Go Top
Why Lightning Struck Vatican
Catholics Against MhFM
Defending the Faith

The Crossroads at 23rd Street


"For, professing themselves to be wise, they became fools." (Romans 1:22)


"When FEAR knocks on your door, send FAITH to answer it."

MhFM’s Preposterous Assumption:
Why Lightning Struck The Vatican?

"And he [Jesus] said to them: I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven." - St Luke 10:18

Biblically … the use of the word “lightning”, more often than not, carries with it a “spiritual” connotation (either good or bad) of being some sort of celestial sign, a symbol, or omen meant to foretell the future and/or to signify an advent of change.

On February 11, 2013, shortly after Benedict XVI announced his demission from the papacy (at around 18:00) lightning struck St. Peter's Basilica … not once but twice.

To say the least … Catholics (and non-Catholics alike) worldwide were asking themselves two pertinent questions:

  1. Was it possible / permitted that a Roman Pontiff could choose to resign his office? And ...

  2. Was the lightning strike a direct sign of God’s wrath condemning Benedict XVI’s decision?

Is it permitted for a Roman Pontiff to abdicate his office?

In answer to that question … Canon 332§2 is clear: "If it happens that the Roman Pontiff resigns his office, it is required for validity that the resignation is made freely and properly manifested but not that it is accepted by anyone."

Benedict XVI's sudden resignation came as a bit of a shock to all those who erroneously assumed that a Roman Pontiff is obliged to stay in office until his death. But, as we have seen from canon law … that simply is not true.

Though Benedict XVI was the first Pope since the 15th century to resign from his office he was not the only one to have done so. To date, out of the 266 popes who have thus far been elected, I’d like to list 5 other prominent popes who resigned their office for varying reasons and circumstances.

  1. St. Pontian (230-235) ... 5 year tenure.

  2. Pope John XVIII (1004-1009) ... 5 year tenure.

  3. Pope Benedict IX (1032-1044) ... 11 year tenure.

  4. St. Celestine V (1294) ... 161 day tenure.

  5. Pope Gregory XII (1406-1415) ... 8 year 216 day tenure.

Benedict XVI was elected pope on April 19, 2005 and officially resigned on February 28, 2013 after serving 7 years 315 days in office.

Benedict XVI resigned citing old age and infirmity as his reasoning. He did not resign as the result of some sort of political upheaval or as the fulfillment of an end-times conspiratorial apocalyptic prophesy, as the Dimond Brothers would have you believe. No, he simply declared to the world that it was time for him to step down and dedicate the rest of his life to prayer.

Why is that so hard to believe?

And now on to the second question …

Was the lightning strike atop St Peter’s Basilica a direct sign from God’s condemning Benedict XVI’s announcement?

If you profess yourself to be a Roman Catholic… the answer to that question depends entirely on which side of the post-Vatican II fence you find yourself standing on.

If you’re in communion with Rome then I’d wager that your answer to that question is “no” … of course not. Though the lightning strike atop St Peter’s Basilica, on the day of Benedict’s announcement, was a bit “spooky” you were sound minded enough and quite capable of recognizing and accepting a natural meteorological phenomenon when it happens.

I’m not implying that the two events event didn’t leave you a bit astonished and/or "dumbstruck"… but you didn’t shake your concerning faith in the sanctity of the Roman Church.

On the other hand … if you’re Sedevacantist, like the Domond Brothers, who are in “schism” with the Roman Church then I’d wager that your answer is unequivocally “yes” and that both those events left you … "thunderstruck".

Here's a short February 2013 audio segment of Bob "Peter" Dimond presenting MhFM's interpretation of these two events.

[Fair Use Notice: I present the audio transcript in an effort to clarify and advance understanding of the political, human, religious, and social issues raised in this 2013 video. I believe presenting the audio transcript constitutes a “fair use” of any possible copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.]

“Why Lightning Struck the Vatican”: Brother Peter Dimond

[Benedict XVI] … and so, if he is the "Seventh King", the fact that his name in Greek equals 666, is that a signal that he is the last of the 7 kings, who causes people to worship the Antichrist?

I believe so.

In fact, on February 11, 2013, Benedict XVI shocked the world by announcing that he would resign his office as antipope. By resigning after only 7 years, Benedict XVI had a short reign.

He thus fulfilled the prophecy about the "Seventh King". The Apocalypse says that the "Seventh King" will reign for only a short time. Apocalypse (Revelation) 17:10: "… and when he is come, he must remain a short time."

In addition to the short duration of his reign, which fits precisely with the prophecy about the "Seventh King", the shock and abruptness of the of Benedict XVI’s decision to resign, arguably signals this shortness even more powerfully than would a death from old age or after a prolonged illness.

Moreover, and this is extremely important, just a few hours after Benedict XVI’s decision to resign on February 11th, which dominated the headlines that day, lightning struck the top of St Peter’s Basilica twice in an obvious sign from God.

Even mainstream media outlets were wondering what this lightning strike might mean?

Well, February 11th was the date on which the “Lateran Treaty”, which initiated the "Seven Kings" by giving them a new temporal kingship was signed in 1929.

Isn’t it interesting that, if what I’m saying about the "Seven Kings" is correct, and I believe it is, that it all began on a February 11, 1929 with the signing of the “Lateran Treaty”?

This act of February 11, 1929 gave a new temporal kingship to the first of the "Seven Kings", Pius XI. And it all culminated with the shocking resignation of the "Seventh King" on February 11, 2013; which was followed a few hours later, on the same day, with two lightning strikes atop St Peter’s Basilica to signal the end of this period, the end of the "Seven Kings"; which began on February 11, 1929 and ended, essentially, on February 11, 2013 with the announcement of the resignation of antipope Benedict XVI.

- End Dimond Text -

Wow are the Dimond Brothers high or what? Of course, I’m not accusing them of smoking anything, if you know what I mean? But if they do “indulge” … I would strongly suggest that they learn to “puff, puff, pass” … “puff, puff, pass”.

It would appear that Dimond is so intent on bolstering / justifying MhFM’s unique end-times Sedevacantist position that he’s willing to sacrifice the truth in order to do it.

So … let’s start with the “Seventh King” mentioned in Revelation (Apocalypse) 17:10.

There is a growing consensus that this “Seventh King” is actually referring to the “Seventh" and last king of the Herodian Dynasty, Herod Agrippa I, who became Judea's “last” ruler possessing the royal title of being its king.

Herod Agrippa I, ruled over Judea for a short period of 3 years (41-44 AD) before being suddenly stricken and dying from some unknown physical ailment

That hypothesis is certainly not as farfetched as the Enchanting Lustful Lie Dimond just told; but it’s definitely worth considering.

And now what about Dimond’s claim that the lightning striking the top of St Peter’s Basilica as being an obvious sign from God, a bad omen?

Dimond again stretches the truth to its maximum limit … and then some.

Dimond conveniently fails to mention that there was another time, relating to significant Roman Church matters, when lightning struck the top of St Peter’s Basilica after another controversial Papal announcement.

It happened on July 18, 1870 at the end of the First Vatican Council, when its participants assembled in St. Peter's Basilica for the solemn proclamation of “Pastor Aeternus”, the Council's "first dogmatic constitution on the Church of Christ," best known for its definition of the "infallible magisterium of the Roman pontiff."

Thomas Mozley, an Anglican clergyman and special correspondent for the London Times during the Council, described the event with Victorian verve:

"The storm, which had been threatening all the morning, burst now with the utmost violence, and to many a superstitious mind might have conveyed the idea that it was the expression of Divine wrath, as 'no doubt it will be interpreted by numbers,' said one officer of the Palatine Guard.

And so the Placets of the Fathers struggled through the storm, while the thunder pealed above and the lightning flashed in at every window and down through the dome and every smaller cupola, dividing if not absorbing the attention of the crowd.

Placet, shouted his Eminence or his Grace, and a loud clap of thunder followed in response, and then the lightning darted about the baldacchino and every part of the church and Conciliar Hall, as if announcing the response. So it continued for nearly one hour and a half, during which time the roll was being called, and a more effective scene I never witnessed. Had all the decorators and all the getters-up of ceremonies in Rome been employed, nothing approaching to the solemn splendor of that storm could have been prepared, and never will those who saw it and felt it forget the promulgation of the first Dogma of the Church."

To the imaginative person advocating supreme papal authority (ultramontane) the storm was a theophany appropriately expressing supernatural ratification of the conciliar decision

But, to the frustrated anti-infallibilist, the storm was a sign of divine displeasure over an ecclesiastical presumption.

How do the Dimond Brothers explain away St Peter's Basilica's July 18, 1870 bout with lightning in that instance?

Once again … the answer to that question depends entirely on which side of the post-Vatican II fence you find yourself standing on.

- Pax Tecum


Faith is Liberty Espoused  •  © 2024  •  23rdStreet.com  •  Contact