tiles on its walls. Standing next to him was the Grand Mufti, who explained about the Koranic verses illustrated on the stones pillars and the dome.

The pontiff also toured on Saturday the nearby Hagia Sophia, a Byzantine basilica which was turned into a mosque after the fall of Constantinople in the mid-15th century before being transformed into a museum.

The pontiff’s visit is being seen as an effort to foster inter-faith relations.

“Fanaticism and fundamentalism, as well as irrational fears which foster misunderstanding and discrimination, need to be countered by the solidarity of all believers,” the pope said Friday in a speech to Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and other political leaders on the first day of his pastoral visit to the cities of Ankara and Istanbul.

“It is essential that all citizens – Muslim, Jewish and Christian – both in the provision and practice of the law, enjoy the same rights and respect the same duties,” the pope added in his speech Friday. “They will then find it easier to see each other as brothers and sisters who are travelling the same path, seeking always to reject misunderstandings while promoting cooperation and concord. Freedom of religion and freedom of expression, when truly guaranteed to each person, will help friendship to flourish and thus become an eloquent sign of peace.”

via Pope Francis Prays in Turkey’s Mosque, Head Bowed Toward Mecca.

4cm: Serious Question about the Pope’s role in the End Times agenda are looking reasonable to ask?

Pope Francis broached the subject of the end of his reign

Pope Francis TO RETIRE? 

by Dr. Steve Elwart
Many in the Christian world were taken by surprise by comments that the Roman Catholic Pope Francis made on Monday.
Aboard the plane taking the Roman Pontiff back to Rome from South Korea, Pope Francis broached the subject of the end of his reign. Frances said that he was giving himself “two or three years” in his role as the head of the Roman Catholic Church, but not necessarily predicting the end of his life.
With the resignation of Pope Benedict from the papacy, Francis may have been referring to his own retirement, “even if it does not appeal to some theologians”, he told reporters on the plane.
“Benedict XVI opened a door,” he said.
Rumors about his health have swirled since he was elected pope, but this is the first time he may have been addressing his health directly. Francis admitted that he had “some nerve problems”, which required treatment.
“Must treat them well, these nerves, give them mate (an Argentine stimulant tea) every day,” he joked.
Though death or retirement, Francis’ comments brought out a flurry of speculation from Vatican watchers on who may succeed him.
Papal candidates are called “Papabili”, a Latin term which literally means, “popeable” or “one who might become pope”. According to modern church law, a pope is selected only from the College of Cardinals who meet in conclave to select the successor. A Papabile must be a cardinal, so the list of Papabili is fairly short, usually four of five men.
According to some, the end of Francis’ reign as pope is highly significant, because according to the prophecy of a medieval church cleric, Francis is the Catholic Church’s “last pope”.
The Prophecy of St. Malachy
St. Malachy (Maelmhaedhoc Ó Morgair) lived in 12th Century Ireland and was the Archbishop of Armagh, now a town of 14,000 in Northern Ireland. Attracted to the monastic life, Malachy established the first Cistercian abbey in Ireland in 1142. He also reformed the Irish Church and aligned it more closely with Rome.
What Malachy is more known for is the so-called, Prophecy of the Popes, which is attributed to him. The prophecy is a list of 112 short phrases that supposedly describe each of the Roman Catholic popes beginning with Pope Celestine II (elected in 1143) and concluding with the successor of Benedict XVI.
This last pope is described in the prophecy as “Peter the Roman”, whose reign as pope will see the destruction of the city of Rome.
The prophecy did not hold much interest among Catholics up until the mid–20th century because it seemed as if it would be a long time before the world would see the election of “The Last Pope”.
Until the pontificate of Pius XII (1939–58), the average tenure of recent popes had been approximately 20 years. This changed in 1958 with the election of Angelo Roncalli who took the name John XXIII.
Elected when he was 77 years old, John XXIII was considered a “caretaker pope” who would keep the papal throne warm until the College of Cardinals could decide on a longer serving pontiff. He served for four years, but put the Catholic Church on a new course by calling the Second Vatican Council.
Giovanni Montini was elected to replace John XXIII on his death and called himself Paul VI. His reign lasted 15 years.
Albino Luciani followed and took the name John Paul I, combining the names of his predecessors.
John Paul 1 reign lasted one month and his death was clouded in controversy.
John Paul 1 was succeeded by Karol Wojtyła who took the name John Paul II. Fairly young in papal terms when he was elected (58), his was the second-longest pontificate lasting 26 years, 168 days; only Pope Pius IX (1846–1878) who served 31 years, reigned longer.
Interest in the Prophecy of the Popes increased as John Paul II’s health declined and Vatican watchers were shocked when Joseph Ratsinger, a 76-year-old cardinal, was unexpectedly elected Pope Benedict XVI.
According to the Malachy Prophecy, whoever succeeded Benedict would be the Last Pope. (The Catholic Church discounts the Prophecy, saying that they have no connection with Malachy except their erroneous attribution to him.)
The prophecy connected with the most recent popes is as follows:
Pope #263 – John XXIII (1958
–1963) – Pastor et Nauta (pastor and marine). Prior to his election he was patriarch of Venice, a marine city, home of the gondolas.
Pope #264 – Paul VI (1963–1978) – Flos florum (flower of flowers). His papal coat of arms displayed three lilies.
Pope #265 – John Paul I (1978) – De medietate Lunae (from the midst of the moon). Albino Luciani was born in Canale d’Ogardo, diocese of Belluno, (beautiful moon) Elected pope on August 26, his reign lasted about a month, from half-moon to half-moon.
Pope #266 – John Paul II (1978–2005) – De labore Solis (of the eclipse of the sun). Karol Wojtyla was born on May 18, 1920 during a solar eclipse. There was also solar eclipse on April 8, 2005, the day of his funeral.
Pope #267 – Benedict XVI – Gloria olivae (The glory of the olives). It was originally thought that this pope would be from the Order of St. Benedict (The Benedictines were known also as the Olivetans.) People who believe in the prophecy believe that the current pope, by taking the name Benedict, fulfilled the prophecy.
Pope #268 – The Last Pope – In persecutione extrema S.R.E. sedebit Petrus Romanus, qui pascet oues in multis tribulationibus: quibus transactis ciuitas septicollis diruetur, & Iudex tremêdus iudicabit populum suum. Finis. – (“In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Peter the Roman, who will feed his flock amid many tribulations, after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people. The End.”)
Many believe that Pope Francis is that Last Pope. Tom Horn is one of those.
In the In the WND Films documentary “The Last Pope?” – based on the book,Petrus Romanus: The Final Pope Is Here, Horn points out many signs that could point to Francis. In one sign, Horn says, “The only thing that it would take to fulfill the prophecy would be a cardinal of Italian descent. And low and behold Jorge Bergoglio, Italian descent, parents full-blooded Italians, or in the old language ‘Romans.’ “But he names himself after Francis of Assisi. Now this is a Catholic friar who lived in the late 1100s and the early 1200s, but his name of birth Giovanni Di Pietro Di Bernardone, Peter. He was an Italian, or Roman in the old language, a man whose name can literally be translated as ‘Peter the Roman.’ So to take that as a namesake, well it was intriguing to say the least.”
While many may hold the Prophecy of Malachy to be true, there is a far more authoritative source to tell us what is coming in the end times. Revelation 4:1 introduces a section of Scripture that detail “things which must be hereafter.” What follows are prophecies of the end times. We have not yet reached the Tribulation, the revelation of the Antichrist, or other end-time events. What we do see is a preparation for those events.
Jesus said that the last days would be preceded by several things: many false christs would come, deceiving many; we would “hear of wars and rumors of wars”; and there would be an increase in “famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in diverse places. All these are the beginning of sorrows” (Matthew 24:5–8).
Today’s news is full of false religions, warfare, and natural disasters. We know that events of the tribulation period will include all that Jesus predicted (Revelation 6:1–8); the events of today are only a prelude for greater trials ahead.
Paul warned that the last days would bring a marked increase in false teaching. “In later times, some will abandon the faith, and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons” (1 Timothy 4:1). The last days are described as “perilous times” because of the increasingly evil character of man and people who actively “oppose the truth” (2 Timothy 3:1–9 and 2 Thessalonians 2:3).
What is important is how we live our lives in preparation for Christ’s return. What witness are we giving to the world to help non-believers accept the saving grace of Jesus Christ?
The return of Christ is always presented in Scripture as a great motivation to action, not as a reason to cease from action. In 1 Corinthians 15:58, Paul sums up his teaching if the rapture by saying, “be steadfast, unmovable, always excelling in the work of the Lord…” (ISV) In 1 Thessalonians 5:6, Paul concludes a lesson on Christ’s coming with these words: “Therefore, let’s not fall asleep like others do, but let’s stay awake and be sober.” (ISV)
The apostles understood that Jesus’ imminent return meant they must busy themselves with God’s work. They lived life to the fullest, as if every day were their last.
We, too, should view every day as a gift and use it to glorify God.

< h4 style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-size: 18px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 24px; margin: 10px 0px 5px; padding: 0px;">Related Links