"There is to be a particular insult, which will be inflicted upon My Holy Name, in an effort to desecrate Me, during Holy Week. This wicked gesture, during Holy Week, will be seen by those who keep their eyes open and this will be one of the signs by which you will know that the imposter [sic], who sits on the throne in My Church on earth, does not come from Me." (March 14, 2013, bold print in original)
Throughout the messages of Maria Divine Mercy, Pope Francis has received his fair share of labeling with such terms as "imposter", though no label is applied to him more, as the successor of Pope Benedict XVI, than that of being the "False Prophet" (see, for example, January 21, 2012; April 12,2012; May 26, 2012; July 10, 2012; February 17, 2013; February 18, 2013).
So, upon the day following Pope Francis' election, this prophecy appeared that foretold a "particular insult which will by inflicted upon [Jesus'] Holy Name" by which we "will know that the imposter [sic] who sits on the throne in [the Lord's] Church on earth, does not come from" Him. And, we are given specific timing as to when this "wicked gesture" was to be committed: during Holy Week, no less.
What would this "wicked gesture" have been? It sounds foreboding; such language hearkens that surrounding the "desolating sacrilege" of Matthew 24:15. What may immediately come to mind is that Pope Francis washed the feet of non-Christians and women on during the Mandatum ceremony on Holy Thursday, which actions drew comment from many quarters: comment commending the Pope for his pastoral sensitivity, along with comment indicating that the Pope's actions stepped beyond the letter of the liturgical law concerning the foot-washing ceremony. However, the message from Holy Thursday - March 28, 2013 - indicated that this "particular insult" had not quite yet happened, though was rather "very near": "The time for the abomination is very near. The time for choosing between My Way, or that of the false prophet, is almost upon you. Watch now, as the Truth will be twisted by the imposter [sic]."
Looking back on Holy Week, it is difficult to find something Pope Francis did which may have qualified as the foretold "particular insult" against Jesus' Holy Name. His most widely reported act that week was the foot-washing of the women and non-Christians, yet, as just indicated, we know that, according the messages themselves, as of Holy Thursday the action had not yet taken place. The Celebration of the Lord's Passion on Good Friday and the Easter Vigil and Easter Sunday Masses all seemed to transpire without any occurrence which may been identified as the "abomination". One would then wonder whether the "abomination" would have been specified by the messages themselves. There are three messages from Good Friday which we may analyze to this effect.
The first message from Good Friday is pregnant with foreboding sounding language describing circumstances which were to have commenced that very day:
"My dearly beloved daughter, today My Church on earth will be Crucified.
Today marks the beginning of the changes, which will be rapid and which will change the face of the Catholic Church in the world.
Watch now, as all I have told you will come to light. I defy, those amongst you, to deny the awful truth when you are forced to swallow a lie.
As you now witness the Crucifixion of my Church on earth, I will call you to proclaim the Truth of God.
There will be those amongst you who will betray Me today." (March 29, 2013, bold print in original)
With this first message from Good Friday we are given word of some considerably grave circumstances: "the beginning of the changes", "the Crucifixion of the Catholic Church", a betrayal, complete with the exhortation to "Watch now, as all I have told you will come to light". Despite the heavy language with which these circumstances are presented, however, we are no closer to identifying any "particular insult" or "wicked gesture" which Pope Francis would have just then committed that Holy Week.
The Second message on Good Friday also speaks of the "Crucifixion of the Catholic Church":
"My dearly beloved daughter, history will be made today. As My Passion is being commemorate it will, in truth, represent the Crucifixion of the Catholic Church.
The Crucifixion of My Mystical Body - My Church on Earth - commences today, the beginning of the final persecution, as the Masonic plan to defile My House, will now become clear to all who know the Truth.
History will now repeat itself, but the Truth will not be denied." And so forth. (March 29, 2013, Second Message for Good Friday).
Here again, we are presented in foreboding language circumstances of grave consequence: "the Crucifixion of the Catholic Church" and "the beginning of the final persecution". It's enough to make one, perhaps conveniently, forget all about the foretold "abomination" which Pope was supposed to have committed that Holy Week. But, alas, whether these grave circumstances and the pope's "wicked gesture" are one and the same thing is not specified by the messages. And, if they are implied to have meant to be the same thing, what Pope Francis exactly did that day to commit some betrayal or even the "Crucifixion of the Catholic Church" is also not identified.
The third message from Good Friday offers a slightly higher degree of specificity. Again, a sort of betrayal is mentioned, as in the first message from that day, yet there is the further indication that this betrayal would have had something to do with kissing:
"My dearly beloved daughter when Judas Isacariot betrayed Me, he held My Head and kissed me on the cheek. When those who lead My Church say they love Me, and then betray Me, you will see, clearly, their kiss of betrayal.
Not at My Feet will they fall. It will not be My Feet they kiss, but those of My servants, My followers, My sinners." (March 29, 2013, bold print in original)
* * *
Before analyzing what kissing may or may not had to with the said betrayal or even "particular insult", it is noteworthy to point out here that the distinction made between the Feet of Jesus and those of His servants, followers, or sinners, does not align with Jesus' biblical teaching on his presence within others. He stated, "He who receives you receives me" (Matthew 10:40), and, most especially, "Whatsoever you do to the least of my brethren, so you do unto me" (Matthew 25:40). One would think that by kissing the feet of Jesus' servants, followers, and even His sinners, that one is kissing the feet of Jesus Himself. The idea that what we do to others, we do to Jesus Himself is a core theme within the parable of the sheep and the goats (Matthew 25:31-46), and the distinction made within the third message of Maria Divine Mercy's from Good Friday between the feet of Jesus and the feet of others, does not align with this scriptural truth.
* * *
Continuing with this message's focus on kissing the Feet of Jesus vs. those of his servants, followers, or sinners, one would wonder - since at that point Pope Francis' foot-washing ceremony the from day prior had become international news - whether the kissing mentioned entailed an allusion to the fact that Pope Francis kissed the feet of the youth upon washing them on Holy Thursday, as seen here:
Pope Francis customarily kissed the feet of those whose feet he washed on Holy Thursday, as seen in this photo from when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires and washed the feet of mothers and their babies on a prior Holy Thursday:
Kissing the feet of those whose feet he washed is also something Pope John Paul II did:
So, in what may this betrayal by kissing have to do with the "abomination" which, as of the preceding day, was "very near"? The third message from Good Friday continues:
"Showing concern for the needs of fellow human beings is admirable. But when you promote the physical well-being of the needs of man over their spiritual needs, it is not I, Jesus Christ, you follow.
Humanism is not Christianity. To be Christian means surrendering all to Me, abandoning yourself in full humility at My Feet. It means allowing Me to guide you. It means obedience to My Laws and doing all that you can to show the example of My Love for all. Today I was betrayed." (March 29, 2013, bold print in original)
Following the words "Today I was betrayed", we are given no further mention of the "betrayal", and the language indicating what this betrayal may or may not have had to do with the impending "abomination" is no more specific. After having previously received clear foretelling by the messages of Maria Divine Mercy of a "particular insult", "wicked gesture", and an "abomination", the language on Good Friday about there having been some betrayal - and what exactly it had to do with kissing - becomes much more vague.
Overall, following the third message on Good Friday which spoke of the betrayal and kissing, despite our having been assured on Holy Thursday that this abomination was "very near", there has no longer been any mention of the "particular insult" in the messages of Maria Divine Mercy. Furthermore, if one were to attempt to link the abomination with the kissing of feet, betrayal, or Crucifixion of the Catholic mentioned on Good Friday, such connection-making may only go so far since the messages do not necessarily present the abomination and betrayal or kissing of feet on Good Friday as the same thing. For all the explicit, clear prophecy which had earlier preceded, foretelling a "particular insult" which was to take place on Holy Week, we are left with indication of an abomination which is not all too particular.
By themselves, the messages of Maria Divine Mercy do not deliver on indicating what this "particular insult" was: "This wicked gesture, during Holy Week, [which would have been] seen by those who keep their eyes open." Following the ominous-sounding occurrences mentioned on Good Friday, Holy Week drew to a close with no further mention or indication as to what this "particular insult" was. Unless can search out some "wicked gesture" performed by Pope Francis during Holy Week, this is one prophecy which, for all its earlier definitive language, fell flat.
But, hold on! Someone has done just that: searched out something done by Pope Francis which may qualify as some sacrilege committed on Holy Week, and, here's a video which has been produced about it.
At first glance, one may say that this is not necessarily a "wicked gesture" to be seen by "those who keep their eyes open", but rather by those who by some chance have access to this obscure video of a portion of the Celebration of the Lord's Passion on Good Friday.
I am not yet able to verify whether the makers of this video have anything to do with Maria Divine Mercy. However, now all that language form the third message of Good Friday about kissing the feet of Jesus' servants, followers, and sinners, appears to start falling into place. So, if we are to momentarily ignore the contradiction that this distinction between Jesus' Feet and those of others has with the scriptural truth presented by the parable of the sheep and the goats, then we can see how this video clearly contrasts Pope Francis' not having kissed the feet of the crucifix on Good Friday, with his having kissed the feet of the youth upon washing their feet on Holy Thursday. But in order for this contrast to have weight, it must first be proven that the act of veneration Pope Francis performed with the crucifix by touching his forehead to it, and indeed not having kissed it, actually means anything. Though we may be used to seeing people kiss the feet of crucifixes as an act of veneration, is there anything indeed wrong in the first place with Pope Francis' not having kissed it?
The rubrics for the Celebration of the Lord's Passion don't specifically call only for kissing. They state: "The Priest, clergy, and faithful approach to venerate the cross as if in procession. They make a simple genuflection or perform some other appropriate sign of reverence according to the local custom, for example, kissing the Cross." (Missale Romanum, Rubrics for Good Friday, 18)
Since Pope Francis performed some other act of veneration which would be allowed by the rubrics, it cannot be stated that the pope performed some sort of betrayal by not kissing the feet of the crucifix.
It is worth noting here that in Maria Divine Mercy's third message from Good Friday, the discussion about kissing begins by mentioning how Judas betrayed Jesus by kissing Him, not by not kissing Him: "My dearly beloved daughter when Judas Isacariot betrayed Me, he held My Head and kissed me on the cheek." According to this message, we were to see some "kiss of betrayal"; we were not supposed to see no kissing at all: "When those who lead My Church say they love Me, and then betray Me, you will see, clearly, their kiss of betrayal." So, on that note, the connection of this third message from Good Friday with what Pope Francis' act of veneration becomes even further implausible.
It being the case that there was nothing wrong with Pope Francis did in performing some other act of adoration besides kissing, the implication that he should for some reason have kissed the crucifix becomes arbitrary, and so too does the contrast between Pope Francis' not having kissed the crucifix after having kissed the feet of the youth the day prior.
Perhaps Pope Francis' act of veneration would possibly be reason for pause for someone who is used to only seeing kissing as an act of veneration. From the subjective perspective of this person who may not know that some other act of veneration is allowed, another act of veneration like touching one's forehead to the crucifix may appear as a sort of slight to Jesus. Even in such a case, Pope Francis' actions would be a far cry from a "particular insult" or "wicked gesture". For his actions to qualify as wicked, there would have to be something objectively evil about them. Since the act of veneration he did perform would be allowed by the rubrics, there was nothing objectively evil about it. Perhaps he was sick and was in actuality performing an objectively good act of charity by not spreading his germs to a crucifix which would be kissed by others. We don't know if he was sick; what we do know is that what he did can not be qualified as any "particular insult" or "wicked gesture".
And, in addition to there not having been anything wrong with the act of veneration Pope Francis performed, he later prostrated himself before the crucifix during the same service:
So, again, since we cannot read anything evil into what Pope Francis did in performing some other act of veneration besides kissing the crucifix on Good Friday, we are left without any real insult being inflicted upon the Jesus' Holy Name, let alone a particular one.
Nothing came of the "prophecy" of Maria Divine Mercy's regarding the "particular insult", "wicked gesture", or "abomination" which was supposed to have taken place during Holy Week.
Maria Divine Mercy should not be so ready to apply the term "false prophet" to others.