Pope Francis: History’s Final Pope?

Petrus Romanus

I am aware that some regular readers who visit this blog ascribe to some degree or another to “the Final Pope” theory as written about in Thomas Horn and Chris Putnam’s book, Petrus Romanus. As I have stated before, I personally am saddened by what I feel is a tremendous lack of discernment and logic concerning this material among many Christians. The following article, written by Dave James was featured on the blog of the Alliance for Biblical Integrity. Although I do strongly disagree with several elements of the article, it is certainly worth reading and considering for those interested in this issue. Hat tip to Alan Kurschner of Eschatos Ministries for initially linking to this article. You can read the full article at ABI here.

29 Comments
  • Gabe from Modesto
    Posted at 17:35h, 30 March

    Joel:

    Thank you for the article. I’m guessing you might disagree with James’ comparison of Petreus Romanus to The Harbinger. I haven’t read Petreus Romanus (and frankly don’t have any desire to), but I have read The Harbinger and I thought that Cahn did a very good job of exegeting Isaiah 9:10-11 and explaining (through fiction, obviously) how America is on a parallel course to the Kingdom of Israel. The difference, to me, is the fact that Cahn’s argument is based on Scripture, and he interprets current events through the Word of God, with very startling conclusions. It seems to me (without having read the book) that Horn and Putnam do just the opposite with Petreus Romanus, by taking current events and forcibly applying their own personal echatology, and then backing it up with a vague and inaccurate mystical prophesy that has no basis in Scripture at all. There really is no Bibilcal scholarship there. Just popular whim. Would you say I’m accurate in making that distinction?

    Gabe

  • Joel
    Posted at 18:09h, 30 March

    I do not have the huge problem with Harbinger as many do. I am not necessarily won over by it, but I think the application which calls on the US to repent is spot on.

    I also affirm the ongoing ability of believers to receive prophetic revelation and reject the notion that 100% accuracy is the standard.

  • Gabe from Modesto
    Posted at 18:21h, 30 March

    Thank you for the clarification.

  • dan13l
    Posted at 19:32h, 30 March

    I have been trying to log onto the Joel’s Trumpet web site for about four days and cannot login or even visit as a guest. Didn’t know how else to reach you to tell you!

  • good4u
    Posted at 21:15h, 30 March

    I, too, just recently read the “Harbinger” book and find the author makes an argument for the seven-year cycle judgment. Basing a nation’s judgment upon the national leaders defiance against a call to repentance quoting the Isaiah 9:10 verse. The question is, is this author’s argument for a continuous judgment cycle a constant earthly reality? That is the ultimate question to be answered to me. The test will come on September 13, 2015 for the Shemittah current cycle to end in conjunction with a partial solar eclipse on that very day. Jewish tradition, as I understand it, states that solar eclipses are bad signs for gentile nations while blood moons are bad signs for Israel. Interestingly, it seems a blood moon will be scheduled to take place right over Jerusalem the same year in 2015 on September 28 during the feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot). We will just have to wait and see. I will for sure will be watching during this time period.

  • Jonas
    Posted at 23:09h, 30 March

    Petrus Romanus, a catholic prophecy that don’t lead you to the Gospel but to Rome.The prophecy itself doesn’t say that the final pope is the antichrist. Rather he suppose to be take care the sheep(Catholics) before the judgement.

  • Nick
    Posted at 23:41h, 30 March

    While the Malachy and 2012 emphases are problematic, their next book will supposedly have interesting information about the Vatican’s odd interest in aliens approaching Earth. This was news to me and it seems they have a serious academic interest in our “space brothers” arriving. This sets them up for potentially massive deception.

  • Pingback:| Joels TrumpetJohns Revelation Prophecy Blog
    Posted at 02:55h, 31 March

    […] Pope Francis: History’s Final Pope? […]

  • Casey
    Posted at 06:06h, 31 March

    In reading excerpts of Cahn’s book, there is an implication I don’t agree upon with promises being put on America that same way as it was on Israel. The that I could not dismiss about the Harbinger is the implications that judgment is indeed upon the US and even moreso. The fact of how the first President, George Washington, pledged in the first capital, New York, on the same block where the Twin Towers were was a fact I could not dismiss. What was strange also about this date, as well, is the fact that on September 11, 3 B.C. Sukkot fell on this date. Some other things that I have read suggests Christ’s birth was during this Sukkot.

  • Pingback:Joel's Trumpet | JohnsRevelation.org Prophecy Blog
    Posted at 12:14h, 31 March

    […] Pope Francis: History’s Final Pope? […]

  • Weeping Eagle
    Posted at 20:15h, 31 March

    Yes, please go to the article which is rather lengthy and then below to the comment section. There, Cris Putnam responds to the writer of the article, Dave James. Putnam takes him to task thoroughly and finally gets James to admit that he did not read the book but “skimmed sections”. This after James said that he certainly did read the book. That to me ends the review of Petrus Romanus as disingenuous at best. I would be utterly surprised Joel if you had read the book as well.

  • Bo
    Posted at 21:46h, 31 March

    If The False Prophet is a Roman Catholic Pope, it will not be because St. Malachy said so. I believed that The False Prophet would be a pope for many years until I started following the Islamic Paradigm. I think The False Prophet would have to come from the same Empire The Antichrist (not necessarily the same nation, just The Empire) comes from since much of prophecy deals with Israel and The Islamic Nations. That is just my opinion and the way I see the Scripture. Keep up the good work Joel and God Bless you!

  • Joel
    Posted at 22:01h, 31 March

    Weeping Eagle,

    Please do not make accusations, brother. Its okay to disagree with something without it leading to brothers fighting etc.

    And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. 2 Timothy 2:24

    That said, I did read the book, completely, within days of its release. As I said, I disagree with several aspects of the article, but I do think the author does a very fair job of pointing out many of the authors’ bizarre leaps of logic, as well their excessive use of pagan prophecies and predictions to validate their own position. It is true that the Lord used Balaam, but to use this as validation for their excessive reliance on numerous pagan prophecies is irresponsible in my opinion.

    Beyond this, the authors are now claiming that they predicted the prior Pope would resign. Could you show me the actual quote where they do this? I searched through my copy and only found one passing reference to an article which asked if the Pope would resign in April of 2012. I would hope that if they claimed that they “predicted” something, that they would be honest in making such a claim. I could be wrong, I may have simply missed the prediction, but I could not find it.

    Blessings

  • Rick Reade
    Posted at 02:01h, 01 April

    I thought you and your readers might be interested in checking out Tim Warner’s free
    chapter-by-chapter audio class series on THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST: http://www.answersin
    revelation.org. I suspect that most people who reject the idea of a Caliphate BEAST and
    a Caliph AntiChrist really do so because they believe the AntiChrist is going to be a Pope and the Beast will be the revived Holy Roman Empire. Pastor Warner did not directly mention a Muslim “Beast” or “AntiChrist”, but his exegesis leaves room for one. He says the AntiChrist will destroy Rome or “Mystery Babylon” when he comes at the beginning of the last 3 1/2 yrs, and, will rebuild the actual city of Babylon (Zech 5:5-11). (I ‘suspect’ that the vision of the Flying Scroll in Zech 5:1-4 is a prophecy about the Quran and Islam.) Check it out! — Rick

  • Joel
    Posted at 10:27h, 01 April

    The new Pope a few year’s ago said the following about a bill concerning Homosexual marriage:

    “Let’s not be naive, we’re not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God, We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”

    Doesn’t sound like something the False Prophet to be would say. But could he be the last Pope? Certainly. But I don’t look to Malachy to validate the notion, I pay attention to the Biblical signs.

  • Gina
    Posted at 16:42h, 01 April

    I do not understand why we are speaking about two apocalyptical figures in the Revelations: The Antichcrist and te False Prophet. The Beast from the Sea in Revelation 13 is the same Beast from the Sea in Revelation 17. It is the Islamic Beast or the conglomerate of the Islamic countries. This Beast represents Islam. The Beast from the Earth in Revelation 13:11-18 is the Antichrist:

    Revelation 13:11
    Then I saw another beast coming out of the eart, and he had two horns like a lamb and spoke like a dragon.

    This Beast from te Eart is the False Messiah, he is the Anticrist. He is called the “False Prophet” because he represents te false prophet of Islam, Muhammad (the Beast from the grave) who was filled with the same Satanic spirit as the Antichrist is.

    The Antichrist is a Muslim, and he will force people to worship the Beast from the Sea, which represents Islam.

    So, I strongly believe that there is only one apocalyptic human figure in the Revelations. This apocalyptic human figure is the Antichrist who also is called the “False Prophet”. The Antichrist or the False Prophet is one and the same person. He is a Muslim and he has nothing to do with the Pople.

    Gina

  • Weeping Eagle
    Posted at 17:55h, 01 April

    Joel,

    I accept your admonishment and admit I was wrong. Please accept my sincere apologies brother. Lesson learned.
    I am glad you read the book. I can’t tell you where they made the prediction in the book, like you I did not make note. I do recall Mr. Horn saying he said Benedict would resign three weeks before he did on a Hagmann and Hagmann radio show which I tracked down to a January 13th air date if you care to check that out.
    I read the book and never felt pressed into believing, or that they necessarily believed that the “prophecy of the popes” had to be from the Lord. Certainly they left the door open for that possibility however. I won’t take time to look it up, but it is my recollection that the authors spoke of the possibility that there may been an agenda within the Vatican to purposely fulfill these prophecies. Had they been dogmatic within the book (yes, the book jacket is over the top) that this is the final Pope, akin to setting dates for a rapture, I would reject it completely.
    God Bless

  • Mark Chellis
    Posted at 19:38h, 01 April

    I haven’t read the book, and I probably won’t, so I can’t confirm this but a website:

    http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/final-pope-authors-predicted-benedict-would-resign/

    says:
    “Horn and Putnam discuss the evidence pointing to a Benedict resignation on pages 74 and 486 of their April 2012 book, and Horn has made the prediction on a number of radio programs in recent months, including Jan. 13.”
    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/final-pope-authors-predicted-benedict-would-resign/#hgvcBqCf6rIGe9k6.99

  • Gina
    Posted at 19:47h, 01 April

    In my previous comment, I wrote that the Antichrist is the False Prophet and he is a Muslim. The Antichrist or the False Prophet (which is one and the same person) has nothing to do with the Pope.

    I categorically disagree with the book of Horn and Putnam “Petrus Romanus”, particularly, because these authors try to portray the last pope as the False Prophet. The purpose of this comment is not to defend this book. The purpose of this comment is to highlight some erroneous statements of Dave James which he made in his article.

    In his article “Pope Frances: History’s Final Pope?”, Dave James wrote:
    “It is difficult to imagine why Horn and Putnam, who are considered evangelicals, would lend so much credibility to Malacy’s prophecy….Malacy was a thoroughly Roman Catholic Bishop of the medieval period. This means that the heretical theology and pagan practices that shaped the Church of Rome..were undoubtedly an integral part of Malachy’s life”

    So, according to Dave James, St. Malachy’s prophecy should not be trusted because St. Malacy was a Roman Catholic Bishop. This argument is a fallacious argument. To argue that the statement of a person is not trustworthy, because this person belongs to some organization which promotes the ideas with which we disagree, is a fallacy. This person could, in fact, make a valid statement. So, the argument that St. Malachy’s prophecy should be dismissed because St. Malachy was a part of the Roman Catholic Church is a fallacious argument.

    Second, in his article, Dave James, quoted some article from the Catholic Answers website. First of all, this website does not reflect the official position of the Roman Catholic Church on the issue of the St. Malachy’s prophecy. There was no official document from the Roman Catholic Church, as a whole, which announced that this prophecy is a forgery and should not be trusted.

    Let’s take a look at this quote from this Catholic website which Dave James presented:

    “Describing the popes to follow John XXIII are the phrases “flower of flowers” Paul VI, “from a half-moon” John Paul I, and “from the toil of the sun” John Paul II, note of which is an obvious connection.”

    The above statement not only doesn’t represent the official statement of the Catholic Church, but also this statement is the erroneous statement.

    John Paul I (“of the half Moon”) was born on October 17, 1912 and he was elected on August 26, 1978 when the moon was half full.

    John Paul II (“from the labors of the sun”) was born on May 18, 1920 during the solar eclipse. Also, his funeral was on April 8, 2005 during the solar eclipse.

    Paul VI was described in the prophecy as “flower of flowers”. Paul VI”s coat of arms had three lilies on it.

    St. Malachy’s prophecy was fulfilled in a jaw-dropping fashion. Let us take a look just at the two last Popes.

    Pope Benedict XVI choose his papal name after Saint Benedict of Nursia, founder of the Benedictine Order, of which the Olivetans are one branch.

    Below is an excerpt from the article:

    “…the following is the best evidence that Pope Benedict did indeed bring glory to the Olive or Olivetans:

    Bernardo Tolomei (1272-1348), founder of the Olivetan Benedictine Order, was canonized at St. Peter’s, Rome by Pope Benedict XVI on April 26, 2009 making him St. Bernardo Tolomei.

    On the 26th March 1319 Tolomei was given a Decree authorising him to build the future monastery of Santa Maria di Monte Oliveto, near Asciano, Italy. Fodor’s Review of Abbazia di Monte Oliveto Maggiore states “Tuscany’s most-visited abbey sits in an oasis of olive and cypress trees amid the harsh landscape of Le Crete.” The illustration of St. Bernardo Tolomei appears to show three large olives with two small olive branches sprouting on top”

    http://www.astrology.co.uk/news/benedict.htm

    As we could see, not only the original name, but the name the Pope has chosen may fulfill the St. Malachi’s prophecy.

    What about Pope Francis I? This Pope took his papal name after St. Francis of Assisi.

    St. Francis of Assisi name at the birth was Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone. St Francis’ name was Peter !!!
    http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/216793/Saint-Francis-of-Assisi

    Name “Peter” means “stone”. St.Francis was in essence “Peter (Rock) the Roman” He was a “builder of the Church”!

    Below is the excerpt from the article:

    “In 2010, Pope Benedict XVI recounted how St. Francis was born in 1181 or 1182 as the son of a rich Italian cloth merchant, according to the Vatican website.
    After “a carefree adolescence and youth,” Francis joined the military and was taken prisoner. He was freed after becoming ill, and when he returned to Assisi, Italy, a spiritual conversion began. He abandoned his worldly lifestyle.

    In a famous episode, Christ on the Cross came to life three times in the small Church of St. Damian and told him: “Go, Francis, and repair my Church in ruins,” Pope Benedict XVI said, according to the Vatican’s website.” ”

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/13/world/pope-name/index.html

    Jesus told to St.Francis three times: “Go Francis and repair my Church in ruins”

    Jesus told to Peter: “On this Rock I will build My Church”

    My God, there is a jaw-dropping similiarity!

    “The name symbolizes “poverty, humility, simplicity and rebuilding the Catholic Church,” Allen said. “The new pope is sending a signal that this will not be business as usual.”
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/13/world/pope-name/index.html

    This name means “rebuilding the Catholic Church”!

    Jesus told: “On this ROCK I will BUILD My Church”!

    In addition, the new pope’s name Francis I (First) reminds you of Peter who is considered the First Pope or the First Bishop of Rome.

    The conclusion is: The new Pope is “Peter the Roman” !!!

    In summary, in his article, Dave James wrote that St. Malachy’s prophecy should not be trusted because St. Malachy belonged to the Catholic Church. This is a fallacious argument. In addition, Dave James argued that St. Malachy’s prophecy was not fulfilled in several cases because he relied on the erroneous information posted on the Catholic Answers website.

    Base on these arguments (one fallacious and one erroneous), Dave James concluded that St. Malachy was a false prophet. Because St. Malachy’s prophecy was fulfilled with such a jaw-dropping precision, he is nothing less than a true prophet of God. Because Dave James based his conclusion on the false premises, his conclusion is also a false conclusion.

    While labeling St. Malachy as the “false prophet”, Dave James quoted 2 Peter 2:1-2

    2 Peter 2:1-2
    “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. 2 And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed.”

    Now, take a look at this breath-taking teaching of Martin Luther:

    “No sin will separate us from the lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day.”
    http://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/reformers.htm

    If it is not a false teaching, then nothing can be a false teaching. With such kind of “teaching” how in the world can someone accuse the Catholic Church of anything?

    By the way, I am not a Roman Catholic. I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian. I am happy with my denomination and have no slightest inclination to change it.

    Gina

  • Joel
    Posted at 23:01h, 01 April

    Gina,

    There’s too much info there to deal with. But for clarity, you said:

    “St. Francis of Assisi name at the birth was Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone. St Francis’ name was Peter !!!”

    Actually “Giovanni de Pietro di Bernardone” Giovanni son of Peter, son of Bernardone. His name was not Peter.

  • Joel
    Posted at 23:17h, 01 April

    Weeping Eagle,

    I appreciate your humility and kindness. Very honorable, bro!

    I agree with you that both Putnam and Horn qualify every component of their overall thesis by ending with questions… “Could it be?” and so forth. Its difficult however, when they spend so much time belaboring a particular point and then end with a quick hedging of their bets. Personally, for me, at times, it feels a bit disingenuous and almost irresponsible. As a teacher, we are held to a higher standard, and how our listeners respond is often the result of how we present information. I am all too aware of the reality that (as Simon and Garfunkel once said) “still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest”. So if you take five pages to discuss all of the evidence that Obama is the Antichrist and then end it with something like, “Now we want to be clear, we are not saying he is, we just think the info is very interesting…” Or something to this effect, many will latch onto the first five pages of arguments but think little of the limid qualifier. And I feel like they do this a lot. This is not a personal impugning of their motives or character, but it is a strong caution I feel concerning their approach.

    As an author, I am aware that the publisher often chooses the title and so I am wiling to give them a pass on this, despite the fact that many will run with “The Final Pope is Here”. But again, for clarity, my cynicism concerning the overall thesis of this book is not intended to be personal toward the authors. They are also brothers and I do not know either of them personally. I simply take my platform too seriously not to alert folks to some of the issues that others have brought up, which I feel are valid and worth considering, as well as some of the warnings that I feel myself. My fault is that I do not have the time to really lay out my issues as it probably deserves. In other words, I probably should keep my mouth shut unless I have the time to actually explain in full my issues.

    Blessings!

  • Adam N.
    Posted at 23:30h, 01 April

    Just wondering if anyone stop to notice that it’s 2013,lol! 2012 is over! They used to stone people in the OT for missing it, thank God for Grace,lol! Just kidding! Good article!

  • Joel
    Posted at 23:35h, 01 April

    Mark,

    I looked up those page numbers and they say nothing about the Pope resigning. 486 is the last page in the book. Its almost like someone just made up a couple of numbers.

    The only info I could find in the whole book, (again, I may have missed something) is on page 59, where there is a screen shot of a news article from September 25, 2011 with the heading “Media say Pope may resign in April”. The authors then say, “…if Pope Benedict were to step down in April [of 2012], it would yield a near perfect eleven… so anytime during 2012 would verify that [Thibaut] got it right.” They were simply discussing the mathematical calculations / predictions of this Thibaut fellow.

    This is quite a jump to the sensational claims, “Exactly as the Authors Predicted!” It would probably be more accurate to say, “Exactly as the Media Predicted two years ago!”

    In any case…
    Blessings

  • Gina
    Posted at 00:49h, 02 April

    Joel,

    You wrote:
    “Actually “Giovanni de Pietro di Bernardone” Giovanni son of Peter, son of Bernardone. His name was not Peter.”

    Actually, the name “Peter” means “rock”.

    Take a look what they wrote about St. Francis, whose name the new Pope has chosen:

    “”There are cornerstone figures in Catholicism,” such as St. Francis, Allen said. Figures of such stature as St. Francis of Assisi seem “irrepeatable — that there can be only one Francis,” he added.”
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/13/world/pope-name/index.html

    That means that St. Frances is the unrepeatable CORNERSTONE. St. Francis is the Rock, he is “Peter”!

    Gina

  • Joel
    Posted at 00:58h, 02 April

    Gina,

    Again, for clarity, you stated that Francis’ name was originally Peter. I showed you that it was not. Peter was his father’s name. You ignored this point and responded by pointing out that some random person once said that Francis was “a cornerstone” of the Church, and thus in your eyes, Pope Francis is Peter. Ta-dahhh! And this is supposed to be “jaw-dropping fulfillment”? I’m sorry, but the most this will evoke from me is a big yawn. It saddens me that we have the sure and perfect Word of God, and we choose instead to focus on things like this that need to be twisted and tweaked eight ways to be “fulfilled”. In my opinion, it is a sad commentary on the priorities of some believers.

  • Gina
    Posted at 03:39h, 02 April

    Joel,

    I do not know the Italian language. I just relied on the 2 websites that told that St. Malachi name original name was “di Peitro di Bernardone”:

    “St. Francis of Assisi (Italian: San Francesco d’Assisi, born Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone, but nicknamed Francesco (“the Frenchman”) by his father”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_of_Assisi

    “Saint Francis of Assisi, Italian San Francesco d’Assisi, baptized Giovanni, renamed Francesco, original name Francesco di Pietro di Bernardone (born 1181/82)”
    http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/216793/Saint-Francis-of-Assisi

    I just found these two websites. You tell me that “di Pietro” means “the son of Pietro”. It is OK, because my original argument for “Peter” was not based on these two websites. My original argument was:

    Let us analyze the name: Peter the Roman. Peter means “rock”.

    Take a look what they wrote about St. Francis, whose name the new Pope has chosen:

    “”There are cornerstone figures in Catholicism,” such as St. Francis, Allen said. Figures of such stature as St. Francis of Assisi seem “irrepeatable — that there can be only one Francis,” he added.”
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/13/world/pope-name/index.html

    That means that St. Frances is the unrepeatable CORNERSTONE. St. Francis is a Rock, he is “Peter”!

    “The name symbolizes “poverty, humility, simplicity and rebuilding the Catholic Church,” Allen said. “The new pope is sending a signal that this will not be business as usual.”
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/13/world/pope-name/index.html

    This name means “rebuilding the Catholic Church”!

    Jesus told: “On this ROCK I will BUILD My Church”!

    St. Francis’is a Rock and a Builder. New pope parents came from Italy. Rome is not just its capital Rome. Rome is the whole Italy. St.Francis was in essence “Peter (Rock) the Roman” He was a “builder of the Church”!

    Below is the excerpt from the article:

    “In 2010, Pope Benedict XVI recounted how St. Francis was born in 1181 or 1182 as the son of a rich Italian cloth merchant, according to the Vatican website.

    After “a carefree adolescence and youth,” Francis joined the military and was taken prisoner. He was freed after becoming ill, and when he returned to Assisi, Italy, a spiritual conversion began. He abandoned his worldly lifestyle.

    In a famous episode, Christ on the Cross came to life three times in the small Church of St. Damian and told him: “Go, Francis, and repair my Church in ruins,” Pope Benedict XVI said, according to the Vatican’s website.”

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/13/world/pope-name/index.html

    Jesus told to St.Francis three times: “Go Francis and repair my Church in ruins”

    Jesus told to Peter: “On this Rock I will build My Church”

    My God, there is a jaw-dropping similiarity!

    In addition, the new pope’s name Francis I (First) reminds you of Peter who is considered the First Pope.

    The conclusion is: The new Pope is “Peter the Roman” !!!

  • Casey
    Posted at 02:01h, 03 April

    Most extrabiblical prophecy have the element of subjectivity to them. True prophetic utterances will always point back to God’s word and to His glory. Most all false prophecy have a self exalting feature.

  • David W. Lincoln
    Posted at 15:35h, 03 April

    How about we wait, and prepare, for when the False Prophet (or to use Muslim terminology, Jesus) appears.

    For he will have the gift of the gab, and frankly we need to prepare so that he doesn’t get more victories on the slight.

    I’m not sure if it has been reported all that much outside of Canada, but 2 Canadians were involved in the Algerian gas plant attack. One was a lapsed Greek Orthodox.

    So, folks, it is time to study and pray to be prepared for the real testing of the faith handed down to us from Jesus to the Apostles, and down to us.

  • John
    Posted at 00:03h, 04 April

    I don’t think we need to worry much now about justifying the title “Peter Romanus” to pope Francis. I think he will eventually earn the nickname (probably from the press) of “The Roman Rock”, because he will be quite popular and be the “rock” that many cling to keeping faith during the upcoming tribulations.

Post A Comment