"The Five Wounds of the Liturgical Mystical Body of Christ"

"The Five Wounds of the Liturgical Mystical Body of Christ"
"The Five Wounds of the Liturgical Mystical Body of Christ" according to Bishop Athanasius Schneider: 1. Mass versus populum. 2. Communion in the hand. 3. The Novus Ordo Offertory prayers. 4. Disappearance of Latin in the Ordinary Form. 5. Liturgical services of lector and acolyte by women and ministers in lay clothing.

Saturday, October 12, 2013


In several Catholic sites and blogs, is circulating an open letter to Pope Francisco by former director of Catholic.net  Lucrecia Rego de Planas As important is the author, having been the director (until recently) one of the largest Catholic networks in  the Internet,  with its amount of material and its visitors. Mrs. Lucretia, and other industry Catholic "conservative" (which come sighting) have begun to show their concern for what we may call-gradual disfigurement of the papacy, which is promoting the same Francisco with his gestures and words to the media communication.
As our readers will not agree with several of the statements of Ms. Rego de Planas, but we see interesting and brave of them-in some respects-this letter he addressed Francisco and then reproduce.

Who do we believe?

Letter to Pope Francis from an Argentine Catholic who knows him very well: "Who should I believe, the Gospel, the Magisterium, Tradition or the Pope?" by  Lucrecia Rego de Planas   



Dearest Papa Francesco, I am so pleased to have the opportunity to greet you. Surely you will not remember me, seeing so many new people every day must be hard to remember everyone, even those with whom you talked and lived during the long course of your life.

Over the past 12 years, you and I, many times have found ourselves in several meetings, church meetings and conferences that took place in the cities of Central and South America on various topics (communication, catechesis, education). During these pastoral meetings I had the opportunity to live with you for so many days, sleeping under the same roof, sharing the same table and also the same desk. Then you were the Archbishop of Buenos Aires and I was the director of a leading Catholic media.

Now you are the Holy Father and I ... only a mother, a Christian, married to a good husband and nine children, who teaches mathematics at the University and seeks to cooperate as best as I can with the Church, the place where God has put it.

In these meetings several years ago, I remember more than one brought you to me and said: - "Girl, tell Jorge Mario, we're friends", I replied, startled: "Absolutely not, Mr. Cardinal! God forbid you from giving of one of his princes on earth. "

Now, however, I beg to call you, because you are no longer the card. Bergoglio, but the Pope, my Pope, the sweet Christ on earth, to which I have the confidence to address as my father.

I decided to write to you because I suffer and I need you to comfort me. I'll explain what is happening to me, trying to be as short as possible. I know you like to comfort those who suffer, and now I'm one of them.

When I first met you during these retreats, when you were still Cardinal Bergoglio, I was struck and puzzled that you never acted like the other cardinals and bishops. To give some examples: you were the only one there that did not genuflect before the tabernacle or during the Consecration, if all the bishops presented themselves with their cassocks and their clerical garb, because that was required by the necessary rules for the meeting, you will presented yourself in suit and clerical collar. If all of you were sitting on the seats reserved for the bishops and cardinals, you left empty the place of Cardinal Bergoglio and you sat in back, saying "I'm fine here, so I feel more at ease."If others came with a vehicle that corresponds to the dignity of a bishop, you had arrived after the others, busy and in a hurry, telling aloud your encounters in public transport in order to come to the meeting. Seeing these things - I am ashamed in telling this - I said to myself: - "Phew ... who wants to attract attention! Because, if you want to be truly humble and simple, is it not better to behave like the other bishops to go unnoticed? ". Even some of my Argentine friends who attended these meetings, somehow noticed my confusion, and I said - "No, you're not the only one. We all were always puzzled, but we know that clear criteria, and in speeches show convictions and certainties always faithful to the Magisterium and the Tradition of the Church, it is a brave loyal defender of right doctrine ... Apparently, however, loves to be loved by all and please everyone. In this sense could one day make a speech on TV against abortion and the next day, in the same TV show, bless the pro-abortion feminists in the Plaza de Mayo, could make a wonderful speech against masons and, hours later, eat and drink with them at the Club Rotary Club. "

My dear Papa Francesco, it is true, this was the card. Bergoglio I knew closely. One day, intent on chatting animatedly with Bishop Duarte Aguer in the defense of life and of the liturgy and the same day, at dinner, chatting animatedly with always Ysern Bishop and Bishop Rosa Chavez on base communities and the terrible obstacles that represent "the dogmatic teachings "of the Church. One day a friend of the Cardinal Cipriani and Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga to talk about business ethics and against the ideologies of the New Age and a little later a friend of Casaldáliga and Boff to talk about class struggle and the "wealth" that the techniques could donate to the Eastern Church.

With this in mind, you will understand that I with greatly widened his eyes when I heard your name after the '"We Have a Pope" and from that moment (before you ask) I have prayed for you and for my beloved Church. And I have not stopped doing it for a single day since then. When I saw you on the balcony, without miter, without cape, breaking the protocol of greeting and the reading of the Latin text, with this trying to differentiate yourself from the rest of the Popes in history, smiling, worried, I said to myself: "Yes, without a doubt. This is the Cardinal Bergoglio. " In the days following your election, you gave me a number of occasions to confirm that you are the same person I had known closely, always looking for a diversity: you asked for different shoes, a different ring, a different Cross , a different chair and even room and home different from the rest of Popes that always had been content humbly with those things provided, without the need of "special" things, especially for them. In those days I was trying to recover from the immense pain felt by the resignation of my beloved and much admired Pope Benedict XVI, in which I identified from the beginning to the clarity in his teachings (the best teacher in the world), for his loyalty the Liturgy, for his courage in defending the right doctrine among the enemies of the Church and a thousand things that will not be listed here. With him at the helm of Peter I felt like I had stepped on land. And with his resignation, I felt the ground disappear beneath my feet, but I understand it, the winds were really stormy and the papacy was something too rough for his strength, now diminished by age, in the terrible and violent culture war being waged.
At that moment I felt abandoned in the midst of war, the earthquake, in the increasingly fierce hurricane, and suddenly you came to replace him at the helm. We have a new captain, we give thanks to God! I confided in full (without any doubt) that, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, with the prayer of the faithful, with the weight of responsibility, with the assistance of the working group in the Vatican and with the awareness of being observed throughout the world , Papa Francesco leave behind the special things and ambivalences of the card. Bergoglio and would immediately take command of the army, and with renewed vigor continuing the path of struggle that his predecessor had set.

Unfortunately, to my surprise and dismay, my new general, rather than take up arms once arrived, he began his tenure using the time as the Pope to call his barber, to his dentist, his milkman and his newsagent, attracting attention to his person and not on the relevant issues of the Papacy.

Six months have passed since then and I recognize, with love and emotion, you've done thousands of good things. I really like (very much) your formal speeches (to politicians, gynecologists, communicators, the World Day of Peace, etc..) And your homilies on feast days, because in them we see a thorough preparation and a deep meditation of each word used. Your words, in these discourses and homilies have been a real food for my spirit. I really like that people love you and applaud you. You are my Papa, the Supreme Head of my Church, the Church of Christ. However - and this is the reason for my letter - I must say that I also suffered (and suffer), from many of your words, because you say things that feel like stabs in the lower abdomen during my repeated attempts to a sincere loyalty to the Pope and the Magisterium .

I feel sad, yes, but the best word to express my current feelings is: perplexity. I do not know what to say and what not to say, I do not know where to go on and let it go. I need you to orient me, dear Papa Francesco. I'm really suffering, and much, for this concerns me still. My biggest problem is that I have devoted much of my life to the study of Sacred Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium, in order to have strong reasons to defend my faith. And now, many of these solid foundations are in contradiction with what my beloved Pope says and does. I am shocked and I need you to tell me what to do.

I'll explain myself better, with a few examples. I can not applaud a Pope who does not kneel before the tabernacle or during the Consecration as taught by the rite of the Mass, but I can not criticize it, because it is the Pope! Benedict XVI asked us in the Redemptoris Sacramentum that we are to inform the bishop of the unfaithfulness and liturgical abuses we are witnessing. Ma .. Who should I inform if the Pope himself does not respect the liturgy? I do not know what to do. I disobey the instructions of our Pope Emeritus? I can not feel happy to have eliminated the use of the paten and kneeling for Holy Communion, and even that you never give communion to the faithful, who do not call yourself "the Pope", but only "Bishop of Rome "or you do not use the fisherman's ring. But I can not even complain, because you are the Pope! I do not feel proud that you have washed the feet of a Muslim woman on Holy Thursday, since it is a violation of liturgical law, but I can not issue a peep, because You are the Pope, to whom I owe respect and to whom I must be faithful! I was hurt terribly when you have punished the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, because they were celebrating the Mass in the ancient rite with the explicit permission of your predecessor in Summorum Pontificum. And punish them, is to go against the teachings of previous popes. But who do I communicate my pain, you're the Pope! I did not know what to think or say when you have mocked publicly a group that had sent you a Spiritual Bouquet of rosaries, calling them "those who count the prayers." Such Spiritual Bouquets are a wonderful tradition in the Church, what am I to think and I do not like it if my Papa derides those who offer them to him? I have many friends who are "pro-life" who a few days ago were very saddened by your calling them "obsessed and obsessive." What should I do? Console, softening falsely your words or hurt them even more, repeating what you said to them, seeking to be faithful to the Pope and his teachings? WYD you asked young people to "make some noise in the streets." The word "casino", as far as I know, is synonymous with "disorder", "chaos", "confusion." Really this is what you want them to do the young Christians in the streets? There are already enough confusion and disorder in the world? I know of many single and older women (spinsters), which are very cheerful, funny and generous and really felt badly when you said that the nuns were not to have a face like a spinster. I was very sick at heart for my friends and me, it hurt me in my soul for them, because there is nothing wrong with being alone and to dedicate one's life to good works (in fact, loneliness is specified as a vocation in the Catechism). What should I tell my friends who are "spinsters"? That the Pope was serious (which I can not do a Pope), or that I support the Pope in the fact that all the old maids have a face like a bitter religious?

A couple of weeks ago you said that "what we are experiencing is one of the best moments of the Church." How can you say that as Pope when we all know that there are millions of young Catholics who live in concubinage and many millions of Catholic marriages where they use contraceptives, when the divorce is "our daily bread" and millions of Catholic mothers kill their children not born with the help of Catholic doctors, when there are millions of Catholic businessmen who are not guided by the social doctrine of the Church, but by ambition and avarice; when there are thousands of priests who commit liturgical abuses, and when there are hundreds of millions of Catholics who have never had an encounter with Christ and do not know the essence of the doctrine, when education and governments are in the hands of the Freemasons and the world economy in the hands of Zionism? This is the best time of the Church? When you said it, beloved Pope, I panicked. If the captain is not seeing the iceberg before us, it is very likely that we smash against it. Do You really believe that or is it just a way of saying dear Pope? Many great preachers have felt devastated to know that you said that now no longer have to talk about the themes of which the Church has already spoken and which are written in the Catechism.

Tell me, dear Papa Francesco, what must we Christians who want to be faithful to the Pope and also to the Magisterium and Tradition do? Let's stop preaching even though St. Paul has told us that we must do so at every opportunity in season and out of season? What with the courageous preachers, we force them to silence, while truly spoil sinners and gently tell them that if they can and want to, should read the Catechism to know what the Church says? Whenever you speak of the "shepherds smelling of their sheep," I think of all those priests who allowed themselves to be contaminated by the things of the world and have lost their scent of priesthood to acquire a certain smell of decomposition. I do not want the smell of shepherds with sheep, but sheep that do not smell of dung, because their pastor care and always keep clean. A few days ago you talked about the vocation of Matthew with these words:  "I am impressed by the gesture of Matthew.He clings to his money, as saying: 'No, not me! No, this money is mine " .  could not help but compare your words with the Gospel (Mt 9, 9), contrary to what Matthew himself says of his vocation: "And Jesus went forth from thence, he saw a man who was sitting at the tax office, whose name was Matthew, and said unto him, Follow me. And he rose and followed him. " 
I can not see where the grasping of money (not what I see in the painting by Caravaggio). I see two different narratives and wrong exegesis. Who should I believe, the Gospel or the Pope, if you want (as I really want to) be faithful to the Gospel and the Pope?

When you talked about the woman who lives in concubinage after a divorce and an abortion, you said  she "now lives in peace." I wonder: can someone live in peace, a lady who is voluntarily removed from the grace of God? The previous Popes, from St. Peter to Benedict XVI, said that it is not possible to find peace away from God, but Pope Francis said so. What should I support, the teachers always or this news? Should I say, starting today, to be faithful to the Pope, that peace can be found in a life of sin? Then you tossed the question without answer on how a confessor should behave, as if to open the Pandora's box knowing that there are hundreds of priests who mistakenly recommend continuing in concubinage. Why does my Papa, my dear Papa, not tell us in a few words what should be advised in cases like this, instead of opening doubts in sincere hearts?

I met Cardinal Bergoglio in almost a family environment and I am a faithful witness to that you are intelligent, friendly, spontaneous, very witty and very clever. But I do not like that the press is publishing all your sayings and quips, because are not a village priest, nor the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, now you're the Pope! and every word you say as Pope, acquires ordinary magisterial value for many of who read and hear you.
Anyway, I wrote taking too much of your time, my good Papa. With the examples I have given you (although there are many others) I think I made clear the pain of uncertainty and perplexity I'm living.
Only you can help. I need a guide that illuminates my steps based on what the Church has always said, speak boldly and clearly, does not offend those who work to be faithful to Jesus' command, to call "the bread, bread and wine wine"," to call sin " sin" virtue " virtue", although this risks his popularity. I need your wisdom, your firmness and clarity. I ask for help, please, because I am in agony.
 I know that God has equipped you with a very acute intelligence, so that, trying to comfort me alone, I could imagine that everything you do and say is part of a strategy to disconcert the enemy, by introducing yourself in front of him with the white flag and so letting your guard down.

But I'd like you to share it with those who are fighting this strategy at your side, because, in addition to disconcerting the enemy, you are disconcerting us, we do not know where he is and where our headquarters is located in front of the enemy. Thank you once again for all the good you have done and what you said during the feast, when you uttered beautiful homilies and speeches because there really are served a lot. Your words inspired and gave us the impulse to love more, to love, to love in the best way, to show the world the loving face of Jesus

I send you a hug branch very loving, my dear Papa, with the assurance of my prayers. I also ask for yours, for me and for my family, of which I enclose a photo, so that you can pray for us, knowing our face. Your daughter loves you and pray for you every day, 

Lucrecia Rego de Planas

Huixquilucan, Mexico, September 23, 2013

You can read the text of the original letter in Spanish:


Fr. Peter Klos said...

The open letter from Lucrecia to poe Francis is too long to comment. But in general - in spite of some appreciative words - this letter is an attempt of character assassination. If she were sincere, she would not have published this letter on internet, because that serves no other goal than to arouse public indigation. I hope Lucrecia may discover what humility means. Maybe than she will understand pope Francius a bit.

Fr. Peter Klos, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

ServusMariaeN said...

Fr Klos,

Thank you for your comment. I shall not presume to know the motives behind this woman's writing an open letter. I've since found that she is a member of the neo catholic Regnum Christi and was a supporter of Fr Maciel. I thought she made a few valid points. oremus pro invicem

Kneeling Catholic said...

Thanks for posting this. I'm putting you on my 'blog roll'!

I think Father Peter's 'shut up and take it!' illustrates the irony of the humility contest the Holy Father has ignited. Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the most humble of them all?

Mrs. Rego's letter is a desperate cry for help. Father ignores that. When someone is drowning, the last thing they worry about is whether other people think they are humble, or dignified or even wise.

ServusMariaeN said...

Kneeling Catholic thanks for your comment. As I told Father Klos, I would not presume to know the motives and/or intent of her letter. I too believe that she is making a cry for help. I would never presume to make a call regarding her humility or lack thereof. Papalotry is not Catholic.

Dr. William Marra On papalotry:

"There is a kind of papalotry going around.

It acts as if no matter what comes out of Rome, it must have been inspired by the Holy Ghost."

fr. Peter Klos said...

Sorry if I gave the impression that I think that Lucrecia has to 'shut up and take it'. I just don't see the benefit of publishing this 'cry for help' on internet. I think Lucrecia misjudges the intentions of pope Francis ('he only wants to be loved by everyone'), and that she is doing great injustice to him. His life (not only since he became pope) is an impressive testimony of humility and love. Of course she has every right to make her own judgments, but why publishing this on internet? Her 'despair' won't reduce when she publicly accuses pope Francis of all kind of things, and I cannot see what good it brings. Thereby are the remarks of Lucrecia often a very subjective interpretation, for instance her accusation that pope Francis has 'punished' the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate. That is quite in contrast with the statements of Fr. Manelli (the founder) himself about the affair. But as I said previous, the open letter is too long to comment. I respect fully the difficulties that Lucrecia has with pope Francis and I can understand that for someone who was so happy with pope Benedict it is not easy to accept a pope with an almost opposite character. But I think that the open letter that she wrote and published on internet will only bring negative fruits. And for the rest I hope that Lucrecia may find peace of mind and heart with our present pope.

Anonymous said...

yes, when there are serious arguments and doubts expressed, it is too long to comment...

Anonymous said...

when someone criticised JPII or BXVI, none was against expressing critics, now, when there is so humble and fulfilled with the Holy Spirit pope Francis, some people ask not to publish or express doubts or critics - why not to criticise??? when there are true authorities and saint people, nothing with be problematic, the truth will defend itself, Hole Spirit will make what is necessary - do not be afraid of thinking and analysing! there is reason in our faith needed!

FR. Peter Klos said...

It is a Christian virtue not to speak bad about people, even when there could be some truth in the accusations. And that is all the more important when the accusations are made public. I would have said the same when this open letter would have referred to JPII or Benedict XVI. Thinking and analyzing is good, but never forget our Christian responsibility for one another. Everybody has his weaker side but let’s be merciful, understanding, grateful for the good and responsible in the way we speak about others.

ServusMariaeN said...

I wonder whether St Paul's rebuke of St Peter in Galatians or St Catherine of Siena's rebuke of Pope Gregory XI could have been public or at least known by the public? I rather like this quote from the blog 'First Things': What these examples illustrate is that there is a place for respectfully criticizing the pope. Neither St. Paul nor St. Catherine campaigned for the Church to “move past” infallible teaching. Rather, they encouraged the pope to do a better job of being pope.

"Defending Pope Francis is admirable, but we must be careful to be accurate in what we are defending—or else we may be building another kind of “house of cards,” which, with a single bad pope, could come crashing down."

Fr. Peter Klos said...

Dear servus mariaen, I understand your comparison, but I cannot see a St Catherine of Sienna in Lucrecia, nor a Gregory XI in pope Francis. Pope Francis - in my eyes - is a very marian, orthodox and humble servant of the Lord who has done already some remarkable things in the few months he is pope (f.i. the day of prayer and fasting for peace, with immediate result; the consecration of his pontificate to Our Lady of Fatima; the change of focus of the Church to the essentials, etc) and the 'rebuke' of Lucrecia is (again: in my eyes) injust, unfair and a result of a very subjective frustration. So, again, I understand your comparison but I don't think it is applicable to the letter of Lucrecia. Time will tell!

ServusMariaeN said...

Fr Klos, I was not trying to draw a direct comparison between St Catherine of Siena & Gregory XI and Lucrecia and/or Papa Francesco. My point is that there has been (and continues to be) the tendency that a Pope is above critique. I cannot believe that any Catholic worthy of the name would make a criticism of a Pope easily. I know that I could not. I personally find much in Papa Francesco which I do find worthy of praise above all some of what you have listed. That said I believe that the Church continues on with the ambiguity and lack of clarity with which we have become accustomed in the post Conciliar times. Papa Francesco made the statement to the effect that "the church has never been doing so well " etc. I beg to differ.

Michael said...

Father, to focus on the person in the comparison and not the principle is a sign of having no argument. Arguing the principle is 1st. She is grieving, we are too. You have assumed the worst in her and the best in the Pope, and while noble, is not your mind in accord with reality. This pope has attacked good people of the traditional persuasion calling them heretics (Pelagians), while not judging homosexuals?

“Peter has no need of our lies or flattery. Those who blindly and indiscriminately defend every decision of the supreme Pontiff are the very ones who do most to undermine the authority of the Holy See- they destroy instead of strengthening its foundations.” ~ Melchior Cano, theologian of the Council of Trent

Anonymous said...

Seriously, if we believe Pope Francis is Orthodox, we need to read PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS again. He expresses many of the hallmark traits of the Modernist. His chosen Cardinal in charge of his "council" openly stated that Vatican I defined modernism as a heresy, but Vatican II "ended the hostilities between the Church and modernism". How can this be? How can the Church end hostilities with the Sum of all Errors? This is not possible, unless the ones ending the hostility have themselves subscribed to the error.

Read on the Error itself, then tell me how Orthodox the Pope is.

Gerard said...

There is a certain irony to a priest publicly posting a rebuke towards a woman who publicly rebuked a Pope for his public actions and the priest complains about the public nature of the rebuke.

Public actions that scandalize demand public rebukes which require public repentance and public reparation. I doubt we'll see that kind of genuine humility.

Handsome is as Handsome does. Whenever I go to confession, I watch how the priest behaves in the Church and in front of the tabernacle. And in every case, the one that doesn't genuflect is the weakest, the most dubious in orthodox beliefs, the worst in pastoral direction and the least concerned with spiritual realities.

I would avoid the current Pope as a parish confessor based on his external irreverence towards God Himself. The man put a beach ball on the tabernacle and treated that with more reverence than he does the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.

It's a pity he's Pope and can't really be given the rebuke that that type of behavior deserves in this life. So, he's got to wait till he stands before the judgement seat of God Himself to know the gravity of his unjust treatment of the Lord. Pope Stephen digging up the body of Formosus and putting it on trial wasn't as disrespectful as what we are seeing now and placidly accepting.

Anonymous said...

The lady is correct with so many of her points. I see it as a cry for help, and also as a wake-up call to those blindly following the Pope.

LaSalette, Fatima, as well as Garibendal, and Medjugorje, all point to corruption in the church.

The signs are all around us! Pope Francis is serving a critical roll in fulfilling the book of Revelations, Daniel, etc.

Alas, nobody wants to hear that. So go ahead Fr.Klos, keep beating up others, and not addressing their points in your blind defense of the church. You are a shepheard with more responsibility regarding peopels salvation. I would walk very carefully if I was in your shoes.
All these points this lady is talking about are very valid points. So many priests are blindly defending the pope. Look at the apparitions, the signs, and wake up!!!!

Anonymous said...

I follow my Church, the One ,Holy Catholic and Apostolic, centuries of Tradition and defined Dogmas . I do not follow apparitions and I do not think that unapproved apparitions should be promoted or used as basis for any judgement.
Now with regard to the author and content of the open letter to Pope Francis, this lady has put into words what I have been unable to express regarding the very public comments of our Holy Father and his very public rejection of papal insignia, accomodation etc , something wich delighted the anti-catholic sectors in the media and many socially liberl lobby groups.This lady is not revealing anything in public that Pope Francis has not already done himself.He instigated the interviews that have given rise to such scandal and confusion in ordinary (humble ) catholics . It certainly has made the public opposition to abortion and homosexual activity more difficult and has silenced ordinary faithful catholics in case they are to be denounced as legalistic. I once saw humilty defined as ordinariness , invisibility . It certainly would not be attributed to anyone singing I will do it my way a la Frank Sinatra. The author has written this letter in a very charitable way , appreciating all that the Holy Father has spoken on in encouraging people and appealing to him to look at the sadness in the hearts of catholics who love and pray for him as the Vicar of Christ .

Anonymous said...


Something all Catholics should read on this subject

Anonymous said...

To not allow for apparitions whatsoever seems somewhat silly. Are we supposed to throw all logic out the window? How many people witnessed Our Lady of Fatima? I think it was 50 - 75k. Obviously she had a message worth mentioning!!! It would be prudent to somehow put it into the assessment of the times we live in.

Our church is in big trouble these days. And those apparitions explain a great deal of it.

I'll give one example of how I see the easy going concept of the church potentially allowing us to take the wrong path. Taking the Holy Eucharist while in mortal sin is yet another mortal sin. So in other words, it will send you to Hell. Don't you think the lineups to confession should be a little longer?

If I was a priest, and I witnessed 80% or more of the congregation receiving Holy Eucharist, I would apply some laws of probability. I would feel compelled to preach about receiving the Eucharist while in grave sin.

I also understand the priests perspective where he doesn't want to appear to condemning. So there is this balance between conformance and standing up for the rules. This all flows from the spirit of Vatican 2.

The mass is to selebrate Jesus dying on the cross for our sins. That's it.

Mother Theresa of Calcuta was a prefect example of charity for the church. Sure she took care of the fleshly needs, meerly as a tool for conversion.

In contrast, the Popes agenda seems to have more of a social justice theme. Which is an extremely dangerous spiritual path.

Anonymous said...

Lucrecia, didn't you defend Maciel? Everyone at the top level knew about him while hiding it from the rest. And you still defend them today. Honestly, you should simply say "I am ultraconservative, and I don't like you, Papa Francesco" instead of "I am a normal catholic and Papa Francesco goes against the Church and God".

Anonymous said...

Medjugorje is a false apparition and not approved by the Church

Anonymous said...

Having read this I thought it was really informative. I appreciate you
taking the time and effort to put this article together. I once again find myself personally spending way too much time
both reading and commenting. But so what, it was still worthwhile!

For a better informative review please check-out
this amazing site :: how much does a face lift cost