consciously deceiving people for the Great Reset and the One World
I have just read an article by
Breitbart News (1)
written about an interview with the Pope and an Italian newspaper
concerning the Pope’s desire for the “healing” of the earth and his
belief that all the world needs to “change course”, and that politics
and economies need to be “rethought “. Considering he has also
supported the Great Reset (2)(3),
my question is, do you think he knows what
he’s saying and doing so with the purpose of achieving the One World
He must know what this leads to and what the final outcome will be, as
anyone who actually reads the Bible knows. I just cannot understand how
someone who supposedly “leads” and entire religious people can expect
to fool those same people. I have also never read about the Vatican’s
plans to change their ways to heal the earth (much the same as current
politicians who tout change only for others). Is there something I’m
I’m hoping you can give me some insight into your idea how he expects
to pull off what he seems believe will help him usher in the OWR and
the Great Reset. I know he’s not in this alone (if only it were that
easy), Even the most basic read and understanding of the Bible would
make this question moot. What am I missing?
Thank you for asking!
Those are very valid questions! We will try to elaborate about Francis's context and logic that explain
much of how he thinks and acts.
It is a common mistake to see this anti-Pope (5) as a "World Master" in
the sense of a wise and all-powerful planner. He is not so. Bergoglio
relative terms (compared to the sharks and wolves who are really in
fool —a very simple person with no depth of mind— who, like many other
world leaders, is being manipulated for the accomplishment of the
overall plan. But, at the same time, he
is not exempt from accountability.
..... Keep reading
distinction between True Christianity and Badly Applied Christianity
FROM OUR FILES: February
From miguel de Portugal
We have received, from a regular visitor to our pages, a link to a site
called: What is so Bad about
It is an extensive "bashing Christianity" site. We just briefly looked
at the index and we saw one section which fully illustrates what we
keep warning all about. It follows:
Record of Christianity
In line with the Moral Argument
already mentioned, if Christianity was the one true religion, or was
divinely inspired, then Christians should be able to demonstrate a
superior morality and a superior moral record. Thus Christians would
have a better record on Social Issues (such as Slavery, Racism, Capital
Punishment, Penal Reform, Physical Abuse, Treatment of Women,
Contraception, Abortion, Divorce, Family Values, Children, Romanies,
The Physically Ill, The Mentally Ill, The Poor, Animals, and the
Christians would have endured
Persecutions of Christians without carrying out Persecutions
themselves. Again, Christians would have a good influence on the
governance of Christian States (for example creating a constructive
Symbiosis between Church & State, not Meddling in National
Governments, and exercising a positive influence in politics).
Christians would have exercised a
sensitive and positive influence over all aspects of Sex, would have
promoted research into Science & Medicine, would have a record of
opposing Violence & Warfare, and no record of Cultural Vandalism.
As Christianity does not always live up to expectations, some Possible
Explanations are considered and the evidence Summed up.
That is exactly the way outsiders see Christianity and which causes its
rejection by those who would otherwise embrace the Faith. The problem
with their perception is that what they are addressing is applied Christianity, which has very little to do with true
Unfortunately these people - and many others - reject true Christianity
(2) based on
what they see - an adulteration of the true Christian Faith; an adulteration which we denounce
day in and day out! (3)
We must live our faith and, in so doing, be living witnesses of what
Jesus Christ clearly taught us. When we do that, those who are counted
among the Elect, but are still away from the Faith because of what they
see, will rush to embrace Christianity with great fervor.
"benedict" in "Benedict XVI" and what do we mean by "Maledict"
Immediately after posting the September 12 issue in this FYI&R page
(see below), we received an alert from a close collaborator, which
FYI&R September 12th, 2022, Francis confirming the
Peace be with you
In the above document you have a typo.
Maledict XVI (6).
Blessings and Graces
A. Thank you
for you attentiveness! We take this as an opportunity to clarify the
question for all.
Actually, it was not a typo. "Maledict" is what we intended to say –
not as an insult, but as an appropriate description.
However, since in that particular text we see now that it is causing
confusion, we have edited that text and replaced "Maledict" (used only
two times) with the more well-known and official name of "Benedict".
"Benedict", from Latin, means "blessed" (1). "Maledict", also from
Latin, means the opposite, "cursed" (2). "Benedict XVI" is the
religious name chosen by Joseph A. Ratzinger for
his office as Bishop of Rome, commonly called "Pope" – now "Pope
We have no problem in addressing him as "Benedict XVI" – IF you
consider that name as a person's name devoid of meaning, which is
usually the case in almost any context.
BUT, since some speakers are able to understand the original meaning of
the word "benedict" (1)(2)
may consider that meaning as properly applied to him, we feel obliged
alert our readers, lest anyone think that we share that opinion. Would
you be at easy, for example, calling a ruthless dictator "Clement", or
a prideful and arrogant millionaire "Simplicius"?
Therefore, we proceed as follows. In the general case, we refer to him
as "Benedict XVI", in order not to create confusion about who we are
referring to. But, in some cases, and in order to alert or remind our
readers about what we consider to be a reality, we refer to him as
"Maledict" – not as an insult, nor as a desire to curse him, but as an
appropriate description of the position
which he occupies in the End of These Times (now in tandem with Francis).
That name, "Maledict", was proposed by Miguel de Portugal (3) in 2010 and we at The M+G+R Foundation still think
that it fits. Perfectly. Should the reader have some doubts about the
details, we invite him/her to read, for example, Miguel de Portugal's
commentary of December 23, 2010 in For
Your Information & Reference (4).
Ricardo de Valencia
(1) "Benedict", from Latin, means "blessed". Depending on the
that meaning can be more or less obvious for the speaker. In Spanish,
Italian and Portuguese it is easy to decipher because the similarity
"benedict" of the words "bendito/bendecido" in Spanish, "benedetto" in
Italian, or "bendito/bento" in Portuguese, all of them meaning
(2) "Maledict", also from Latin, means the opposite, "cursed".
words are "maldito" in Spanish and Portuguese, and "maledetto" in
Italian, meaning "cursed" in all three cases. In English, "maledict" is
an archaic word keeping the original meaning from Latin, "cursed".
importance of women in the Church - And the error of the female
incoherence of displaying weapons at a Worship Service
FROM OUR FILES: June 21st,
From Initials Withheld
@ Somewhere in the World
Last Sunday I attended a service at [name withheld] in [location
withheld]. It is an Anglican church that we have attended 3 or 4 times.
Each time, it has been a different type of service.
In between we have become well acquainted with the Arch Deacon, [name
withheld]. We have met him informally on a number of occasions over a
I am troubled by a few things:
- I don't know why, but I feel it is
not 'right'? 'correct' that women ministers lead the services, and
there are more women clergy than men it seems. I DON'T KNOW WHY I feel
this way - it doesn't seem to make sense and seems very politically
incorrect. However, the feeling lingers.
- Transubstantiation does not occur/is not genuine in their services.
Simple as that.
- The following is an excerpt of an email I have sent to the Arch
Deacon tonight. This event continues to trouble me greatly. Again I
don't know why - it just isn't 'right'.
the call for youth to attend 'Y Time', the presiding minister made a
general call for one of the children to take up a Taiha and lead the
other children to the group.
I question, what place a taiha has in
church - it is quite simply a weapon, designed specifically to kill. I
was quite surprised to see one in a church in the first place, then more surprised
to see it proudly wielded by a child, leading a group of other children
into what I suppose (but am not sure of what 'Y Time' is about at this
stage) is learning/teaching from the Bible.
A Taiha (which was used during the services by children) is an ancient
Maori hand held spear. I suspect there is some politically correct idea
that it represents some 'spirituality' in Maoridom and one of the women
ministers that day was Maori - she was the one who called the child up.
I wrote to the Arch Deacon with my concerns and I suspect I am at risk
of upsetting this man, who seems quite 'comfortable' with his little
(and shrinking) Parish.
However, something is amiss here.
Initials and country withheld
something "is amiss here" and it is not you!
We have addressed the issue of women in the Priesthood already thus:
Women in the Priesthood (1)
The maternity of men? Are men less important than women because they
cannot be mothers? Of course not! God created us in His image,
male and female, and the fact that some are male and others female is
for a reason.
Men and women are truly different and have different functions. Just
like a man cannot be a mother, a woman was not intended to be for the
priesthood. It is not a matter of better or worse; superior or
inferior... although, when "all is said and done" and summing it up:
The One who is the highest honor of our race is Mary (2)
- a woman!
When we speak of the "motherhood" in a woman - we should not limit
ourselves to the fact that they are biologically capable of being a
mother by nurturing a fertilized ovum through birth. Women, blessedly,
have a unique number of physical, psychological and spiritual
characteristics which are only inherent to a female and which make them
fully capable of being "a mother". The same applies with a male and the
On the other hand, women as effective Church leaders is a completely
different matter, and we are not talking about nuns cleaning toilets in
the Apostolic Palace. We are talking about women being appointed
The key functions of Cardinals are the Administration of the Church and
the election of the Pope. Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church could
certainly have women at the highest possible non priestly, yet
extremely influential, position in the Church. They could not become
Pope but they could certainly vote in a Conclave to select a priest to
be invested as Pope. If Mary gave birth to Jesus, what would be wrong
with a few female Cardinals joining with male Cardinals in "giving
birth" to the man who is considered by the Roman Catholic Church to be
the Representative of Jesus on Earth? (3)
We understand that the "Cardinal concept" evolved from the custom that
until late in the Middle Ages the title of cardinal was given to
prominent priests of important churches. Therefore it is a man made
tradition and not a Divine Requirement. Jesus taught us through
and Mark 7:8-9
what He thought of man
traditions which interfered with Divine Plans. In this particular case,
the Divine Plan is not to keep the women cleaning toilets in the
Apostolic Palace but to bring women fully into the areas of Church
leadership not forbidden by the creative plan of God.
You are also right about the Transubstantiation (4) as well as the use of
the Taiha during the service. Any symbol of the death culture, a
"culture" which started millennia ago (5), certainly has no
place in a House of Worship. That is precisely why Jesus lived, died
and resurrected for us - so that we would rescind such "culture" and
embrace the "culture of love". A culture which those entrusted to
diffuse the Good News rapidly forgot returning to the death culture (6) which still today,
reigns supreme... and will until God repeats what He did during the
time of Noah. This time, true to His Word, He will not use
water... He will use fire! (7)
Whether what we have written above is believed or not because "...we do
not know the face of miguel de Portugal...", mankind will have to
answer to the face of God why our final warnings (8) - delivered in His Name
- have not bee heeded.
We remind one and all what we have said before and related by
Matthew 3:7 - And seeing many of the Pharisees and
coming to his baptism, he said to them: Ye brood of vipers, who hath
shewed you to flee from the wrath to come?
Dei's treatment of women
confirming the "charism" of Opus Dei
The following items are from the news. We thank PD for providing us the
first item (and a link related to the last). The rest (and more, if we
the time) are easy to find in a five-minutes search with the appropiate
Opus Dei in Argentina responds to
accusations of exploiting women (1)
ACI Prensa Staff, Aug 3, 2022
Opus Dei in Argentina has responded to a BBC news story about a
complaint made to the Vatican by 43 women who claim to have been
exploited by the Catholic apostolate.
According to the news article, what the women demand is “financial
compensation and public acknowledgement by the Church.”
According to the BBC, these women came from “low-income families when
they were between 12 and 16 years old and [Opus Dei] took them to
Buenos Aires in the ’70s, ’80s, and ’90s with the promise of giving
them an education.”
However, the BBC continued, “they received training in domestic tasks
and made them work for free for high-ranking members and priests” of
Opus Dei paid $977,000 to settle
sexual misconduct claim against prominent Catholic priest (2)
By Michelle Boorstein, January 7, 2019
The global Catholic community Opus
Dei in 2005 paid $977,000 to settle
a sexual misconduct suit against the Rev. C. John McCloskey, a
well-known for preparing for conversion big-name conservatives — Newt
Gingrich, Larry Kudlow and Sam Brownback, among others.
The woman who filed
the complaint is a D.C.-area Catholic who was among
the many who received spiritual direction from McCloskey through the
Catholic Information Center, a K Street hub of Catholic life in
downtown Washington. She told The Washington Post that McCloskey groped
her several times while she was going to pastoral counseling with him
to discuss marital troubles and serious depression.
ODAN denounces: "Basic Human Rights
Testimonies and Other Writings
Opus Dei recruits women from
poor backgrounds to devote their lives to
the cooking and cleaning of the opulent centers of Opus Dei, while
living a life of celibacy.
Escrivá liked to call assistant numeraries his “little daughters.” It
is well-known that he encouraged their childish behavior. Tapia says
that she was embarrassed by seeing adult women behaving like
thirteen-year-olds. The directresses also egged us on to indulge in
this behavior. After a while, it became a difficult habit to shake off.
There are many assistant
numeraries across the world living lives quite
similar to the one I have explained. I feel that these women’s
rights are severely breached by the attitudes and rules of Opus Dei.
However, Opus Dei continues
to justify and allow this type of status to
exist. It can only be described as the serious exploitation of a
vulnerable group of women in the name of God.
"To guard the
charism": In new decree,
Pope Francis makes changes to Opus Dei (4)
By Courtney Mares, Catholic News
Agency, July 22, 2022
Pope Francis issued a document on Friday that changed the oversight of
Opus Dei. It also decreed that its leader, the prelate, can no longer
be a bishop.
In the motu proprio, issued on July 22, the pope confirmed the Catholic
organization and urged its members to safeguard its charism in
“to spread the call to holiness in the world, through the
sanctification of one’s work and family and social occupations.”
“It is intended to strengthen the conviction that, for the protection
of the particular gift of
the Spirit, a form of government based more
on the charism than
on hierarchical authority
is needed,” Pope Francis
As you can see in the last item, Francis confirms the Vatican's
endorsement for Opus Dei – a privilege that was granted in full by John
Paul II (5) and
exalted by Benedict XVI (6).
Francis makes a distinction between "charism" and "hierarchical
but, actually, he is not forcing a real change, since Opus Dei can
continue to work internally on their own "Way" (7) while presenting
whatever "hierarchical" facade is imposed upon them from the Vatican (8).
For many, many years, they got along very well with just "every
five years, a report on the state of the Prelature, and on the
development of its apostolic work" (9) as the only requisite
the Vatican imposed, by law, upon them for watching them (this is
something they achieved through the late John Paul II). Based on this
single fact, do you think that the Vatican was (or is) really concerned
in monitoring them? Even though Opus Dei is a world wide organization
tentacles all over the political and social fabric? Does anyone really
think that the new requirement by Francis for that report to be on a
yearly basis (and now addressed to another Vatican entity) is going to
Think about the message from Francis
that they are receiving: At the
same time that he is addressing to apparently
improve the "hierarchical authority" of Opus Dei, he is officially
confirming and protecting Opus Dei's "charism" or "spirit" at the most
high level. Therefore, he is encouraging them to go on their
the way of duplicity, which is one of the most defining features of
their "charism" (8).
And, then, in the above news items related to their treatment of women,
you can see by yourself whether the problem is the "charism" or the
"hierarchical authority". If the problem is the "charism", then you
which "spirit" is Francis protecting. Coherent with the
"spirit" of Francis and Benedict (10).
Expanding on the question - A problem
of "charism" or of "authority"?
Actually, it is both. Authority
and "charism" are inseparable in Opus Dei. Their members are
under an authoritarian system (11)
that sustains a sick and deceptive "charism" which is corrupt at its
root (7). And,
at the same time, the key of their "charism" —indeed, the definition of
it, more than the alleged "sanctification through work"— is their
worship of Josemaría Escrivá, a cult (12) inseparable from a specific form
of authority taught by him, which is:
Total obedience and submission to
superiors, with "the heavenly Father" Escrivá (13) (and their
representatives) at the top, by means of religious commitments
(including covert vows) aimed at implanting in the members the thought
that, by obeying their superiors, they are fulfilling their commitments
before God, thus obeying God.
Therefore, the terms in which Francis speaks (14) are totally wrong, it
is not a problem that could be solved by somehow healing the
"hierarchical authority" of Opus Dei while keeping their "charism"
intact, because their "hierarchical authority" —properly called,
religious authoritarian system— is an
inseparable part of their "charism". They, at all costs, will keep
their real authorities intact,
their hierarchical system of obedience up to the top (which, for
them and in practical terms,
is not the Pope),
while wrapping themselves, at all times, on a external form suitable
public consumption or for the consumption of the naive Bergoglio.
(8) The ability of Opus Dei to
simultaneously operate on many (often contradictory) fronts:
Constitution "Ut Sit", visited 9-May-2019: "Through the Sacred Congregation for
Bishops, the Prelate will present to the Roman Pontiff, every five years, a report on the
state of the Prelature, and on the development of its apostolic work."
Please note that, as
of 12-Sep-2022, the text has already changed, as recently ordered by
Francis, and now reads "Each year the Prelate shall submit
to the Dicastery for the Clergy a report on the state of the Prelature
and on the fulfillment of its apostolic work."
Tower of Babel: a "new and improved" society
FROM OUR FILES: April
Do you ever wonder... why will
man attempt to build a "new and improved" society,
a modern day Tower of Babel, when we know from the beginning that it
was not acceptable to God? Thus:
they said: Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may
reach to heaven; and let us make our name famous before we be scattered
abroad into all lands. And the Lord came down to see the city and the
tower, which the children of Adam were building. And he said: Behold,
it is one people, and all have one tongue; and they have begun to do
this, neither will they leave off from their designs, till they
accomplish them in deed. Come ye, therefore, let us go down, and there
confound their tongue, that they may not understand one another's
speech. And so the Lord scattered them from that place into all lands,
and they ceased to build the city. 9 And therefore the name thereof was
called Babel, because there the language of the whole earth was
confounded; and from thence the Lord scattered them abroad upon the
face of all countries. [Genesis
For the same reason man wants to play God (genetic manipulation,
reproductive manipulation, etc.) considering that from the very, very
beginning God showed immense displeasure at such tendency. Thus:
the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat; But of the fruit
of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us
that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps
we die. And the serpent said to the woman; No, you shall not die the
death. For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof,
your eyes shall be opened; and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and
evil. [Genesis 3: 2-5]
Because man, without God, is basically very stupid and when man wants
to upstage God, God is certainly not with him.
counsel and the confirmation of the Divine reality of Jesus
FROM OUR FILES: April
Did you know that... the words
of Gamaliel directed to the other religious leaders and elders of
Israel regarding Jesus:
men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do, as
touching these men.
For before these days rose up
Theodas, affirming himself to be somebody, to whom a number of men,
about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all that
believed him were scattered, and brought to nothing. After this man,
rose up Judas of Galilee, in the days of the enrolling, and drew away
the people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as
consented to him, were dispersed. And now, therefore, I say to you,
refrain from these men, and let them alone; for if this council or this
work be of men, it will come to nought; But if it be of God, you cannot
overthrow it, lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God.
...actually confirm the historical and Divine reality of Jesus?
Only the Jesus we know through the Scriptures - God incarnate - could
have started - against all odds - a religious movement which even
Constantine saw as the only means of saving his Empire. Let us not
forget that Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the
Empire to shore up his collapsing Empire and not because "he believed".
Therefore the Church founded by Jesus Christ had become a real moral
socio-political force in the area.
No poor carpenter with the "gift of gab" could have possibly done that,
and, let us not give the credit to Paul's incessant travels and
preaching since he was only
acting on behalf of Jesus Who chose him.
mandate to move the assets of the Curia to the "Vatican bank"
could be the real motive?
Did you know that (pope) Francis has
ordered all Vatican entities funds
to be transferred to the Vatican Bank by October 1, 2022? Would
that include all churches as entities, also? If you have any
insight, I would appreciate your knowledge. I did not see an
explanation in the article I read.
I guess that digital currency is on the way.
For those who do not know the news, we will provide a summary: (1)
Pope Francis instructs
Vatican entities to move all funds to Vatican bank by Sept. 30
Rome Newsroom, Aug 23, 2022 - By
Hannah Brockhaus for CNA
Pope Francis has ordered that the
Holy See and connected entities move all financial assets to the
Institute for Works of Religion (IOR), commonly known as the Vatican
The pope’s rescript (2), issued Aug. 23,
clarifies the interpretation of a paragraph in the new constitution of
the Roman Curia, Praedicate Evangelium, promulgated in March (3).
According to Francis’ rescript,
financial and liquid assets held in banks other than the IOR must be
moved to the Vatican bank within 30 days of Sept. 1, 2022.
Re: Would that include all churches as
No. The edict or "rescriptum" of Francis (2) is formulated within the
juridical framework of the apostolic constitution "Praedicate
which is aimed —according to its preamble— to "the reform of the Roman Curia". It is
something similar to say "the reform of the structures of the Vatican".
Therefore, this edict does not apply to the particular churches spread
throughout the world. (4)
Both the edict and the related article of "Praedicate Evangelium"
(article 219) are aimed to those entities whose assets are directly under the control of the
Roman Curia (5)
– notably including what was traditionally under the financial control
of the APSA ("Administration
of the Patrimony of the Holy See") and the Vatican Secretariat of State (which
are, both, powerful institutions in the Roman Curia).
As an illustration, the Vatican's situation in 2013 was that: (6)
[Besides the APSA,] There are also about 80 departments,
agencies, and foundations in the Vatican each having their own money
and investments, but those funds are generally restricted to the
purpose of the each department.
The edict of Francis does not affect, for example, institutions such as
Communion and Liberation or Opus Dei, no matter that some
has suggested that possibility. Those institutions have a practically
absolute autonomy, being only symbolically supervised by the Vatican.
It is completely absurd to think that an organization like Opus Dei (8) would allow its finances
to be governed by the Vatican. It is precisely the opposite: Opus Dei
would like to control (9)
the Vatican's finances, and possibly that is what we are seeing.
Re: I guess that digital currency is
on the way.
We have not found a thread that reliably connects Francis' recent edict
with plans for a digital currency. It is true that some isolated sites
speak of such a connection, but we have not found any noteworthy
argument in them.
In other words, we do not know the
mechanism by which the pooling of all its assets in the "Vatican
bank" (IOR) could protect or benefit the Vatican in order to face an
impending financial crisis or monetary reform, although that does
excludes a connection. Therefore, at present, we can neither affirm nor
deny this alleged connection.
Now, generally speaking, the signs that the globalizers plan to plunge
the world into a purely digital transaction economy are everywhere. It
is a logical objective of those who, having planned a New World Order
for decades (10),
have found that, more and more, technological advances are helping them
in their purpose of absolute control of the world's population,
including absolute financial control.
A possible motivation
Continuing on the subject of Francis' recent edict, there is one thing
that does catch our attention:
(a) On the one hand, we know that
neither Francis nor the Curia that controls Francis have a sincere
interest in the total
transparency of the finances of the Hierarchy of the Roman-Catholic
Church. Of course, a partial or
apparent increase in transparency may benefit them, but we
should not form a mistaken idea of the "sanctity" of the Vatican
(b) On the other hand, it is logical that, when an organization wants
to keep its dirtiest economic operations hidden, the greater is their
interest in diversifying its economic activity through numerous fronts.
Conversely, pooling their deposits in a single entity undermines their
ability to disguise operations that they do not want to be known.
So, why are they now interested in pooling all their assets in "the
Vatican bank" (IOR)?
The most immediate explanation that comes to mind is that this is the
result of a power struggle in which
the group that controls the IOR's movements has won.
The Vatican and its court of speculators that are interested in
laundering capital through the Vatican's international diplomatic
privilege, taken as a collective, lose out. They lose in concealment
capacity. But if we look at it from the perspective of a possible power
group controlling the IOR, that
particular group wins because they will have gained, no more and
no less, the ability to financially monitor (and, to some extent,
control) all Vatican institutions.
As an added benefit, they get (for the Vatican) an appearance of
greater transparency because the IOR "has
undergone serious reform in the past several years, and now earns high
grades from European banking overseers for transparency" (12). Of course, if one
examines the recent history of the IOR (6), one will know that IOR
"reforms" have a tradition of promising and not delivering, no matter
what medals they receive.
edict in Italian
("Rescript of the Holy Father Francis about the
Instruction on the Administration and Management of the Financial
Assets and Liquidity of the Holy See and Institutions Related to the
(4) For further confirmation:
The expression that
the edict uses in
Italian (the original language of the edict) (2) clearly does not include
particular churches. It literally says "La Santa Sede e le Istituzioni collegate con
la Santa Sede". That expression does not have an exact
correspondence in English (in many media it is being translated as
"related institutions" or "connected institutions"), but we can assure
you that speakers of Italian and Spanish (the language of Francis)
understand perfectly well that the expression "istituzioni collegate"
(in Spanish, "instituciones colegiadas") does not include the
particular churches because the expression would be very different and
much more precise in absolute terms.
(5) Specifically, the related
article of "Praedicate Evangelium"
(article 219) speaks of "those entities that have entrusted their
assets to the Holy See".
En Español: Para vuestra
Información y Referencia - Septiembre 2022
© Copyright 2022 by The
All rights reserved. However, you may
freely reproduce and distribute this document as long as: (1)
Appropriate credit is given as to its source; (2) No changes are made
in the text without prior written consent; and (3) No charge is made
The M+G+R Foundation
Please Note: If the above dated image does not appear
on this document, it means that you are not viewing the original
document from our servers. Should you have reason to doubt the
authenticity of the document, we recommend that you access our server
again and click on the "Refresh" or "Reload" button of your Browser to
view the original document.