David Elsberry

@ProtecttheFaith The last bastion of hope in tradition.

We adore thee, O Christ, and we praise thee, because by thy holy cross thou hath redeemed the world. Amen Please pray for Fr Davide Pagliarani and the bishops, priests, religious and laity of the SSPX

@pontificatormax @Enjcjones Lol! Me too!

@Enjcjones I checked. It wasnt.

The new papal encyclical reads like the ravings of a stoned madman.

@pontificatormax Nailed it.

@aguivaldi @riecker @CauseofourJoy That’s because this is borderline fantasy.

@DavidElsberry3 @riecker @CauseofourJoy This is the first time I’m hearing about Apostle Peter’s wife’s death.

Most people don't know St. Peter was married. Even fewer know how his wife died. In 64 AD, Peter stood and watched his own wife being marched to her execution. He could have screamed. He could have fought. He could have cursed the soldiers dragging her away. He did none of those things. Instead, he called out to her. By name. And what he said has echoed for almost two thousand years. But before I tell you what he said, you need to understand who this man was. This wasn't some stoic philosopher. This was a common fisherman who loved the Lord. This was Peter. The same Peter who, decades earlier, had denied even knowing Jesus. Three times. To save his own skin. The same Peter who wept bitterly in the dark after the rooster crowed. The same Peter who once stepped out onto the water in faith and then sank like a stone the second he got scared. That Peter. The impulsive one. The fearful one. The one who broke under pressure. And now here he is. Watching his own wife walk toward martyrdom. The single hardest moment a husband could ever face. So what does he do? He doesn't break. He calls out to her by name and says three words: "Remember the Lord." That's it. Not "I'll save you." Not "Don't be afraid." Not even "I love you." "Remember the Lord." Because Peter understood something almost no one understands anymore. He wasn't losing her. He was sending her home. The early Church father Clement of Alexandria recorded that Peter actually rejoiced watching her go to her death. Not because he didn't love her, but because he loved her rightly. He loved her enough to point her toward heaven with his final words to her on this earth. His love for her wasn't a rival to his love for God. It was wrapped up in it. Inseparable from it. So when the worst moment of his life arrived, he didn't cling. He pointed her home. And here's the part that should give you chills: She walked to her death in faith. He stayed and gave thanks to God in his suffering. And not long after, Peter himself would be crucified upside down, refusing to die the same way as his Lord. Two thousand years later, we are still telling their story. This is the kind of love the modern world can no longer even imagine. A love so anchored in eternity that death becomes a doorway instead of a defeat. Husbands, THIS is the standard. A love so rooted in Christ that you would point your own wife toward heaven even as your heart is shattering. Share with a friend who needs to know this. You can read this account for yourself in St. Clement of Alexandria's Stromata, Book VII, Chapter 11. (The year 64 AD is an approximation based on the historical data.)

No it isn’t incorrect. It’s what they are supposed to do. Whoever says that doesn’t understand that those people need to be blessed probably more than those in a state of grace. Think of those who are investigating the faith being told that they are not supposed to even be blessed by a priest and aren’t welcome to worship with the congregation because they are not worthy of a priest blessing them.

@gotren @BreeSolstad our Priest explains before Communion if you are not receiving you may still come up for a blessing to him or the EM. Is that incorrect?

Cute but nuns should not lay hands on someone’s head during prayer. Nuns are consecrated religious women but not ordained clergy. The laying of hands on the head is a priestly/sacramental sign reserved for ordained ministers.

@pontificatormax Yes, out of the park, and out of the Catholic Church, right into the glove of an awaiting and gleeful Satan.

What an endorsement!

@SharonEmily No. There is no record of this historically in scripture or the scrolls. St. Clement is the source and every writer after him simply copied it without verification. Historians consider St. Clement as unreliable because he had a history for writing rumors as factual evidence.

@riecker Is this true? As a lifelong Catholic, I never heard this.

@TJ4138 No one did, it has a single source and has no evidence of being true. It isn’t in gospel or any scrolls anywhere else.

@riecker Wow! Didn't know this about his wife(knew he was married... it's in the Gospels). Thanks for sharing.🙏 🙌

@Dutchysmomma She wasn’t, there is no record of this except for St. Clement. It’s rumor that he wrote as fact and historians consider his writings unreliable.

@riecker So I didn’t know she was martyred too. But I guess a lot of people forget about Jesus curing his mother in law as 1 of the recorded miracles.

@DevotionFirst @riecker Yes, that’s correct. This is only written by St. Clement who wrote down rumor as fact, and historians consider him an unreliable source.

@riecker While this is possible, many scholars believe St. Peter to have been a widower when he encountered Jesus. This is supported by the Bible account where his mother-in-law appears to be in charge of his household, a duty usually reserved for the wife.

@HassanClan It isn’t, it has one original source St. Clement, who historians do not consider reliable as he often wrote rumors as facts. This person writes AI stories for the purposes of marketing his online service of supposedly strengthening marriages.

@riecker earlychristianwritings.com/text/clement-s… I'm sorry, but I don't think your citation is correct.

Trump cut off the USAID slush fund and the ActBlue foreign donations scheme...and now Democrats have no money. Odd that...isn't it.

To your point, Jesus was speaking to the Father directly, Muhammad was speaking to the people. A subtle distinction but important in that Jesus had a direct connection to the Father and was speaking to him because he was divine. Muhammad was uttering at its core, a curse of death.

@RealShahriqKhan Muhammad’s last words were May god kill all Jews and Christian’s. Jesus last words were Father forgive them they know not what they do. Muslims don’t believe Jesus was crucified Not the same

Muslims love to say Jesus never taught the Trinity. I used to think that too until I noticed something wild in the story of the adulterous woman. The Pharisees drag this woman before Jesus, ready to stone her, trying to trap Him with the law. And what does Jesus do? He bends down and starts writing in the dirt. I used to skim past that part until I read Exodus 31:18: God gave Moses the law written by the finger of God. Suddenly Jesus writing in the dirt was not random anymore. He was signaling something massive: “The law you’re trying to use against me? I’m the one who wrote it.” Then it gets deeper. Jeremiah 17:13 says those who reject the Lord, the fountain of living water, will have their names written in the dust. And in John 7, Jesus says He is the source of living water and then points directly to the Holy Spirit. So in one moment you have: The Son revealing authority over the Law. The Father’s identity tied to the Lawgiver. The Holy Spirit described as living water flowing from Christ. And then Jesus forgives the woman. This is not random storytelling. This is theology happening in real time. Jesus did reveal the Trinity. He just did it through law, living water, forgiveness, prophecy, and symbolism that the Jewish audience standing there would have understood immediately. People miss it because they only listen to what Jesus said instead of watching what He was doing. Pray for eyes to see it.

@jdflynn Wait until you hear about the type of people who produce 99% of the other movies out there… You don’t have to like JHW or Father Altman to realize this is an unserious critique, especially considering everyone has known Gibson is a Sede for a long time.

Would the Fatima seer, Sr Lucia use the name of God in vain? Of course not. But the proven impostor did. thefatimafiles.substack.com/p/the-curse This is just one more piece of evidence added to so much at sisterlucytruth.org. The "disappearing" of Sr Lucia is intimately connected to the creation of a false church & a false Mass under false popes after the false Second Vatican Council. Even Josef Ratzinger, later Benedict XVI, credibly told a close priest friend, Fr Ingo Dollinger that the Third Secret of Fatima included the foretelling of "a bad council and a bad mass": onepeterfive.com/cardinal-ratzi… And that can only happen under a false pope, "the top," as Cardinal Mario Ciappi, who knew the Secret, stated in a 1995 letter to Professor Baumgartner.

The SSPX are not, never have been, and never will be sedevacantists.

@CatholicSOTC If you are elected with 133 rather than the maximum 120, UDG says your election is null and void. So there is no question at all of absolute papal power, since in the present chrisis L14 has 0, zippo, authority. He is a fraud.

@WalkingHymnal Fr Altman will not be laicized. He did nothing wrong. His bishop was a heretic