Friday, 17 February 2017

What evil is on the horizon from Rome and Bergoglio?

As Hilary White says, the "cool kids" are all now finding Fra Cristofero's blog, Anonomidellacruce. "Fra" is apparently a priest, with access and contacts and as such, remains anonymous. Conscience now prevents him from remaining silent. There is a link to the blog at the left.

Take the time to read this post by Hilary wherein she quotes Fra Cristofero.

Prepare friends, it is going to be a wild ride.

Remember, what you must do is pray, pray the Rosary, the Office (Divino Afflatu), get or stay in a state of grace through the sacraments, get to the traditional Mass. Be strong, know that this is why you were born to live at this time and to take a stand for Our Lord Jesus Christ, His Church and the Truth.


When you are confused, seek clarity in tradition. What did the Church teach and believe for two thousand years.That is what you follow.


These men are devils, they are sodomites, they have no faith in Christ, no love for Him or Our Lady. They must be confronted, they must be fought. They will not listen to us, they intend on fulfilling their plans, we may not be able to stop them, but we will not remain silent.


Remember, our parents and grandparents did not know better. They trusted them and they were lied to and manipulated. They did not know what we know, some did, and I think of Anne Roche Muggeridge whom I had the pleasure of meeting thirty years ago, who was a lioness in Canada.

Be ready and do not be alarmed.

God is in control and is permitting this. 

Here is the post with translation smoothed out by Hilary White.

https://anonimidellacroce.wordpress.com/2017/02/13/spifferi-parte-iii-i-grandi-rinnovamenti-di-bergoglio-di-fra-cristoforo/

Image result for pope francis
“Tip-offs III: the great “renewals” of Bergoglio” by Fra Cristoforo Let me tell you a story. Last Thursday, in a coffee bar in front of the Porta S. Anna (facing Vatican City) a Monsignor (very close to Bergoglio) in his 50's and a layman go for a coffee. The discussion turns to the “dubia”.
The Monsignor, with an “enough” says: “The Pope will never answer the “dubia” of the 4 Cardinals. He will never lower himself to their level. Francis has much bigger plans, which do not stop with Italy. The only hitch during this period has been the election of Trump.”
To which the layman replied: “And what has Trump got to do with Amoris Laetitia?”
“He has everything to do with it” replied the Monsignor, continuing: “the aim was to back Clinton, because she has a special relationship with Francis. They’re in frequent contact. And the goal to be reached was that the Catholic Church was to rehabilitate certain “non negotiable” principles in a soft manner, in such a way that the Vatican too would have had strong global political support, which is needed at this time, above all for the big manoeuvres which are coming.”
About this we must agree with the great Assange… read here
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/10/12/clinton-campaign-chief-helped-start-catholic-organisations-to-create-revolution-in-the-church/
The layman even more amazed says: “And which manoeuvres are coming?”
The Monsignor sips the last drops of coffee and says: “But have you still not understood that the vision which you have of the Church has been left behind?
“…But do you not understand that today the Pope is a world leader? That had Ratzinger stayed we’d all be finished. Do you know what the next manoeuvre will be? Precisely the diaconate for women. Because it’s the only way to show our concrete closeness to the Lutherans and Anglicans. And you will see that by November we will have the diaconate for women. Not of course identical with what you think. But it will come very close.” “BY NOVEMBER.”
~
There it is, in so many words what was said confidentially by the Monsignor of the Secretariat of State.
Now let us take a moment to reflect. Saint Peter’s Square is by this point almost always empty (and ‘TV 2000’ only films that small group of people crowded together in front of the window.) What do the faithful matter to Bergoglio? From the contents of this conversation it can be inferred that the Argentinean has plans much broader than evangelisation. Often and willingly he has said that evangelisation is a form of proselytism, which is not OK. Just recently he even said that he is worried that in certain congregations there are many vocations.
There you are. He seeks only himself. He seeks to keep the spotlights on himself, and not to tread on anyone’s toes, because he is the LEADER.
And Jesus Christ does not concern him. How unlike St Paul. The Apostle to the gentiles said “we are become as the refuse of the world” (1 Cor 4,9-13) precisely because in first place he put evangelisation. Bergoglio instead, to the prejudice of Christ and of the salvation of souls, wants the first place for himself.
Dear readers, this is the reality. And in a week there will be more appalling news. But I won’t anticipate the press releases.
The reason behind my anonymity is this. I am a priest, but I HAVE TO be anonymous. Otherwise I would no longer have any way of writing these things to you. I have reflected on this a great deal in these last months. But I still cannot reveal myself publicly. I do however still think it important that the faithful “understand” the dynamics which are evolving in the See of Peter. And these discussions at the coffee bar are for me extremely relevant, and in conscience I have to communicate them to you.
Fra Cristoforo

40 comments:

Johnno said...

I was thinking of the 3rd Secret and John XXIII, and his precise words that, "This does not concern my pontificate." As well as the vision of the 'bishop in white' that Lucia said gave them the "impression that it was the holy father" and as if "they were looking at a mirror."

Given the year the secret was to be revealed 1960, we perhaps assume that it was relevant to John XXIII, but, what about if prophecy as we know oftentimes has a dual meaning that we see reflected in typology, can also be concerned with Francis?

The 3rd secret could not only have been referring to John XXIII, but also a foreshadowing of a predecessor or one with the impression of being a predecessor that would likewise be calling for a council.

Johnno said...

When Vatican PR tried to dismiss the Fatima revelations as being concerned with the past, they perhaps through mental reservation refer to the council Vatican II, as John Paul II may have instructed them to.

But what if the secret was, or still is, concerned with Vatican III and Francis?

Maybe John XXIII was right that it didn't concern him, if the secret alleged an antipope, which John XXIII knew he was not. And the relevance of the 1960 release was intended to caution him, were he humbler, to turn from the idea of convening a council in the first place...

But John got hung up on the antipope portion and decided that instead of prudence, he'd push through with it anyway and thus unwittingly set the ball in motion towards the secret's inevitable fulfillment... an antipope who convenes a council after which follows destruction.

But since the prophesied destruction did not occur after VII, those who covered up the secret probably believed they'd escaped, or that the secret was wrong or Sr. Lucia had misinterpreted it, or meant something else...

But what if John XXIII's reckless actions of convening Vatican II, instead of the secret prudently giving him pause, as it had to Pius XII, had unwittingly given cover to the enemies of Christ who were plotting a more long term council and illicit Mass that VII and the Paul VI missal were only a precursor of, when in fact the reality was yet to come and the secret is referring to Francis and Vatican III? Something John XXIII could've taken action on by prudently putting off his council and conducting a purge, but instead provided cover for and exploitative openings for the prophesied bishop in white with the impression of being the Holy Father.

Could the Fatima centenary see Francis announce Vatican III?

Anonymous said...

Women deacons is only the tip of the iceberg ,priests will be allowed to marry ,and not just the opposite sex,already priests are "coming out" ,in one case announcing their sexuality on the Altar after Mass,to a large round of applause.

TLM said...

Yes, people are speculating a 'Vatican lll' but I'm not so sure that will happen. It may, but I have my doubts. If Bergoglio and co. have their finger on the pulse, they know that the Bishops are divided and there would be nothing but fireworks and opposition, especially after witnessing him for the last 4 years. They certainly wouldn't have a 'consensus' on revolutionizing the Church! Then again logic and common sense doesn't seem to be his strong suit so????? I see more of an 'Obama executive order' scenario going on. Time will tell.

Anonymous said...

This is merely speculation, but perhaps Bergoglio is waiting until the world is enmeshed in a third world war to convene the next council. What an opportune time for him to be seen as the man of peace. After all, he was allied with the Clintons. Hellary would most likely have us at war with Russia by now if she had been elected. Maybe Frankie's plans didn't work out as quickly as he had hoped. A dire international conflict would allow Bergoglio to take center stage and tie up the loose ends of his unification agenda. The blind, in their desperation and ignorance will surely follow. Perhaps Burke's exile to Guam is nothing more than Bergoglio's attempt to further squash resistance and ensure that an imperfect council is not called before this all comes to fruition. I hope I'm wrong. I hope and pray something happens to set things right with the Catholic Church. What dynamic times we find ourselves in! We must remember that the Church has stayed afloat amid more violent waters in its history. It is mind boggling to think that this disastrous post V2 age of the Church will one day lead to something much worse. Please pray for the few holy priests and religious that are left.

George Benner said...

It is with LOVE and COMPASSION that we need to tell everyone that they need to convert to the Catholic Church outside which there is No Salvation Out side of Her. If we do this alone we will return the Catholic Church to do the will of God. This is the profound difference between the last 70 years and the introduction of the novus ordo Mass and the centuries of obedience to our God.It is no coincidence that we lose vocations and the strength of our faith.

In Christ,
George Brenner

Kathleen1031 said...

Hold on. If this article quotes the Secretariat of State, and there were only three people there, does that not at least "out" Fra Cristofero and of course the Secretariat, who would not be pleased to find himself publicly quoted? This does not seem prudent. Maybe I am missing something.

Joseph Blain said...

I saw your post last week and reference to Fra Cristofero and found some interesting reading. Although Fra Cristofero wishes to remain anonymous, you can glean enough of his penchants from his correspondents in the combosx. Among those in frequent correspondence, are Esclava di Maria and the Marian based apparition site
http://www.conchiglia.us/IT_index.html.

Based on revelations to Conchigla, the site clearly identifies Pope Benedict XVI as the fallen Pope in white of Fatima, and Pope Francis as the anti-pope. Conchiglia also identifies the Shell of Saint James in Benedict's Coat of Arms as further proof of the authenticity of his papacy (which is also the name of the seer in question). They again strongly suggest the advent of one world government and religion.

As for Fra Cristofero's reference to Wikileaks Julian Assange, there is not much new to report. The Clinton's intrusion into Ecclesial politics has been extensively covered since 2016, when John Podesta, close advisor to Obama, was convinced that he could successfully guide Clinton to the Presidency. Maurizio Blondet has covered the sordid relations between the Clintons, the Podestas and so many other spurious enemies of the Church since 2016. If you want to read some very horrific revelations from Assange,and analyzed by Blondet , read his article on Maria Abamovic (very close friend of Clintons, Podesta, and Soros), who was also given a favorable mention by Trump in his inaugural address:
MESTRUO, SPERMA, LATTE DI DONNA: TUTTI A CENA CON JOHN PODESTA

We are not living in auspicious times. Motus in fine velocior.....
Coraggio Joseph Blain

Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas said...

@ Joseph Blain

Could you clarify, who was given a favorable mention by Trump?

It seems to me that Bergoglio wants a one world religion. Many things he said and did even before papacy point in this direction. God is not Catholic; doctrines divide; do not convert to Catholicism, but stay where you are; we are all God's children; there is no hell, only dissolution of the soul; keeping all commandments impedes progress, follow your inner forum instead; I believe in... love.
This love is really sodomy for too many of his minions. Or sex. It also means self-destructing openness and tolerance to error and evil.

Just one thought: Not many of us growing up ever imagined that our Catholic faith would turn us into undesirables, deplorables, lepers and thought criminals. I lost my faith in university years - which was by design of those who wanted me to lose it - largely due to the concern for all the people around the world who were not Catholics. How could a loving God make them, only to send them to hell for all eternity? There was also the question of contraceptives. How can I, who works so hard to survive (a monthly salary covered a month's rent for one dingy room without a window; bathroom shared with 4 families, no kitchen), be deprived even of a love of a husband? Why would I be grateful for such a life, where everything good was denied me? Obviously, it would be irresponsible to have children.

All the people around me used contraceptives, didn't go to Mass, and generally decided to go with the flow - devil, hell, eternal damnation were all myths to them, silly and even harmful. They did yoga, did not believe in the real presence or even resurrection, led sexually immoral lives, and wore white in church for the wedding.

When I left the Church due to my deep unbelief, they accused me of cruelty to my broken-hearted Parents, and asked: Why can't you be normal? Who do you think you are?

I could not figure out, how the vast majority of people could be so hypocritical, so unconcerned for the children they begot, and in whom they now needed to instill a love for truth.

I did not understand! They themselves really did not have a love for truth! They just wanted things, wanted to be happy and successful, wanted to be nice, to go with the flow (progress)!

Their children are adults now and some have their own children.

Francis Church was inevitable, it seems now.

Those of us who don't share his low expectations of humanity, and don't agree with his imposition of low expectations on those who love truth, are a tiny minority. We are perceived as hateful. People around us, young people, CAN NOT see us anything other than petty, judgemental, kill-joy, prideful, backward.

Why would we even want to save a "church" made up of such misguided people? Why would our Father in Heaven want such a church?

He is a worthy of a Church made up of those who love Him.

Anonymous said...

It makes sense that Bergolio would want to have women deaconettes in the church (conciliar church, that is). But I don't believe that it's because he wants a "concrete closeness with Anglicans and Lutherans." Rather, Bergolio just wants to destroy the Church, and attacking the priesthood is Satan's way of doing it.

~M.Ray

Anonymous said...

The false Prophet Bergoglio who says a Country who has borders and limits immigration is a danger to humanity and the planet. Words spoken from a true Communist Marxist and occupies the Chair of Peter for his master Satan.

Benjamin Mankowski said...

Last I checked, his papal name was Pope Francis. Did anyone other than Jesus Himself ever refer to Peter as "Simon" or "bar Jonah?" I have my concerns about Pope Francis, but I will not point the finger and appoint myself as arbiter of the pope's legitimacy. A little humility in doing the same might be in order for the rest of you.

Vox Cantoris said...

Humility? You mean like someone who calls people rigid, fomenters of coprophagia and self-absorbed Promethean, neo-Pelagians?

Johnno said...

Actually we still generally call Peter - Peter, or St. Peter. I've never heard him ever referred to as 'Pope Peter.'

Mark Docherty said...

Vox,

It would be a shame if your wise words at the beginning of this post were to get lost in the Fra Chrstoforo revelations. Something very big is indeed coming. Everyone can feel it. When it happens, people are going to panic, and their faith will be tested. So preparation is key, and you can't be too prepared.

"Prepare friends, it is going to be a wild ride. Remember, what you must do is pray, pray the Rosary, the Office (Divino Affaltu), get or stay in a state of grace through the sacraments, get to the traditional Mass. Be strong, know that this is why you were born to live at this time and to take a stand for Our Lord Jesus Christ, His Church and the Truth. When you are confused, seek clarity in tradition. What did the Church teach and believe for two thousand years.That is what you follow. These men are devils, they are sodomites, they have no faith in Christ, no love for Him or Our Lady. They must be confronted, they must be fought. They will not listen to us, they intend on fulfilling their plans, we may not be able to stop them, but we will not remain silent. Remember, our parents and grandparents did not know better. They trusted them and they were lied to and manipulated. They did not know what we know, some did, and I think of Anne Roche Muggeridge whom I had the pleasure of meeting thirty years ago. Be ready and do not be alarmed.God is in control and is permitting this."

Ana Milan said...

A pope's first duty is to uphold the Deposit of Faith, Magisterium & Tradition of the CC & PF isn't doing so. Instead, he is actively seeking out schismatics & infidels to be his advisers in order to bring these deniers of Christ into a NWO religion of which he sees himself Chief of Staff. Therefore, there is no rational reason to prevent faithful Cardinals & Bishops from supporting the Dubia. Those that are supportive are only humbly asking PF to clarify five questions relating to AL that lead to divergent interpretations, particularly relating to divorced & remarried & cohabiting couples (no distinction for LGBT couples), which contradict the sixth & ninth commandments.

Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament - not an Ideal - & the various interpretations already being put in place contradict fundamental principles of doctrine & discipline, so It is the duty of the pope to confirm the Brethren in the True Faith & clarify once & for all what he intended in his Papal Exhortation Amoris Laetitia. Yet PF ignores this basic duty as Supreme Pastor. We know, of course, that he hates fundamentalists but he cannot afford to ignore the teaching handed down consistently from the First Apostles & Christ Himself. Jesus said "If you love Me, keep My Commandments". Consequently, if PF & cronies don't want to follow Christ they won't want to keep His Commandments either, so this should be sufficient evidence of their apostasy. Are those Cardinals & Bishops with their heads in the sand prepared to forfeit their own salvation for the illusion that the Pope is always correct in what he says even though not speaking authoritatively ex cathedra? Many know the Third Secret of Fatima & it is now time to release it in full & to urge PF to carry out the consecration of Russia.

"To test this faith and confidence of the just, there will be occasions in which everything will seem to be lost and paralyzed. This will be, then, the happy beginning of the complete restoration." Our Lady of Good Success.

Joseph Blain said...

To Dorota Mosciewiczp-Palatas,

Dear Dorota, Thank you for your request for clarification on the reference to President Trump; in fact there is a double error in my post: the first reference is to Serbian born Performance Artist Marina Ambrovic, Spirit Cooking; the honorable mention did not come from Trump but from the the Italian Director Paolo Sorrentino, of the HBO Series the Young Pope; in the second series the Jude Law character states that the most important contemporary artist today is Marina Ambrovic. But whether it was Trump or HBO, it is indicative of very sinister undercurrents.....

Sincerely,

Joseph Blain

Kathleen1031 said...

Thank you all for such good commentary.

Anonymous said...

I agree Vox. Bergoglio doesn't deserve the title Pope Francis until he actually upholds the Catholic faith. He is a joke, an NWO puppet promoted by some faggot loving, child molester protecting cardinals who wish this church to develop into an international safe haven for every type of despicable sin. I am by no means a wonderful Catholic Christian, but he doesn't deserve my respect. He has never pronounced any new dogma nor defended even the simplest tenets of the true faith. I can remain Catholic and disregard this imposter and his heretical quest. My only prayer is for his conversion.

Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas said...

Dear Joseph,
I would not call this disturbed person, Marina, an artist, not even a contemporary one. It is very shocking that she looks like she does at the age of 70.
But this is the least shocking and troubling thing.
A man identifying himself as Titus Frost on his you tube channel revealed yesterday that child pornography was in fact found on James Alefantis' (or Comet Ping Pong's) computer. The evidence was forwarded to police on Dec. 5th (screen shots of emails and even the name of the receiving officer are revealed). The evidence was recently sent to AG Sessions, among other people.

There were thousands of paedophiles and sex traffickers arrested in the last three weeks, but none from the so called elites.

If Alefantis remains a free man, we really have reasons to worry.

Should this interest you, you will find this evidence near the end of the following video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQ82gD8VYIo

Benjamin Mankowski said...

Vox, you've done your own set of name calling. I agree the Pope is wrong on that. I was hoping I could appeal to you, that your righteousness might exceed that of the Pharisees.

Unless you know something I don't, you and I can't call for a conclave or make Pope Francis step down. We can, however, as Anonymous said below, pray for his conversion. We've had bad popes in history, some of whom may be in hell. Those who were pointing the finger and assuming the right to call into question a pope's legitimacy back then are probably more likely to be right alongside those bad popes.

Uxi said...

Yes, humility is absolutely needed. Recall that St. Paul would not blaspheme the Jewish High Priest in Acts and repented of calling him a "whitewashed wall" even though he was persecuting them! This is the test of Job. Do not fail!

Anonymous said...

If the account of the conversation in the cafe at Porta S. Anna is accurate, then we don't have a Pontiff but a Hireling in the Vatican. Naturally a Hireling would seek coalition with the Cuckquean Hillary Clinton.

Please God will deliver us from this.

Vox Cantoris said...

Dear Benjamin,

I have not denied that Jorge Bergoglio is the Bishop of Rome. In fact, that is the problem. I have said elsewhere on this blog that I am not qualified to declare him an antipope or "the" false prophet. I have certainly every right to be raise alarm about him and the evil actions undertaken by him and others. That, you cannot deny.

Frankly, I am scandalised in the truest sense of the word by this man. When he came out that night on the loggia I sat watching and wanted to vomit. I mean literally, I felt cold, as if something dark had happened. The next day, he did not genuflect, he refused to bless the media, because some were not Catholics or non-believers.

Yes, we must pray for him. I pray for his conversion and an end to this papacy and a cleansing of the Church from these sodomites, perverts, Freemasons, modernists and communists.


Kathleen1031 said...

Anytime one points out a heretic, there are apologists right behind, on the scene denouncing it as pharisaical, etc. This is one reason we are in such a terrible pit of moral decay in the church, because we have papalotry on the part of too many, or just plain effeminate weakness. Personally I have run out of patience with the sanctimonious attitude of a lot of Catholics, morally superior because they support immigration, etc., or won't call out heresy. Enough already.

Anonymous said...

Well said.

Unknown said...

I am a convert from 2003. I thought I converted to the Catholic Church, but after doing a lot of research concerning Vat 2, the new mass and the popes since John 23, I have come to the conclusion that it is simply no longer the "Church" nor are the men who have pushed the errors of Vat 2--actual popes.

Have fun with your Vat 2 religion and your new leader. It disgusts me.

Eirene said...

Vox - just seen a report that Francis - in a speech just now - says that Muslim terrorism does not exist! Please follow. Breitbart News
has the details! The report attracted over 8,000 comments!

Anonymous said...

Agreed Kathleen. Benjamin and these other Mark Thomas-types are just as much the problem as Bergoglio himself is.

Kathleen1031 said...

Joseph Blain, thank you for taking responsibility for your erroneous comment about President Trump, who is already unfairly treated. It is kind of astounding, and makes one pause, to consider how easily we can wrongfully malign someone's character as we blithely move on with our own day or lives. We cause a black mark on someone's reputation, and off we go, oblivious (or not) that we have caused harm to another with our reckless accusations. We send out our verbal missiles with abandon, and great harm can result, which is then our moral responsibility, even if we don't know it. Food for thought.

Vox Cantoris said...

From Jim Norwood

A message for ...

http://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-secret-gay-operatives


... on What evil is on the horizon from Rome and Bergoglio?

Martine said...

I have been wondering about new converts who learn the truth concerning what happened to the Catholic Church. Did you leave Catholicism for it?

Unknown said...

To Martine:

I attend an independent chapel with a priest in the Archbishop Thuc line. If that were not available to me I would probably attend an Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church as their rites of priestly ordination and bishop consecration were untouched by Vat 2. I know several sedevacantists who use this option. Other sedes feel it is a sin to attend a Mass that is una cum Francis. It is a most confusing time for everyone.

Before Francis came on the scene, I occasionally spoke parishes on behalf of Project Rachel and quoted JP2's 'a word to women who have had abortions.' I was even a guest on Life on the Rock in 2004.

In the end I am somewhat grateful to the Francis pontificate---otherwise I would never have researched the history of Vat 2 and what followed. At the same time I still feel very betrayed and somewhat bitter.

Anonymous said...

It quotes a *monsignor* from the Secretariat of State.

Terrye Newkirk said...

Can someone illuminate for me the statement that "had Ratzinger stayed we'd all be finished"?

Anonymous said...

Terrye, this is only a slight guess, but i believe it may mean that if Pope Benedict XVI had stayed, he would have pushed back against the liberal modernists that surrounded him. Perhaps if he were younger, stronger he may have fought harder. Those with a liberal agenda probably feared for their status because PBXVI was an intellectual giant so to speak. His clarity and firmness on certain moral issues confounded the progressives. It's only a guess though. God Bless! Have a good day.

Joseph Blain said...

Dear Dorota,

Yes I am familiar with the charges of rampant pedophilia in Washington. I almost didn't bring it up in my initial post; in fact you only have to google Pizzagate to find out all the horrific undercurrents in mainstream Washington. The Clinton-Podesta-Obama-Abramovic-Alefante connections. It has been significantly covered in various blogs. I agree with you on the elite fascination with this 70 year old so-called Serbian performance artist. Maurizio Blondet outrightly calls her a "Strega"....

As for the discussions on the rules of deference to address the current titular bishop in the Chair of Peter, Francis or Jorge, note that Fra Cristofero gives high praise to Antonio Socci, the first Italian Vaticantista do declare " Non est Petrus" I share Fra Christofero's admiration for this great Catholic defender of the faith and his site "Lo Straniero".... however, also worth reading is Fr. Ariel's response to Antonio Socci. Fr. Ariel's site, Isola de Patmos, the place of the last revelation, is quite interesting: the papacy representing a necessary paternity towards the faithful, even though that there always good and bad fathers or "cattiva paternità, ma è sempre paternità."

In Xpristo. Joseph Blain

Anonymous said...

Marc chippino, where to start I've read a comment saying more must convert to the RCC that would be great, but it's not gonna happen I fear our faith is close to irreparable damage. Pope francis it pains me to put pope when mentioning him he is bent on destroying what's left of the real traditional Catholic Church & there's not much left anyway. All this stay at home pray the rosary don't go near a church or priest that is part of novus ordo sect it's fine saying that but 99.9% of priests are novus ordo but some are bloody good priests who are aware of what they are a part of. Many of us want to attend church in my case there's no proper Latin mass near me so I can't go mass or shouldn't. Suppose what I'm saying is I'm close to throwing in the towel if rumours are true of women deacons & priests that's it for me I'm out. But at the same time allowing remarried Catholics to receive communion means nothing to me When you hear rumours about ssm women priests etc. People who remarry im fine with that, we already allow Anglican Protestant priests who are married with families to become catholic priests which is so unfair on catholic priests who can't marry. Either stop allowing married Protestant priests to join us or allow catholic priests to marry personally I'd stop protestants who are married from becoming Roman Catholic priests. I pray things get better I'm just scares it's not gonna happen.

Martine said...

So far you've kept faith in Catholicism, it looks. Please do. Thanks for the reply.

Eirene said...

To Benjamin Mankowski. Your Virtue Signalling leaves me speechless ! Almost as speechless as the antics of Francis ! Don t bother to reply. Sanctimonious retorts bore me !