Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Pope Bows to Ecumenical Patriarch, Does Not Kiss Feet for Some Reason



Featured post from the past.

Acting on a whim originating in his idiosyncratic view of the Church he leads, Jorge Bergoglio bows and seeks a blessing from the schismatic Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch.

Unless he is willing to give up entirely the role and position of the Roman Catholic Church -- which he may be, were it possible -- this is just wrong. He is Peter. The lower does not bless the higher. The lower is blessed by the higher. The lower bows to the higher, the higher does not bow to the lower. In Jorge Bergoglio's mind, however, all questions of supremacy and hierarchy are set aside in the warm glow of confusion that characterizes his life.

Of course, he has always had this impulse to bow to heretics and schismatics.



This man, Jorge Bergoglio, seems willing to abandon the Petrine Office and act on his eccentric,  private impulses at the drop of a hat. He may always be the Pope, but it seems he often sets aside the responsibilities of that office -- not the least of which is keeping up appearances -- and bumbles along with his personal Humble Jorge schtick.

Senor Bergoglio, please. You must know that reunion with the Orthodox is a fool's errand. Yes, it would be a glorious feat were you to pull it off, and you would be very, very famous in history, and even more people would love, love, love you.

But the Orthodox are still mad about the sack of Constantinople by Crusaders, and reject the filoque. As is the fate of all who leave Peter's side, they have split into their national churches, and countless subsects. Orthodoxy is not catholic, but nationalistic. Surely Senor Beroglio knows this? Even if Bartholemew were charmed into going along (retaining the odd heresy here and there, of course) the Russians and Bulgarians and all the rest of the Orthodox crazy quilt wouldn't follow, nor does he have the authority to make them.

Perhaps Pope Francis will give up primacy, and achieve reunion with Orthodox and Anglicans in one fell swoop as the Bishop of Rome among brother bishops. Of course, he cannot, but he seems to enjoy dancing to that music.

At what point does humility become a twisted pride in one who imagines he can personally transcend all, and change the world by his example? The Bear cannot read Jorge Bergoglio's heart, but only watch what he does, and listen to what he says.

And the problem with this picture is that it is worth a thousand words.

Thanks to Rorate Caeli.

31 comments:

  1. oy. (facepalm; headshake; deep sigh) oy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. At what point? From the beginning-- I'll wear what I want on the balcony, I'll make a big show of my black shoes and paying my hotel bill to myself. I'll not bless those who see me at audience. I'll discourage adherence to the moral law. I'll condemn only Catholics, and tell all heretics, heathens and perverts to forget about converting. I'll step into a Kia at the tail end of a millions of dollars trip. More? More? I'll sack anyone who dares to call me on it.

    More?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you ever wonder what His Holiness is like when there isn't a camera in the room?

      Delete
  3. Haters gonna hate, Bear. You rigid, promethian types are behind the times. Didn't Jesus say that there are many paths up the mountain? If he didn't, I'm sure he would have if orthodox Catholics hadn't crucified him. Stop being so judgmental.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your talents are wasted on a microblog, Roke.

      Delete
    2. Pope is the schismatic and heretical one. He represents the brothel which is called roman papacy. There is no office of Peter among the Christian church which is the Orthodox church. This the barbarian and illiterate barbarian visigoths, franks and others (which represented the pathetic roman catholics at the time) assumed the title to challenge Byzantium. And that was one of the reasons of the schism in addition to the theological garbage that the papists had introduced. There was no primacy of the pope among the patriarachates. All the original patriarchates are still orthodox and the papists did not have any place in the holy sepulchure until they forced themselves by looting and massacring Jerusalem. Roman papists and their heresy are the best representation of the presence of the devil on Earth. The Christian church will never unite with the heretics of papism as long as its Holy Christian Tradition and ascetic fathers and ecumenical councils continue to guide the church. Orthodox patriarchs never kissed the feet of the representative of the devil. Only the schismatic ones that briefly sighed a heretical union to try to save Constantinople from the Turks only them possibly did so. The attempt to unify the Christian church with the papist filth was massively rejected by the real Christians and its representatives were excommunicated. Your pathetic blog is not only antichristian, it is also stupid and ahistorical which is pretty typical of your kind. Only when the papists humble themselves in front of the Christian church and the original patriarchates of it which make the Orthodox church only then will the church become whole again. Until then you will be the representatives of the primate heresy on Earth.

      Delete
    3. You know, hearing an apologetical broadside like Ioannis's is almost refreshing, in way. You know pretty well where he stands, with no sign of any ecumenical intoxication in sight.

      Of course, where he stands in is open schism with the True Church of Christ, captive of a church that devolved into a wholly owned subsidiary of the Byzantine state a millennium and a half ago (and its various successor states since), eager to embrace whatever dicta were convenient to those secular authorities (like, say, divorce).

      But I appreciate the clarity on offer. I really do.

      Delete
    4. Quite interesting to call the Church of Christ, the Orthodox Church a subsidiary of Byzantine state. That from the pathetic presence of a church which in itself became and is a state in itself with its bishops allowed to fight in battle and pillage and massacre other humans including Christians. Your church is indeed the one that holds hostage the real Church of Christ in its spiritual, ascetic and humble natures that were created in the East not in the West. Your hypocrisy is the one that is refreshing and very useful to see indeed for educational purposes so that the uneducated ones do not follow in the filth that the papacy represents. It is very useful for the Orthodox to see the fallacies that your beliefs represent and they should always be reminded by examining the papists' historical tenure all the way to our own days.

      Delete
    5. I'm sorry, Bear, but I cannot compete against Ioannis--he has me beat for pure polemical nonsense. The Church in Rome was clearly recognized in the early centuries of Christendom as the preeminent Church and the Holy Father was likewise recognized as the symbol of Christ's truth and the Vicar of Christ on earth. Schismatics and heretics always rewrite history to justify their errors. Ioannis is no exception.

      Delete
    6. It is not the Orthodox that rewrote history. That is how they brainwash the uneducated papists. Papism has already rewrote the history, the dogmatics and altered the ecumenical councils of the church many times over to fit its claims of primacy. Dream on, you never had that characteristic in the original church. Only an honorary title and equal among all the patriarchs of the East. That is all you deserve and nothing more. The church started in the East not in the West. The vicar of the church and the symbol of the true church and all these buffooneries the illiterate visigoths and ostrogoths that initially made your church are the ones that deviced it to make themselves legitimate barbarians from simply pure barbarians in the eyes of Byzantium. You used to be the mostly heretical part of christianity even in those days plagued with the heresies of Arius and others because you were uneducated and crude minded. The real Christian church the Orthodox Church moved and lived in full spirit in the East. Even the original popes were Greek educated and very Orthodox by todays standards. You are presently a caricature of what the church was originally not very different from the protestants. Even the divine liturgy you altered by the way it used to be originally. Only the Orthodox church retained its authenticity and its doctrinal consistency because it had and still has the Holy Spirit in it unlike you. Look at the old Christian churches, Coptic, Armenian they all are very similar to Orthodox because in essence they are. You have nothing of the sort that is why you split in a bunch of further heresies. You have nothing to do with the symbol of Christ's true church. Absolutely nothing.

      Delete
    7. Calm down, Ioannis, I know it burns your that the Roman Catholic Church traces its origin to Christ and that fools and idiots like St. Augustine and St. Jerome knew that they should and did submit to the Holy Father in his role as the Vicar of Christ. I know it also burns you when Pope St. Clement I--the fourth Pope--in the first century wrote to the Church in Corinth and instructed them as the Church which presides in love. The truth hurts. Please come home.

      Delete
    8. Hmm I am certainly calm in the knowledge that The Orthodox Church is the church of Christ. Nice parroting of the heresies that your church is blabbering for centuries. When a church is devoid of the Holy Spirit it can construct all different schemes to justify its claim. But the Orthodox know very well that you are a heretic. Because never St Augustine nor St Ignatius addressed the primacy of the papacy. Says St Augustine "You cannot deny that you see what we call heresies and schisms, that is, many cut off from the root of the Christian society, which by means of the Apostolic Sees, and the successions of bishops, is spread abroad in an indisputably world-wide diffusion" There has never been one Apostolic See but many. St Ignatius says "In like manner, let all reverence the deacons as an appointment of Jesus Christ, and the bishop as Jesus Christ, who is the Son of the Father, and the presbyters as the Sanhedrin of God, and assembly of the apostles. Apart from these, there is no Church" There is no primacy of the bishop of Rome. Everytime papism tried to manufacture anything towards the heretical concept of the primacy that was fully rejected by the Eastern Church and the full Orthodox Church including the latter churches like the Russian Orthodox Church. Your arguments are so pathetic that it is so easy to see as heretical creations to create your own point. You are the one that altered the doctrine, you are the one that does not follow the ecumenical councils. You are the one that looks like a joke in the course of history as far as following Christianity is concerned. No dear, you are the one that will have to come to Christ as you have been away from His church for centuries. The Orthodox can wait for many years. You cannot, you will be done and gone soon the way your church is progressing.

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    10. Oh btw St Basil the Great the great theologian and philosopher of the Orthodox church (and also a saint of the papists) more educated that all the western theologians and popes at the time (and after) did not have the pope in high esteem either. According to him he is nothing else but another bishop. So here you have it. Ponder on it. As I said we Christians have all the time in the world to wait for the heretics to return to the real church including the roman papists.

      Delete
    11. "[T]he one way of safety for the Churches of the East lies in their having the sympathy of the bishops of the West." (St. Basil, Letter #66 to St. Athanasius)

      "It has seemed to me to be desirable to send a letter to the bishop of Rome, begging him to examine our condition, and since there are difficulties in the way of representatives being sent from the West by a general synodical decree, to advise him to exercise his own personal authority in the matter by choosing suitable persons to sustain the labours of a journey,—suitable, too, by gentleness and firmness of character, to correct the unruly among us here; able to speak with proper reserve and appropriateness, and thoroughly well acquainted with all that has been effected after Ariminum to undo the violent measures adopted there. . . . A point also that is insisted upon by some of those in these parts, very necessarily, as is plain even to myself, is that they should drive away the heresy of Marcellus, as grievous and injurious and opposed to the sound faith. For up to this time, in all the letters which they write, they are constant in thoroughly anathematizing the ill-famed Arius and in repudiating him from the Churches. But they attach no blame to Marcellus, . . ."
      (Letter #69 to St. Athanasius, 1-2; NPNF2-8)

      Seems like fairly high esteem to me. But YMMV, obviously.

      Keep up the bravado, Ioannis. You've got the Athonite patter down pat.

      Delete
    12. Ioannis, sorry but I am apart from my library for several days. Otherwise, I would be happy to provide you citations of Sts. Augustine's and Jerome's acknowledgment of the primacy of Peter. Perhaps I will do so. In the meanwhile, I am sure you have a ready explanation for what Christ himself said to Peter in establishing him as the rock in Mt. 16:18 and shepherding his sheep in Jn. 21:15-17. I am sure you also have a ready explanation as to why Jesus always included Peter in his inner circle when he excluded other greats like St. Andrew (I wonder what revelation was made known to Peter alone?). I am sure you can readily explain why Paul went to Jerusalem to confer with Peter rather than the other way around? I am likewise sure you can readily dispatch the implications of it being Peter who determined how Judas would be replaced as one of the Twelve in Acts 1:15-23 and how all of the others did what he commanded. I am sure you can readily explicate how it is that Peter was the one who spoke for the Twelve on Pentecost in Acts 2:14 and 38. I am additionally sure that you can readily explain why Peter is the first mentioned in every listing of the Twelve and subsets thereof? I guess that stupid Bible itself was also confirmed in its present content by the heretical Roman Catholic Church so you don't have the Pope to thank for that either.

      Delete
    13. Athelstane you should not be as naïve as you portray yourself. And use your brain. Nothing of what you present supports the primacy of the Bishop of Rome. Nothing. There was of course respect as mutual respect among the apostles and fathers of the church and humility but nothing of a single supremacy. Your papist church is heretic in every aspect of the word including the inability to see the meaning through the words. Many writings exists that go one way or the other but nothing in the direction of the primacy of the pope. And certainly not in the impression and understanding that the majority of the early church (which was then mainly in the East) had. Humility certainly is another strength that your church does not have. The last should be the first certainly does not characterize the spirit of your heretical institution. As I said St Basil was not fond of the pope is seen is several places. This does not mean he did not respect or had love for the bishop. He simply does not indicate anything towards any primacy of the bishop of Rome. Of course he had high esteem but that is very different than considering him as the primate as other of his writings indicate. This can go forever which means that there was no understanding of any primacy of the bishop of Rome.
      St Basil: "But a further rumour has reached me that you are in Antioch, and are transacting the business in hand with the chief authorities. And, besides this, I have heard that the brethren who are of the party of Paulinus are entering on some discussion with your excellency on the subject of union with us; and by “us” I mean those who are supporters of the blessed man of God, Meletius. I hear, moreover, that the Paulinians are carrying about a letter of the Westerns assigning to them the episcopate of the Church in Antioch, but speaking under a false impression of Meletius, the admirable bishop of the true Church of God. I am not astonished at this ... But I shall never be able to persuade myself on these grounds to ignore Meletius, or to forget the Church which is under him, or to treat as small, and of little importance to the true religion, the questions which originated the division. I shall never consent to give in, merely because somebody is very much elated at receiving a letter from men."[Letter CCXIV - To Count Terentius]

      Delete
    14. Roke you indicate a stupidity that is typical of the heretical arguments of the papists. You should be able to do better than that. Again nothing that you show indicates the primacy of the bishop of Rome. Peter was the first among equals among the apostles as John was the beloved of Christ. So what does this mean?. Should we give the church of Patmos the primacy?. How ridiculous indeed. Peter was the most mature and stronger apparently among the apostles (possibly older?) and he was the leader of the group. That does not give the primacy to the bishop of Rome of course. Your arguments are sick and poisoned by the need of the primacy. You are indeed heretical as nothing in your arguments after seen in peace and in the spirit of humility and love indicates anything towards primacy of the bishop of Rome. The Eastern Church the only one that at the time was larger and more educated than the western church (with all the issues the western church had with heresies and the western barbarians) and spiritual enough never as a whole understood these as indicating the primacy of the bishop of Rome. And not only that but all the other garbage that your heresy introduced such as infallibility, fillioque etc. Think about it. That will be your homework for this week. Hard one for a papist indeed. Again don't forget your time is going to expire soon as your heresy continues disintegrating.

      Delete
    15. Ioannis, you admit that Peter had the primacy and then deny that Peter has the primacy. I guess there is no apostolic succession in the Orthodox Church. Epic fail.

      Delete
    16. Roke you seem to be not the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree. Try harder. The primacy of Peter (which never really was primacy nor any other properties in the sense that your heretical church assumes as I fully explained above) does not imply (nor it ever implied in the more theologically developed and educated East ) the primacy of the bishop of Rome. Did you get that? If not try again. Pray possibly. You and your fellow poperers are clueless and unable to seeing (or deny seeing) the simplicity of the argument. Your pseudo-scholastic pathologies, artificialities and alterations of the dogmatic aspects of the Christian church for your own benefits (which is really what you are doing) created a mockery and a caricature of Christianity which is the roman church which led to the other mockery which is the protestant church. One of the reasons the reformation and all the other heresies that your church initiated appeared. Apparently you are unable to think simply and logically which is a typical characteristic of you heretical church and most of the roman poper lovers that I have met. You try to milk the mosquito destroying everything in the process because you are incapable. My dear things are simple indeed. A little of the Holy Spirit goes a long way in the church. Your church has none of the sort. The Epic fail is fully yours indeed. You should be even characterized as rejected by the Christian church and as not having apostolic succession as you are the ones that altered, obfuscated, caricatured Christianity for your own benefit and power. Yes, you have nothing with apostolic succession as you have no doctrinal and theological (also liturgical) continuity in your historical presence as a church.

      Delete
    17. Don't insult other guests. You've been warned.

      Delete
    18. Ioannis, you say that I am not the brightest bulb on the tree. My reply: I hope so, Ioannis, I hope so. You say you have fully explained why Peter and the Church in Rome do not have primacy. My reply: you have done nothing of the sort and haven't addressed a single point I have made. As far as trolls go, however, you've done well.

      Delete
  4. (retaining the odd heresy here and there, of course)

    Including a not-so-pro-life position on abortion, I might add.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bear, my apologies for the strange turn of this thread, but like I told you, haters gonna hate and I'm having too much fun.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Imagine my delight this morning!

    Also, perhaps our visitor could explain the Orthodox "three bites at the apple of love" policy of the Orthodox and how that squares with the clear statements of Our Lord.

    Perhaps then she might address the heresy of Phyletism.

    Let's not even talk about the infestation by Russian intelligence services (or will she just deny this?) or the Russian Church being a wholly owned subsidiary of the Russian state? I wonder if she lives in a country where those nuclear missiles the Patriarch of Moscow blessed in a big ceremony?

    There may have been illiterate Visigoths, and, sadly, priests, as well, but the Benedictines kept the fires of civilization burning. Both Orthodoxy and Catholicism possess the true and beautiful. In fact, things were all wrapped up for a reunion at the Council of Florence until a single bishop -- Mark I believe -- ruined things, for which the Orthodox made him a saint.

    It's odd that our visitor seems fixated on the "illiterate Visagoths." What about the illiterate Russians? In fact, it doesn't matter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing wrong with the visigoths they were illiterate as the Russians, they conquered Rome and used the western church and vice versa. The Russians however had the civilization of Byzantium to look up to. The visigoths (your forefathers) had nothing. They used the pope for their own gain and legitimacy against Byzantium (and vice versa). Theology, doctrine, spirituality etc were not among the strenghts of your ancestors!. That is how your papist church became a state and the garbage that it is now. The council of Florence was an instrument exploited by the papists among many other ways to subdue the Orthodox church which was under attack including war and massacre which were among the favorite ways of your church, no?. I guess you will manufacture another pathetic denial of this hmm?. Most of the delegation was against the union with the heretics however they were pressured by the emperor mainly to sign the union so that they will receive the pathetic help of a couple of hundred troops. Laughable. If the pope cared of the dire situation he would strongly help the sister Church. But we should not forget that he tried to destroy it many times before no? To the great courage of Mark and the others and all the Christian East the fake union went down the tubes and Orthodoxy remained intact. It was a sacrifice for Christ. The correct decision. It did not turn out that bad though as the Turks were more civilized and tolerant than the papist western barbarians towards the Christians. The papists always tried to undermine the Orthodox Church with no luck as it is shown historically in their efforts to damage the Church with the uniate pseudochurch in Ukraine created by the polish effort to undermine, convert the local Orthodox under the polish conquest of the Ukrainian lands (and elsewhere) for example. You have been the heretical church that kept trying to destroy the Orthodox in any way shape and form for centuries. But you blatantly failed. Keep on dreaming of the union. As I said the real Christians have all the time in the world to wait for the papists to repent and come to the Church of Christ, the Orthodox Church. Your time is close to over as you are disintegrating even as we speak. Good luck with those pedophiles priests of yours. Make sure you erase their names real well. And of all the others leaving your church. The real church of Christ is the Orthodox church in spiritual, theological and ascetic form and consistency throughout the centuries. You are not. Keep expecting of the Orthodox Patriarch to kiss the feet of a heretic. You people are to laugh at. Only an ignoramus or a fanatic is unable to see how heretical your church is. I guess you must belong to one of these categories. BTW the Benedictines follow St Basil's form of monasticism which is the Orthodox form. And I would not be surprised if some of them poor ones got burned in the process by your church. The lack of the Holy Spirit is evident in the historical life of your church and in the disintegration into further heresies. I rest my case lady Bear. Study and search the truth. You have a long way to go. Make it count.

      Delete
  7. The more you write, the less you contribute. You're entitled to your opinion, but you're not entitled to your facts. Orthodoxy is a nationalistic museum piece. There's an old joke. A Russian is rescued after being long marooned on an island. He was found to have built two churches. When asked, he said, "That is one I go to. That is one I don't go to." That pretty much sums of intra-Orthodox attitudes. I certainly don't expect you to get along with my readers since Orthodox have never figured out how to get along with each other, dividing over trivial matters like the calendar.

    And in case I didn't make it clear, do you live in a country where those nuclear missiles the Patriarch of Moscow blessed are pointing? If you want to talk about obscene how about that? Or his $15,000 watch he had erased out of a picture on his website, but his people forgot to remove the reflection from the tabletop?

    I have given you one chance to address the heresy of phyletism and you muffed it.

    BTW, certain of your statements lead me to wonder if you even read the article. I am unhappy with the Pope for bowing to the Ecumenical Patriarch.

    I used to be Orthodox. I have much respect for it, particularly its liturgy, even though it is wounded by a thousand self-inflicted cuts. There will not be a reunion. Orthodox cannot separate the concepts of state and church. The local Orthodox church, no matter if Russian or Greek, or Bulgarian, or Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, or Orthodox Church in America (which not all Orthodox recognize, BTW), or Old Calendar Russians, or whatever are ethnic clubs. They lack the breadth of vision that the Catholic Church has.

    As for sex scandals, there's an old saying: people who live in glass onion domes shouldn't throw stones. Or did you miss the debacle with the OCA?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Orthodoxy is a living faith and the represents the authentic church of Jesus Christ as it is indicated by its history and theological consistency of which your pathology (hmm roman Catholicism) has none. Your faith is a papist heresy and a caricature of Christianity from your primacy, infallibility and more heresies that you are still unable to correct. You have looted, pillaged and massacred to expand your dominion that is how in essence your church grew in Latin America and elsewhere in the middle east. But it is diminishing and it is in disarray more than ever before. Your churches in Europe are becoming everything else except places of worship. It is funny how your representatives look like when they visit Mount Athos in Greece of which I am a frequent visitor. They are drooling in amazement looking at the greatness of the tradition and theological and ascetic dimensions of the Orthodox Church and its monastic dimension. You are a joke as you were pretty much when you were issuing absolutions for money many years ago. You have not changed by much in that respect. Still the same stupidity as it is indicated by the lack of intelligence in your theological arguments.

      Delete
    2. Yes you want to talk about phyletism? I didnt know many details about it but I read a little. It is a joke compared to the heresies that your church still carries with it and also went through. Religious nationalism is of course unacceptable by Orthodoxy and has been rejected as such. I experience no problem visiting all sorts of different Orthodox churches. Your joke is pathetic probably a polish anti Orthodox joke. Orthodoxy is correcting any issues with religious nationalism. Today it is more of an administrative or jurisdictional issue of the Church particular in areas of Orthodox Diaspora such as the USA and Western Europe. This the Orthodox church will resolve as it did with the church Outside of Russia that is unified back with the Russian Orthodox church now. It is a historical phenomenon which if it does not alter the Orthodox theology is not a heresy. Strangely enough despite this Orthodoxy is far more consistent than papism throughout the years. The independence of the Orthodox churches and the addition of the rest of the patriarchates to the original ones (which were originally and still are Orthodox) even along ethnic lines is a positive one however. As it represents the freedom and the independence in the Orthodox world. You are the one that is a state church with the state being the Vatican. Hypocrisy abound! Yes Orthodoxy has some issues along the ethnic lines but they are minor and correctable. As long as there is no theological heresy all can be resolved. Your church has far more issues from the past and new that are by far more serious. In my church there are Ethiopian, Arab and prior Roman Catholics (they saw the light) and there is no problem whatsoever. You as always bring up nonsense without seeing the huge pole that is in your eyes. The state of your priesthood was a joke before and it is still is and the celibacy of priests (which never was the practice in the original church which is the eastern church) is also close to a heresy that you initiated among hundreds of others. If you were Orthodox as you said, you left because you were clueless and uneducated about the history of the real church. It does not matter. There are more papists returning to the Orthodoxy that the other way around especially today where Orthodoxy is actually growing. Orthodoxy has issues of course like the old calendar zealots but these issues are not really theological or Christological. The devil always works to undermine and confuse. But they are outliers in the body of the Church that the Orthodox church can ignore and let the Holly Spirit work us through them unlike your church that in the past would burn the poor folks to death. You are the masters of hypocricy and stupidity that you present it as knowledge. Your church all of it is a huge issue and a heresy. Any historically educated individual can see that. Apparently you don't belong to that category. The itch about the union only your popes have. Not us. The union will occur when your church repents and joins the original church with the bishop of Rome being a regular bishop. You should hope it will come one day for your own salvation. The rest of you will be left out being like the joke you are now.

      Delete
    3. Ioannis, my, you have posted a lot of words, but, unfortunately, you have proffered very little. If you wish to convince the four people left reading this thread, you will need to do better than that. Else you should move on. There are many and great Eastern saints. But Rome is home. Period.

      Delete
  8. The first 31 popes were martyred for the name of Jesus Christ. Each successor must have known that he would not die in his bed; rather, each man knew that a cruel death awaited him. What faith! Oh, that I had such faith!

    ReplyDelete

Your comment will likely be posted after the Bear snuffles it. Please, no anonymous posts.

Featured Post

You Knew it was Coming (Sponsored by "Venom")

Sponsored by Venom: a New Scent by Francis Venom: "Smell like the sheep..." There comes a moment in the life of every televi...