The Great Catholic Monarch Of Prophecy

[kafka]

I dont even know how to react to that, but I will put up with the implicit ridicule for now.

This thread is obviously not for you.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='kafka' date='15 March 2010 - 03:42 PM' timestamp='1268678565' post='2073558']
I dont even know how to react to that, but I will put up with the implicit ridicule for now.

This thread is obviously not for you.
[/quote]
It was an honest question.
If I am studying a topic and find a resource by a respected orthodox authority in the field, I wouldn't hesitate to read it, and see if my ideas correlated with those of the Church.
If I want to know about Dogma I consult Ott, if I want to know about Scripture passages I consult the Father Most collection.
You seem insulted by the idea.

[kafka]

I'm not studying the idea anymore, rather explaining my own understanding of it in an informal way. I'm not sure if I am right about everything, and I surely havent read all what the authorities have to say, but so be it.

here is the wikipedia article on the great Catholic monarch. I dont like it. I am not going to edit it there, but I am thinking about criticizing it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Catholic_Monarch

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='15 March 2010 - 01:48 PM' timestamp='1268678908' post='2073560']
It was an honest question.
If I am studying a topic and find a resource by a respected orthodox authority in the field, I wouldn't hesitate to read it, and see if my ideas correlated with those of the Church.
If I want to know about Dogma I consult Ott, if I want to know about Scripture passages I consult the Father Most collection.
You seem insulted by the idea.
[/quote]
I agree with this. We've mentioned a couple different widely accepted Catholic sources which you haven't examined. That's fine. I find it odd though, that with your interest in the general subject, you're not more interested in at least exposing yourself to and knowing the methods and positions of widely accepted orthodox Catholic perspectives. Even if you don't agree with them for whatever reason (and I'm sure you have reasons) that's not a good excuse not to examine them. Certainly it gives you the opportunity to have a more informed viewpoint.

Edited March 15, 2010 by Nihil Obstat

[kafka]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='15 March 2010 - 02:57 PM' timestamp='1268679424' post='2073565']
I agree with this. We've mentioned a couple different widely accepted Catholic sources which you haven't examined. That's fine. I find it odd though, that with your interest in the general subject, you're not more interested in at least exposing yourself to and knowing the methods and positions of widely accepted orthodox Catholic perspectives. Even if you don't agree with them for whatever reason (and I'm sure you have reasons) that's not a good excuse not to examine them. Certainly it gives you the opportunity to have a more informed viewpoint.
[/quote]
its fine I know. I just dont like the way of being set over and against like I'm not Catholic or my interpretations are not Catholic.

And I really have no obligation to study the others, though I have read some of the Fathers.

This is a speculative topic. It is not doctrine or dogma. Plus I'm not even a formal theologian. I'm a nothing. I'm dirt. I'm not teaching. Rather just explaining my view after years of meditation and study, and realizing it is different than the popular view, but sticking to it anyway.

You know a simple thank you or something of the sort would be nice. I've spent a lot of time on this thread. And there is nothing like this on any other Catholic forum or anywhere on the net.

Edited March 15, 2010 by kafka

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='kafka' date='15 March 2010 - 04:03 PM' timestamp='1268679811' post='2073567']
its fine I know. I just dont like the way of being set over and against like I'm not Catholic or my interpretations are not Catholic.

And I really have no obligation to study the others, though I have read some of the Fathers.

This is a speculative topic. It is not doctrine or dogma. Plus I'm not even a formal theologian. I'm a nothing. I'm dirt. I'm not teaching. Rather just explaining my view after years of meditation and study, and realizing it is different than the popular view, but sticking to it anyway.

You know a simple thank you or something of the sort would be nice. I've spent a lot of time on this thread. And there is nothing like this on any other Catholic forum or anywhere on the net.
[/quote]
Your view is interesting and I have read [b]all[/b] your posts on the topic. There is no popular view on the topic, it barely exists in catholic circles except to refute the popular protestant heries on the subject. You don't have to be a formal thrologian to contribute something of great value or insight, but you should compare your views to others on the topic, and you might get many more good ideas and insights on topic by doing so. You have done an amazing amount of work on the subject but [i]to get published[/i], you need to do a bit more collaboration.

Please get off the dirt routine.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='kafka' date='15 March 2010 - 02:03 PM' timestamp='1268679811' post='2073567']
its fine I know. I just dont like the way of being set over and against like I'm not Catholic or my interpretations are not Catholic.

[b]And I really have no obligation to study the others,[/b] though I have read some of the Fathers.

This is a speculative topic. It is not doctrine or dogma. Plus I'm not even a formal theologian. I'm a nothing. I'm dirt. I'm not teaching. Rather just explaining my view after years of meditation and study, and realizing it is different than the popular view, but sticking to it anyway.

You know a simple thank you or something of the sort would be nice. I've spent a lot of time on this thread. And there is nothing like this on any other Catholic forum or anywhere on the net.
[/quote]
I actually disagree with the bolded point. I think that a private theologian who has not formed his opinions from the very best of sources is acting recklessly. Theologians have a puissant ability to shape the opinions and faith of laypeople and sometimes even the clergy. If they're not doing everything they can to make sure that they're shaping those people towards a solid Catholic position, then there's a good chance that they're actually doing harm. Although you'd disagree with me, I'd point to Karl Rahner as an example of that, and as a sample I'd point towards his writings regarding ascendance Christology, or transfinalization. Even if we can accept that he isn't technically incorrect (although I'm sure we could have a great debate/discussion on the matter) there is still the opinion that Rahner's speculation did damage to Traditional Church teachings, especially in the lives of the faithful.

[Innocent]

I skimmed through this thread and all the events in your speculative account seem to happen in Europe. (If you wrote of any notable incident to happen in the Americas I must have overlooked it.) Do you have any speculations on what is to happen here in the East during these incidents?

[infinitelord1]

Hey I have a good question....

Is it possible that I am the Great Catholic Monarch? I think that would be great!! I would gladly accept such a role... and there would definately be Peace on this rock if I was!! HAHA. I know this is a crazy question its just that I have recently put together the complete geneaological proof (which my family worked on for 30 years) that I am related to Clovis I who was the very first French King, and that I am also related to the entire monarchies of Western Europe including the Hapsburg's and French, German, and Italian monarchies... and I am currently in Exile... in Iraq. Somebody please tell me im not so I can squash any hope that I have. I guess im just bored right now and dont have much to look forward to...so theres nothing better to do than have wishful thinking...LOL. I dont mean any sarcasm by this.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='infinitelord1' date='16 March 2010 - 03:16 AM' timestamp='1268720216' post='2073885']
Hey I have a good question....

Is it possible that I am the Great Catholic Monarch? I think that would be great!! I would gladly accept such a role... and there would definately be Peace on this rock if I was!! HAHA. I know this is a crazy question its just that I have recently put together the complete geneaological proof (which my family worked on for 30 years) that I am related to Clovis I who was the very first French King, and that I am also related to the entire monarchies of Western Europe including the Hapsburg's and French, German, and Italian monarchies... and I am currently in Exile... in Iraq. Somebody please tell me im not so I can squash any hope that I have. I guess im just bored right now and dont have much to look forward to...so theres nothing better to do than have wishful thinking...LOL. I dont mean any sarcasm by this.
[/quote]
I love it.

[kafka]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='15 March 2010 - 03:16 PM' timestamp='1268680565' post='2073574']
Your view is interesting and I have read [b]all[/b] your posts on the topic. There is no popular view on the topic, it barely exists in catholic circles except to refute the popular protestant heries on the subject. You don't have to be a formal thrologian to contribute something of great value or insight, but you should compare your views to others on the topic, and you might get many more good ideas and insights on topic by doing so. You have done an amazing amount of work on the subject but [i]to get published[/i], you need to do a bit more collaboration.

Please get off the dirt routine.
[/quote]
fair enough. Like I said before I prefer to go my own way at this point.

and the dirt routine was bad. Was a bit melodramatic yesterday.



[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='15 March 2010 - 03:16 PM' timestamp='1268680567' post='2073575']
I actually disagree with the bolded point. I think that a private theologian who has not formed his opinions from the very best of sources is acting recklessly. Theologians have a puissant ability to shape the opinions and faith of laypeople and sometimes even the clergy. If they're not doing everything they can to make sure that they're shaping those people towards a solid Catholic position, then there's a good chance that they're actually doing harm. Although you'd disagree with me, I'd point to Karl Rahner as an example of that, and as a sample I'd point towards his writings regarding ascendance Christology, or transfinalization. Even if we can accept that he isn't technically incorrect (although I'm sure we could have a great debate/discussion on the matter) there is still the opinion that Rahner's speculation did damage to Traditional Church teachings, especially in the lives of the faithful.
[/quote]
the best source for eschatology is Divine Revelation. I explained that over and over. I would not even dare try to form an eschatology on the private revelations alone. The fact that I have drawn and discovered so much from Scripture might account for the strangeness of the material I've put together. Almost every point I've made is an interpretation of Scripture or private revelation. What greater source is there?

I think you should be concerned with the soundness or un-soundness of my arguments not whether or not I have drawn from other theologians.

Theological opinions of others are also a good source. I've studied some of the others perhaps some you have never heard of such as Saint Victorinus. I have also been heavily influenced by Conte. I've felt that this was enough and have come up with the rest according to grace, providence, meditation, etc.

A lot of these insights are a living part of me. Its been a living on-going process. That Maccabees post I've had on my mind for years. I never just post anything recklessly. I do not treat this subject as a scienctific study. To me it is sacred and very important, beyond science. It is a process of Living Tradition and Scripture and the freedom God has given me to try and figure the world I am plunged into.

Perhaps this is why I sometimes get a little angry and excited. This stuff is intimate. Its deep in me. A part of living and growing up and experiencing and figuring out a lot of things over the past 15 years. Perhaps it wasnt wise for me to start such a thread, but I always hope to have a peaceful outlet, to perhaps make new friends, get a good discussion goining, receive encouragment, etc.

But now it is about other non-essentials, I am not interested in.
[quote name='Innocent' date='15 March 2010 - 09:33 PM' timestamp='1268703213' post='2073760']
I skimmed through this thread and all the events in your speculative account seem to happen in Europe. (If you wrote of any notable incident to happen in the Americas I must have overlooked it.) Do you have any speculations on what is to happen here in the East during these incidents?
[/quote]
The East will certainly be affected by the events of the first part of the Tribulation, however the East will not be involved with the particular events I've been focusing on such as WWIII and WWIV.

Edited March 16, 2010 by kafka

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='kafka' date='16 March 2010 - 12:45 PM' timestamp='1268754357' post='2073995']
The East will certainly be affected by the events of the first part of the Tribulation, however the East will not be involved with the particular events I've been focusing on such as WWIII and WWIV.
[/quote]

How could they not be involved in a world war?

[kafka]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='16 March 2010 - 09:21 PM' timestamp='1268788913' post='2074336']
How could they not be involved in a world war?
[/quote]
a world war is a general term. It does not denote or imply that all the nations of the world are at war as is clear in the examples of WWI and WWII.

In WWIII all of Europe, the U.S., some of South Africa, all of North Africa, all of the Middle East will be directly involved and engaged at one time or another. The Arabs will not even move east to Aghganistan. Russia will not even be involved. This is my understanding. Now some nations in the East may be involved in some indirect manner by sending troops or supplies, etc. however they will not be directly engaged.

The nations of the East will be affected by the world war (III). They will participate in the world wide famine, the civil strife, and the death by various causes such as disease which are a direct and simultaneous result of the war.

In WWIV the Allies will be the U.S. and the exiled European nations as well as some other nations perhaps some South African nations, Canada, or other nations in the Americas. They will invade and attempt to recover Europe from the occupation of the extremist Arab nation. They will be successful and even take all of the Middle East and North Africa, because of the Mercy and Justice of God.

[Socrates]

According to The Amazing Conte, it all starts this year!!

[quote]* New York City will be struck by a nuclear bomb (not a missile; not a dirty bomb) [b]sometime between June 1, 2010 and Dec 31, 2010[/b], inclusive
You will make them like an oven of fire, in the time of your presence.
The Lord will stir them up with his wrath, and fire will devour them.
* World War 3 begins as a result of the nuclear attack on New York City
* World War 3 is the first horseman of the apocalypse and the first of the Seven Seals.[/quote]

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Socrates' date='17 March 2010 - 01:37 PM' timestamp='1268843856' post='2074603']
According to The Amazing Conte, it all starts this year!!
[/quote]
ACtually any city could be struck, but I think Los Angeles is a more likely target.