EXPAND YOUR READING!!

"Today the concept of truth is viewed with suspicion, because truth is identified with violence. Over history there have, unfortunately, been episodes when people sought to defend the truth with violence. But they are two contrasting realities. Truth cannot be imposed with means other than itself! Truth can only come with its own light. Yet, we need truth. ... Without truth we are blind in the world, we have no path to follow. The great gift of Christ was that He enabled us to see the face of God".Pope Benedict xvi, February 24th, 2012

The Church is ecumenical, catholic, God-human, ageless, and it is therefore a blasphemy—an unpardonable blasphemy against Christ and against the Holy Ghost—to turn the Church into a national institution, to narrow her down to petty, transient, time-bound aspirations and ways of doing things. Her purpose is beyond nationality, ecumenical, all-embracing: to unite all men in Christ, all without exception to nation or race or social strata. - St Justin Popovitch

Google+ Badge

Sunday, 1 December 2013

WHAT IS WRONG WITH MICHAEL VORIS? - 2 : MICHAEL VORIS AND POPE FRANCIS


Let us begin with Michael Voris at his worst which shows that he is as far from the mind of Pope Francis as any Catholic could be.  He quotes, but out of context, and adds his own words to give what Pope Francis says a meaning that it does not have.   In fact, he is as bad as the secular media in misinterpreting Pope Francis; but the secular media has the excuse that it reports without faith, so misunderstanding is to be expected. What is the excuse of Michael Voris?

To begin, let me show you two videos: one of Cardinal Bergoglio celebrating a First Communion Mass in Buenos Aires in Latin American style,- I have celebrated many Masses like that and feel nostalgic watching it - and the other where he gives a short talk on the Eucharist.   In this way you can see a typical Latin American fiesta Mass and discover from the Celebrant its meaning. This shows you a real "happy clappy" Mass, with a statement from a real celebrant who happens now to be Pope: not a sweeping statement on "happy clappy" masses in general and an insulting, uncharitable, basically schismatic and unCatholic description of celebrants of "happy clappy" masses in abstract.  This can form the context for my commentary on Michael Voris's words. In these two videos you will discover that the celebrant is totally orthodox, like most of the celebrants I have met.   The crisis of a clash between "faithful Catholics" and "modernists and liberals" has been exaggerated by Voris to such an extent that he falsifies the situation, and he gets most things wrong.




  Michael Vorst begins his comments on the Mass by triumphantly quoting the Pope:


"We think: we go to the temple, we come together as brothers - that is good, it's beautiful - but the centre is where God is.   And we adore God.  More important is the adoration: the whole community unites  to see the altar where the sacrifice is celebrated and adored."

 This is an about-face from the way the Mass has been celebrated almost everywhere in the world - he says - where everything is centred on the people.   He says that coming together as brothers is all very well, but is of no importance when compared with the reasons why we really go  to Mass.   He is not criticising a few nutcases, some exceptions, a minority, but Mass as is celebrated almost everywhere in the world.   Why has this situation come about?   "Because of zillions of weak-kneed, effeminate bishops".   This is not about a few bishops, but "zillions": he is talking about the episcopal college.  He speaks like a schismatic, and not as a Catholic at all.  Actually, the Pope shows no sign of disillusion with the new Mass nor does he accept Voris's exaggerated interpretation of what takes place.

Voris says that we go to the altar and not the table, to the sacrifice, not the meal.  This is pure Michael Voris.

   Anyone who has read St Thomas Aquinas knows that the Mass is both sacrifice and meal, and that the altar is also a table.   Theologians differ in their explanation of the exact relationship between sacrifice and  meal; but, as long as neither aspect of the Eucharist is denied, they remain within Catholic Tradition.   In the Eastern tradition, the altar is called the holy table, and "altar" refers to the whole sanctuary.  

The Mass is a Mystery, and no explanation or vocabulary is adequate enough to be universal, apart from dogma which is common to all.   Thus, in Pope Francis's words, there is unity in diversity, in theologies as well as in liturgical practice.

Pope Francis does not say that the people coming together is "meaningless": he says that it is beautiful.   However he reminds us - not imposing on us from the outside: we are Catholics and hence already know, deep down, that he is right - that  coming together gains its meaning from the Mass which is orientated towards God.   "More important is the adoration: the whole community unites to see the altar where the sacrifice is celebrated and adored."

I am absolutely delighted to read these words.   During and after the Council, I had conversations with theologians and liturgists either directly involved or colleagues of theirs or professionals with inside knowledge of what was going on. When we were discussing Mass where the priest is on the other side of the altar with his face in the direction at the people, the only argument I heard in favour of that practice was that both priest and people could see the paten and the cup, everyone had a good view of the altar, and the central part was not hidden by the priest's own body and that what happens on the altar is what unites us, exactly Pope Francis's point.   When I later saw priests keeping eye contact with the people, even at the most sacred moments, I considered them to be  liturgically and theologically uneducated.   I was shocked when I read Cardinal Ratzinger who said that "Mass facing the people" was so that everyone could look at everyone else. It was the first time I had seen that view written down. I thoroughly agreed with him how absurd it is, but his version went completely against all I remembered.  

Now, at last, Pope Francis has given the main reason why, in the post-Vatican II Mass, the altar is truly central, so that everyone can see the altar "where the sacrifice is celebrated and adored."   "There is nothing to see," say opponents of the idea.  To this we can quote St Francis of Assisi who said, "Believers see and believe: non-believers just see."

In both the old Mass and in the new, priest and people are facing the altar.   THAT is in accordance with the hermeneutic of continuity.   In the old Mass, the priest is facing God, while in the new Mass people face each other, THAT is the hermeneutic of rupture: it is not only liberals who rupture.

Let us now look at the Mass, Latin American style, as celebrated by Cardinal Bergoglio.   It is of a kind that, according to Michael Voris, has become common due to "zillions of weak-kneed, effeminate bishops." 

  Two questions arise.   Does he have reason to believe that Cardinal Bergoglio was weak-kneed and effeminate?  After all, as archbishop, he was happy  to permit "happy clappy" Masses in his archdiocese, just like all the rest, and, as Pope, Francis is happy to celebrate the new Mass and shows little interest in celebrating the old.   Does that make him less Catholic than Michael Voris?  I suspect that Voris will have to reply "No" to both questions.   If that is the case, what makes Michael Voris believe that Pope Francis is the exception, or, looking at the problem the other way round, why does he believe the majority of bishops are weak-kneed and effeminate if the Pope is doing exactly the same thing?  

It would be a mistake to believe that the Latin American Mass he celebrates in the video is directed towards the people rather than God.   The aim is to include all those children in the upward movement of adoration. I know: I have celebrated them.  Latin Americans have a tradition of celebrating fiestas centred on some saint, of combining a sense of holiness with quite secular forms of celebration.  The new Mass fits well into that context.   You must not presume that what is going through the mind of the worshippers is the same as in an English or American congregation.   They have a well developed sense of the holy, in contrast to many in the West.   When I have  asked Peruvian kids in confession why they had not been to Mass, I have sometimes received the reply, "I intended to, but I had committed such-and-such a sin; and as I approached the doors of the church, I came out in goose pimples, and I just couldn't enter until I had been to confession."   They were so sinful and the Mass so holy; but it is a "happy clappy" Mass in which the people sense God's presence.    

You must remember that the Pope is also very keen on the Byzantine Liturgy which he used to serve as acolyte in his youth.   That is why he emphasises that  Catholicism is unity in diversity, where unity is brought about by the same Holy Spirit that is at work in all its parts.,

The Pope also says:
I believe - I say this humbly - that maybe we Christians have lost a little of the sense of adoration.

 I think that he realises the same thing that his predecessor did, that reform of a kind required by Vatican II is not the work of a single generation.  Pope Benedict said somewhere that a council is a charismatic occasion in which the Church's bishops work and pray in synergy with the Holy Spirit,  Then there is usually a turbulent time as the Church tries to comes to terms with the insights and make the changes that the council implies.   This is rarely easy, nor is there immediate agreement on everything.   There is usually much more in the council than a single generation can cope with.   He reflected on one of the Cappadocian Gregorys who said that having councils should be avoided as much as possible because they always bring turmoil and bring out the worst in people.   

Like Pope Benedict, Pope Francis realises that the liturgical reform we have does not yet do justice to all that Vatican II said about the liturgy.   There is more to come when the Church is ready.  Clearly there must be more emphasis on a sense of adoration. 

    Gradually, the Holy Spirit, working through Tradition, that is, through the way that the Catholic Church actually celebrates the life of Grace throughout the world and down the ages, will find solutions, and the liturgy will grow.   The process has already started, and all of us are part of it, even Michael Voris if he gets off his high horse.  

Unfortunately for Michael Voris, the "weak-kneed and effeminate bishops" have a key part to play in this work of the Holy Spirit.   However, those who are keeping alive the old Latin liturgy will certainly contribute, as will the Anglican Ordinariates,  the traditional non-Roman Latin rites, but also the neo-Catechuminate and other particular traditions; and we will also receive help from the Eastern Orthodox, and, above all, the ordinary experience of the faithful.  In spite of all  these sources, the work of the Holy Spirit will eventually bring about harmony under the successors of the Apostles who have the vocation from Christ, not from Voris, to preside at the Liturgy. St Ignatius of Antioch says, whatever we do,  we do in communion with the bishop.   As Pope Benedict said often, the Church is a communion, and that involves us working in harmony with the bishops, not an abstract episcopate, but the concrete bishops we have, with all their faults and virtues.   They are bishops by the grace of God and favour of the Apostolic See.  Therefore, whatever we do, we do in harmony with them.   We do not insult them.

In fact, I think I now know why I disagree thoroughly with Michael Voris. Have any of you read the "Letters from the Desert" by Carlo Carletto?   He was a top member of the International YCS and a young leader of Catholic Action in Italy.   Then, one day, he simply disappeared, leaving many friends and contacts wondering what had happened to him.   One moment he was there, and the next moment, he wasn't.   About five years later, he wrote "Letters from the Desert" to tell them what had happened.   He suddenly realised that God did not need him, that he did not have to try to carry the world on his shoulders, because Christ is doing that.  Christ wanted to set him free from all this hyper-activity to concentrate on "the one thing necessary".   He joined the Little Brothers of Charles de Foucauld as a novice in the Sahara, burned his address book, and concentrated on opening himself up to the Lord.  He came to recognise that, compared with "the one thing necessary", most of what he had been doing was a waste of time.

I believe that much of what Michael Voris is doing is also a waste of time.   Take the liturgy, for example.  It is the primary expression of Tradition which is the product of the synergy between the Holy Spirit and the Church, and it is the highest expression of the ordinary magisterium of the Church which functions by means of the same synergy.

  In the early Church there was considerable liturgical invention, but all this invention had to go through a process where the main actor is the Holy Spirit working through his instrument, the Church. It is the same in the present Church.  Central to that process is the episcopate, but not in isolation from the rest   of the Church, but participating in the liturgy by presiding and by listening and choosing, as instruments of the Holy Spirit.   In this process Michael Voris's videos have no place.   The litugical creativity of the Church is submitted to the Holy Spirit in the actual celebration.   The Church does all this on its knees: liturgy is as much a product of the Church's prayer as an expression of it.  Unconsciously, Michael Voris has a Protestant view of the Church where he and his faithful followers, like Luther and Calvin before him, in the name of a purer form of Christianity, attack the zillions of Catholic bishops and makes sweeping judgements on the Masses they celebrate or permit to be celebrated.  He does not seem to be aware that, every time Mass is celebrated, God is more involved than man; and this is true, whatever the style of the Mass.   Hence, the solution to the problems in modern liturgy is to be found, not in the intervention of Michael Voris and his ilk, but in the constant action of the Holy Spirit on those who participate in the liturgy, especially the bishops.   Therefore, if he wants a solution to the Church's problems, let him fall on his knees and pray.   Like Carlo Carretto, he must realise that he does not bear the Church on his shoulders: Christ does, working through the Holy Spirit.  The Holy Spirit works in and through the visible Church, using its structures including the bishops that Voris insults.  Liturgical reform does not depend on him but on Christ, working in the Church through the very act of celebrating. 

This process is called Tradition and is the very life of the Church, so that the phrase “traditional Catholic” is a tautology, like “round circle”.   Adhesion to Tradition is the very guts of what it is to be a Catholic because it is the shape that salvation has taken in us; but Tradition is a process of celebrating and passing on this synergy between the Holy Spirit and the Church, between the Holy Spirit and the humble, obedient soul, from one generation to the next. The Bible is the Word of God, but, when the book is closed, the Word of God is not being transmitted.   However, as soon as it is read, it is interpreted by Catholics according to Tradition because its very reading is an act of "traditioning"; and the main deposit of wisdom gleaned from a traditional reading of the Bible is embedded in the Liturgy.

 The sign of the presence of the Holy Spirit is ecclesial charity, so that, in patristic times, being in communion with the Church and being in charity meant one and the same thing.   For St Augustine, breaking unity with the Catholic bishops was breaking away from charity and, therefore, from the Holy Spirit.  (I can’t remember exactly where he said it, but he did, with regard to the Donatists.)   I don’t know how St Augustine would have rated calling the bishops “weak-kneed” and “effeminate” and rejecting the way they preside at the liturgy in their local churches.  To hold that Pope Francis, or any other pope for that matter, would concur with such behaviour is simply absurd.

 Voris must be careful not to gate-crash this process of "traditioning" by cheap journalism,  acting like a bull in a china shop, rushing in where angels fear to tread with hob-nail boots onto holy ground, insulting the very people the Holy Spirit is using to preside over the process instead of humbly praying with  and for them, waiting on the Lord and being obedient to the Church for the love of Christ. If he chooses the latter way, he will do so with confidence : as a Catholic he knows that this process is going on, perhaps in spite of appearances, because the Church is the body of Christ. 

 Next year, the bishops of the world are going to meet in synod, and then again the year after, to discuss the family.   Meanwhile, it seems that there is going to be a complete overhaul of the way the Church is organised, with more authority going to the universal synod, regional synods and national episcopates "with and under Peter".   Thus, the insights and decisions of Vatican II are being implemented in other directions, and the way the Church is organised will be closer to  the synodal structure of  the first thousand years.

I am sure this process will have its teething problems.   Michael Voris will have to choose whether he is to be part of the solution by prayer and non-judgemental reporting or to be one of the problems by playing party politics, like a a crypto-Protestant in Catholic clothing.







Synthesis of Pope Francis’s Apostolic Exhortation “The Joy of the Gospel”

[Vatican Information Service]

Vatican City, 26 November 2013 (VIS) - “The joy of the Gospel fills the hearts and lives of all who encounter Jesus”; thus begins the Apostolic Exhortation “Evangelii Gaudium”, by which Pope Francis develops the theme of the proclamation of the Gospel in the contemporary world, drawn from, among other sources, the contribution of the work of the Synod held in the Vatican from 7 to 28 October 2012 on the theme “The new evangelization for the transmission of the faith”.

The text, which the Holy Father consigned to a group of thirty-six faithful following the closing Mass of the Year of Faith last Sunday is the first official document of his pontificate, since the Encyclical “Lumen fidei” was written in collaboration with his predecessor, Benedict XVI. “I wish to encourage the Christian faithful to embark upon a new chapter of evangelization marked by this joy, while pointing out new paths for the Church’s journey in years to come”, he continues. It is a heartfelt appeal to all baptized persons to bring Christ’s love to others, “permanently in a state of mission”, conquering “the great danger in today’s world”, that of an individualist “desolation and anguish”.

The Pope invites the reader to “recover the original freshness of the Gospel”, finding “new avenues” and “new paths of creativity”, without enclosing Jesus in our “dull categories”. There is a need for a “pastoral and missionary conversion, which cannot leave things as they presently are” and a “renewal” of ecclesiastical structures to enable them to become “more mission-oriented”. The Pontiff also considers “a conversion of the papacy”, to help make this ministry “more faithful to the meaning which Jesus Christ wished to give it and to the present needs of evangelization”. The hope that the Episcopal Conferences might contribute to “the concrete realization of the collegial spirit”, he states, “has not been fully realized”. A “sound decentralization” is necessary. In this renewal, the Church should not be afraid to re-examine “certain customs not directly connected to the heart of the Gospel, even some of which have deep historical roots”.

A sign of God’s openness is “that our church doors should always be open” so that those who seek God “will not find a closed door”; “nor should the doors of the sacraments be closed for simply any reason”. The Eucharist “is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak”. These convictions have pastoral consequences that we are called to consider with prudence and boldness”. He repeats that he prefers “a Church which is bruised, hurting and dirty because it has been out on the streets, rather than a Church … concerned with being at the centre and then ends by being caught up in a web of obsessions and procedures. If something should rightly disturb us … it is the fact that many of our brothers and sisters are living without … the friendship of Jesus Christ”.

The Pope indicates the “temptations which affect pastoral workers”: “individualism, a crisis of identity and a cooling of fervour”. The greatest threat of all is “the grey pragmatism of the daily life of the Church, in which all appears to proceed normally, which in reality faith is wearing down”. He warns against “defeatism”, urging Christians to be signs of hope, bringing about a “revolution of tenderness”. It is necessary to seek refuge from the “spirituality of well-being … detached from responsibility for our brothers and sisters” and to vanquish the “spiritual worldliness” that consists of “seeking not the Lord’s glory but human glory and well-being”. The Pope speaks of the many who “feel superior to others” because “they remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past” whereby “instead of evangelizing, one analyses and classifies others” and those who have “an ostentatious preoccupation for the liturgy, for doctrine and for the Church’s prestige, but without any concern that the Gospel have a real impact” on the needs of the people. This is “a tremendous corruption disguised as a good … God save us from a worldly Church with superficial spiritual and pastoral trappings!”.

He appeals to ecclesial communities not to fall prey to envy and jealousy: “How many wars take place within the people of God and in our different communities!”. “Whom are we going to evangelize if this is the way we act?”. He highlights the need to promote the growth of the responsibility of the laity, often kept “away from decision-making” by “an excessive clericalism”. He adds that there is a need for “still broader opportunities for a more incisive female presence in the Church”, in particular “in the various settings where important decisions are made”. “Demands that the legitimate rights of women be respected … cannot be lightly evaded”. The young should “exercise greater leadership”. With regard to the scarcity of vocations in many places, he emphasizes that “seminaries cannot accept candidates on the basis of any motivation whatsoever”.

With regard to the theme of enculturation, he remarks that “Christianity does not have simply one cultural expression” and that the face of the Church is “varied”. “We cannot demand that peoples of every continent, in expressing their Christian faith, imitate modes of expression which European nations developed at a particular moment of their history”. The Pope reiterates that “underlying popular piety … is an active evangelizing power” and encourages the research of theologians, reminding them however that “the Church and theology exist to evangelize” and urging them not to be “content with a desk-bound theology”.

He focuses “somewhat meticulously, on the homily”, since “many concerns have been expressed about this important ministry and we cannot simply ignore them”. The homily “should be brief and avoid taking on the semblance of a speech or a lecture”, should be a “heart-to-heart communication” and avoid “purely moralistic or doctrinaire” preaching. He highlights the importance of preparation: “a preacher who does not prepare is not ‘spiritual’; he is dishonest and irresponsible”. Preaching should always be positive in order always to “offer hope” and “does not leave us trapped in negativity”. The approach to the proclamation of the Gospel should have positive characteristics: “approachability, readiness for dialogue, patience, a warmth and welcome which is non-judgmental”.

In relation to the challenges of the contemporary world, the Pope denounces the current economic system as “unjust at its root”. “Such an economy kills” because the law of “the survival of the fittest” prevails. The current culture of the “disposable” has created “something new”: “the excluded are not the ‘exploited’ but the outcast, the ‘leftovers’”. “A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual”, of an “autonomy of the market” in which “financial speculation” and “widespread corruption” and “self-serving tax-evasion reign”. He also denounces “attacks on religious freedom” and the “new persecutions directed against Christians. … In many places the problem is more that of widespread indifference and relativism”. The family, the Pope continues, “is experiencing a profound cultural crisis”. Reiterating the indispensable contribution of marriage to society”, he underlines that “the individualism of our postmodern and globalized era favors a lifestyle which … distorts family bonds”.

He re-emphasizes “the profound connection between evangelization and human advancement” and the right of Pastors “to offer opinions on all that affects people’s lives”. “No one can demand that religion should be relegated to the inner sanctum of personal life, without a right to offer an opinion on events affecting society”. He quotes John Paul II, who said that the Church “cannot and must not remain on the sidelines in the fight for justice”. “For the Church, the option for the poor is primarily a theological category” rather than a sociological one. “This is why I want a Church that is poor and for the poor. They have much to teach us”. “As long as the problems of the poor are not radically resolved … no solution will be found for this world’s problems”. “Politics, although often denigrated”, he affirms, “remains a lofty vocation and one of the highest forms of charity”. I beg the Lord to grant us more politicians who are genuinely disturbed by … the lives of the poor!”. He adds an admonition: “Any Church community”, if it believes it can forget about the poor, runs the risk of “breaking down”.

The Pope urges care for the weakest members of society: “the homeless, the addicted, refugees, indigenous peoples, the elderly who are increasingly isolated and abandoned” and migrants, for whom the Pope exhorts “a generous openness”. He speaks about the victims of trafficking and new forms of slavery: “This infamous network of crime is now well established in our cities, and many people have blood on their hands as a result of their comfortable and silent complicity”. “Doubly poor are those women who endure situations of exclusion, mistreatment and violence”. “Among the vulnerable for whom the Church wishes to care with particular love and concern are unborn children, the most defenseless and innocent among us. Nowadays efforts are made to deny them their human dignity”. “The Church cannot be expected to change her position on this question … it is not ‘progressive’ to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life”. The Pope makes an appeal for respect for all creation: we “are called to watch over and protect the fragile world in which we live”.

With regard to the theme of peace, the Pope affirms that “a prophetic voice must be raised” against attempts at false reconciliation to “silence or appease” the poor, while others “refuse to renounce their privileges”. For the construction of a society “in peace, justice and fraternity” he indicates four principles: “Time is greater than space” means working “slowly but surely, without being obsessed with immediate results”. “Unity prevails over conflict” means “a diversified and life-giving unity”. “Realities are more important than ideas means avoiding “reducing politics or faith to rhetoric”. “The whole is greater than the part” means bringing together “globalization and localization”.

“Evangelization also involves the path of dialogue”, the Pope continues, which opens the Church to collaboration with all political, social, religious and cultural spheres. Ecumenism is “an indispensable path to evangelization”. Mutual enrichment is important: “we can learn so much from one another!”, for example “in the dialogue with our Orthodox brothers and sisters, we Catholics have the opportunity to learn more about the meaning of Episcopal collegiality and their experience of synodality”; “dialogue and friendship with the children of Israel are part of the life of Jesus’ disciples”; “interreligious dialogue”, which must be conducted “clear and joyful in one’s own identity”, is “a necessary condition for peace in the world” and does not obscure evangelization; in our times, “our relationship with the followers of Islam has taken on great importance”: the Pope “humbly” entreats those countries of Islamic tradition to guarantee religious freedom to Christians, also “in light of the freedom which followers of Islam enjoy in Western countries!”. “Faced with disconcerting episodes of violent fundamentalism” he urges us to “avoid hateful generalizations, for authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence”. And against the attempt to private religions in some contexts, he affirms that “the respect due to the agnostic or non-believing minority should not be arbitrarily imposed in a way that silences the convictions of the believing majority or ignores the wealth of religious traditions”. He then repeats the importance of dialogue and alliance between believers and non-believers.

The final chapter is dedicated to “spirit-filled evangelizers”, who are those who are “fearlessly open to the working of the Holy Spirit” and who have “the courage to proclaim the newness of the Gospel with boldness (parrhesía) in every time and place, even when it meets with opposition”. These are “evangelizers who pray and work”, in the knowledge that “mission is at once a passion for Jesus and a passion for his people”: “Jesus wants us to touch human misery, to touch the suffering flesh of others”. He explains, “In our dealings with the world, we are told to give reasons for our hope, but not as an enemy who critiques and condemns”. “Only the person who feels happiness in seeking the good of others, in desiring their happiness, can be a missionary”; “if I can help at least one person to have a better life, that already justifies the offering of my life”. The Pope urges us not to be discouraged before failure or scarce results, since “fruitfulness is often invisible, elusive and unquantifiable”; we must know “only that our commitment is necessary”. The Exhortation concludes with a prayer to Mary, “Mother of Evangelization”. “There is a Marian “style” to the Church’s work of evangelization. Whenever we look to Mary, we come to believe once again in the revolutionary nature of love and tenderness”.

[This synthesis is offered by the Vatican Information Service.]

To read the full text of the Apostolic Exhortation “Evangelii Gaudium”, or to download it in PDF format, go here: http://www.vatican.va/phome_en.htm

WHAT IS WRONG WITH MICHAEL VORIS? -1 : A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH CHRIST (click)

I hope someone will direct his attention to the two posts because I believe he intends to do good but is doing harm, treating Catholic things in a Protestant way and judging people unjustly and leading others to do the same.
IN CONTINUATION: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POPE FRANCIS & POPES JOHN PAUL II & BENEDICT XVI
Post a Comment

Search This Blog

La Virgen de Guadalupe

La Virgen de Guadalupe

Followers

My Blog List

Fr David Bird

Fr David Bird
Me on a good day

Blog Archive