Barbara wrote:About Benedict, I still feel there was something different about him. He was nowhere near the coarseness of Francis
Barbara, I am not particularly influenced by one "style" or another, whether someone is refined or not, and I do not base my judgments on mere "feelings". We ought to measure all things by Divine Scripture and the teachings of Holy Church. I don't assess Benedict to be a deceptive liar based upon his looks or how he carries himself, or whether he listens to classical music or not. Satan masquerades as an angel of light, so clearly his servant Benedict can do the same. I don't care how refined he may seem to present himself.
He was refined : not a candidate for the Illuminati usually, right ?
Barbara, a century ago, Sergei Nilus explained that the last resistance of the Roman See in their struggle with the Masonic-Jewish Sanhedrin was in the time of Pope Leo XIII, well over a hundred years ago. He says the papacy lost the battle, and was subjugated to the Sanhedrin. Yet you are trying to convince me that more than a century later, the Sanhedrin, which has only increased and consolidated its power over that time, just sits by idly and allows the Roman Catholics to install their own leaders, without any influence or interference on their part, and the Roman Catholics just happened to pick someone traditional and admirable in many ways, with Benedict. But then they just suddenly did an about face, and decided to go in the complete opposite direction, and go with Francis. Is this even reasonable? No, it is not. I will simply tell you what is the case, and if you choose to reject the facts and base your decisions on mere gut feelings, then so be it. I will be on my way, for there is nothing more for me to say.
The reality of the situation is, that every pope in your and my lifetime has been chosen by the so-called Illuminati. It is naive to believe that the Illuminati is going to just leave the RCC unmolested, after triumphing over her more than a century ago. Once the Roman church lost the battle, they were forced to have their leaders installed by the Masons.
The only way the scenario you have presented could work, is if you disregard the opinion of Orthodox confessors such as Sergei Nilus, and the mountain of evidence over the last century which only serves to confirm everything he has warned us of, and you believe the Roman church is actually strong enough to mount a vigorous defense against the Masons. This is simply not what the evidence shows. Benedict went running to three Jewish synagogues and to Auschwitz in the first couple of years of his papacy, no? Benedict voiced his commitment to strengthening ties of "friendship" between the Catholic Church and Jews.
Paul VI also has something very sneaky in his look.
He may have had a sneaky look, but we cannot become emotional about these things. We must use reason, not hunches based on looks.
We know that there is much evidence about him having been a homosexual. Francis is almost surely one.
So, you acknowledge that the Roman Catholic church was so rotten 50 years ago, that they elected a homosexual to the papacy, and you acknowledge that the current pontiff is likely of the same persuasion, but you somehow believe that in between all this rottenness they decided to elect an admirable man to the papacy in Benedict? Is that even logical?
But not Benedict. I can't see that, despite the sometimes demonic-looking photos published of him.
That is because you appear to base your judgments on "feelings" or how someone "looks" rather than a thorough examination of the facts.
I believe I have articulated my views rather explicitly regarding how the Roman Catholics have operated in our generation. It is the culmination of thousands of hours of exhaustive investigation, and is not based upon simply a feeling. You will need to address the facts regarding Francis and Benedict, and stop telling me you think some pope looks okay to you. We cannot have a fruitful discourse about the pope of Rome based upon whether or not he listened to refined classical music or not.
Let's talk about all their blasphemies and heresies first. Of course, it goes without saying, that any pope must be extremely arrogant, vain, delusional, and demonically possessed with the spirit of Antichrist to presume to ascribe to himself the role of Universal Bishop and Vicar of Christ!
Benedict beatified that vile and despicable Koran-kissing blasphemer John Paul II. What else needs to be said?
