Pater Noster: Lord’s Prayer, Not Pope’s…

Somebody forgot to say this prayer!

 

From the Editor, Catholic Truth…

When the news broke of Pope Francis’ criticism of the “Our Father”, I dismissed it as a blog topic, certain that nobody in their right mind would give it a second thought, let alone take it seriously enough to change this ancient prayer. I forgot about the Scottish Bishops.  Alerted to the incredible news that the Bishop of Paisley, (John-wasn’t-Martin-Luther-a great-guy-Keenan), and  former Bishop of Galloway, (the notorious Maurice-I’m-proud-of-my-part-in-creating-the-awful-liturgical-texts-for-new-Mass-Taylor), are sympathetic to the possibility of changing the Lord’s Prayer to suit Pope Francis’ latest shocking whim,  and might thus seek to influence the rest of the Bishops, I decided to launch this thread.  Me? I’ll say this latest “new” prayer, like, never. What about you?  Click here to check out the “cautious welcome” given to the Pope’s proposal to change the Pater Noster by these two outright modernists,  and then read the excellent commentary from the Fatima Center (Canada) website below. 

From the Fatima Center Staff: And Lead Us Not Into Stupidity…

How obtuse and inattentive have been the custodians of the Faith these past two thousand years! We and our ancestors have apparently been permitted, even enjoined, to recite the Our Father in an inaccurate and misleading way. Resonating through the corridors of time, from the first century until our own, are the words, “lead us not into temptation.” (ne nos inducas in tentationem — in the Latin Vulgate)
At last, however, in this year of Our Lord 2017, we have a Pope who is prepared to lead us out of the traditional Lord’s Prayer and into a new and improved version that will save us from the misunderstanding we have presumably labored under through the millenia.

Just what is this misunderstanding that requires correction? It is, according to Pope Francis, the idea that God tempts us to sin. “A father doesn’t do that,” the Pope said in a recent television interview. “He helps you get up right away. What induces into temptation is Satan.”

Did we not know this already? Does it require the Pope’s critique of an ancient translation to enlighten us in the matter? All authorities agree that the traditional translation from the New Testament Greek is accurate, and it has never posed a problem — until now.

But does it really pose a problem at all?

We have all prayed the Our Father countless times and repeated the words “lead us not into temptation” with the clear knowledge that we are asking Our Lord to save us from falling into sin. We have prayed these words with the understanding that we are asking for the grace to help us resist the lies of satan, and the attractions of the world and the flesh that are laid before us and that tempt us to forget we have an immortal soul and an eternal destiny.

Have any of us actually thought that God wants us to sin? That Our Lord is trying to induce us to transgress His laws and harm our souls so that He may damn us? How absurd! Yet, Francis is admittedly worried that such may be the case. How ought we to respond to the Pope’s desire to change the words of the Our Father?

We are forced, by common sense, to doubt the genuine nature of Francis’ expressed concerns. It cannot be that a Vicar of Christ, a highly educated Jesuit, really believes that the words of the Our Father have been misinterpreted for two thousand years and that a corrective is needed at this particular time. To take the Pope’s words at face value we must impugn either his intelligence or our own. Francis is not a stupid man, and Catholics are not so doctrinally benighted as he seemingly fears.

So what is this new commotion regarding possible changes to the Our Father really about?

Many things were changed following Vatican II: liturgy, discipline, customs, catechesis, prayers. Many of these changes appeared to be gratuitous, others gravely troubling. But the overall import of the changes was to unsettle the Catholic mind and heart. Once we accepted that anything and everything was subject to change, we were more likely to accept with acquiescence whatever novelties authority proposed. We simply got used to having the ground shift beneath our feet with such frequency that we no longer minded the large and little earthquakes that shook the Church.

All of these changes were merely cosmetic, we were told: an updating of language and discipline to keep pace with the times. Nothing of substance was being lost, we were re-assured time and again. But imagine someone cut off from the Church, say from 1960 until the present. Would he recognize as Catholic anything that he might see going on today in his parish? Would he not be dumbfounded by the words of the post-conciliar popes? Would he not regard Pope Francis as incomprehensible and outrageous? Would he not, like Mary Magdalene at the tomb, say in pain and confusion, “What have they done with my Church?”

What would he make of the vernacular Mass, the changed words of the Consecration, lay men and women distributing the Blessed Sacrament, people receiving Holy Communion in their hands or drinking the Precious Blood from the Chalice? What would he make of the typical Novus Ordo funeral Mass, which is now a falsely jolly ceremony of canonization? What would he make of Amoris Laetitia? Of the pedophile scandals among the clergy? What would he think of a notorious homosexual prelate being placed in charge of the papal residence and serving as the papal representative to the corrupt Vatican bank? What would he make of Pope Benedict’s resignation? We could go on. But we all know how vast and deep have been the so-called reforms that followed the Second Vatican Council. The Church is hardly recognizable from what it was a half-century ago and from what it has been throughout the ages.

And there is no end in sight for the “updating” that is deemed so necessary to keep the Church relevant to the modern world. Now, we are told that the Our Father may need to be updated, too. France has taken the lead and its bishops have already changed the phrase the Pope finds theologically troubling. “Ne nous laisse pas entrer en tentation” (do not let us give in to temptation) has already been adopted. So, the Pope can rest easy that at least the Catholics of France, or the diminishing remains of them, will not be misled.

As for the rest of us, we are apparently still in need of further instruction and the habits of a lifetime may have to be broken, for our own good, presumably. But does any of this nonsense about the words of the Our Father have to do with genuine pastoral concern? Is the Holy Father really worried that spiritual harm will befall us unless he intervenes to change the custom that has persisted for two millennia? It may be doubted, to put it politely.

Even the most mild and conciliatory of Catholic commentators are clearing their collective throats about this latest of the Pope’s initiatives. “Pope Francis has made a habit of throwing things into confusion, and this is one of them. It just makes you wonder, where does it stop, what’s up for grabs. It’s cumulative unease.” So says Philip Lawler, editor of Catholic World News and a compliant apologist for any number of post-conciliar novelties. Perhaps, if Mr. Lawler and others had not allowed their unease to accumulate but had addressed it immediately, we would not be faced with the present absurdity, which even they feel compelled to address, albeit in their restrained and ineffectual way.

The Protestant world, however, is not so restrained. According to a report in the New York Times, R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said he was “shocked and appalled” by the Pope’s remarks. “This is the Lord’s Prayer. It is not, and has never been, the Pope’s prayer…”

But Southern Baptists probably fall within the spectrum of those fundamentalists for whom the Pope has repeatedly expressed his disdain, so he is unlikely to be deterred by his otherwise keen ecumenical sensitivities. Still, Mohler’s remarks are refreshing in their frankness when set beside the timid reservations of Lawler’s “cumulative unease.”
During her final years, Sister Lucy said that we must take the initiative in prayer and penance and not look to those in authority to lead us in these things. Those who have seen the full Third Secret, such as Cardinal Ciappi, have told us that apostasy in the Church will begin “at the top.” Has it not begun? All we can do is follow Sister Lucy’s advice. And when we pray, let us pray the words of Our Lord, “lead us not into temptation.”  Source – Fatima Center Staff

Comment:

Well – will YOU ever say the new Our Father?  Even if you are attending the new Mass, praying the new rosary, reading the new catechism, accepting the new morality, supporting the new canonisations, new everything.  Will you draw the line at this outrageous change?  Or do you agree that Christians have been idiots for two thousand years and didn’t understand the meaning of this simple prayer  – thus, now we need to grow up and get with the papal programme, which appears to be to leave nothing, absolutely nothing unchanged. Let’s hear it… 

69 responses

  1. Well, although we disagreed on Amoris Laetitia, With the exception to your flip attitude here, I must whole heartedly agree with you hear. All the changes since Vat 2, I try my best to abstain from. I cannot hardly bring my own alter rail, but you get my point. For me, during Mass and any other time, I will say the Our Father as I always have. But not as a sign of my rejection, no, perhaps just because I understand the pros and cons. Am I insulted by the Church’s attempt to understand the lead us not? Initially yes! But, we have bigger fish to fry, bigger concerns to fret over. I pick my battles. This just isnt one to lose sleep over.
    Kind Regards

    • ICF,

      The Church has been teaching us the meaning of “lead us not into temptation” for two thousand years and I can’t remember ever hearing about, or speaking to anyone who did not understand the meaning. So, this is not “the Church’s attempt to understand the lead us not” – nope. This is, as the Fatima Center article indicates, Pope Francis’s latest attempt to confuse and undermine the Faith at one level or another. Put his own little stamp on it.

      Actually, none of the battles are “one to lose sleep over” since Christ has promised us the victory in the end. Still a lot of damage is being done in the meantime and our duty as Soldiers of Christ means that we must always correct confusion, error and heresy where we encounter it. As I said in the intro, I was quite prepared to leave this particular nugget alone until I read Bishop Keenan’s willingness to go along with it. Not without a fight from Catholic Truth, he won’t.

      • “Not without a fight from Catholic Truth, he won’t.”

        As we say on this side of the pond: “Atta girl!” 🙌

      • Editor,

        Bishop Keenan’s willingness to go along with it

        The trouble with Bishop Keenan is that he tries to be all things to all men.

        If Francis said we should all renounce God and worship Satan, I expect Bishop Keenan would “cautiously welcome” the idea!

        OK, I am being facetious there, but it would indeed be refreshing for the Bishop to simply deride such nonsense, instead of treating every idea as if it’s the best thing since sliced bread,

        • Gabriel Syme,

          Facetious? Don’t speak too soon! Nothing, but nothing about Bishop Keenan would surprise me. I hope I’m not being uncharitable (again) but I’ve always felt that he had one eye on promotion. His predecessor, remember, went on to become Archbishop of Glasgow. Naughty me! Still, if that is the case (and I hope, if I’m wrong, that I find out before my Judgment so that I can make reparation!) then the scenario you paint is not too far removed from the possible reality. Shock horror.

          MOVING ON TO THE GOOD NEWS…

          I hope you don’t mind me telling the world that your latest little daughter, Felicity, was baptised today and what a beautiful little baby she is, good as gold, all the time. She obviously takes after her lovely mum 😀

          Father had wondered about whether to close or open the doors near the font, and – allowing my modernist streak free rein – I asked him if he would like me to take charge of the doors since that would allow me to be “actively involved”. For some reason he found that amusing. These traditional priests. They just don’t get it, do they?

  2. There is one thing that Francis will leave unchanged, and that is himself. But perhaps he will have a nightmare about a certain weeping and gnashing of teeth if he doesn’t repent. Or perhaps he will be visited by the ghost of Judas Iscariot, wrapped in clanking chains, when the clock strikes midnight….

    I disagree with two points in the [Fatima Center] article: one, I don’t think Francis is intelligent at all. He is very shrewd, but not intelligent. Two, I disagree that he is highly educated. He is highly indoctrinated with Marxist rubbish, but that is not the same as being highly educated.

    • RCA Victor,

      I agree with your disagreement! There’s a first!

      I keep reading this description of Pope Francis as “intelligent” and “highly educated” and I agree with you that he is neither. Sadly.

      However, I’m not sure that I agree with you that he’s “shrewd”. If anything I think he stumbles along from one day to the next, sometimes literally…

      Still, I’m going to quit while I’m ahead, since we agree about two out of three issues, and it’s clear I’ve been erased from several Christmas card lists this year so I just can’t afford to lose any more friends 😀

      PS For those who think I’m being cruel about the Pope’s tendency to fall, I’ve fallen over myself several times in recent years, most recently in a shopping centre in Glasgow before Christmas, when I fell on my back, so I really am sympathetic. Honest. After my recent fall, the security staff were solicitous and obviously terrified that I’d sue (the tiles were wet) but I assured them that if I sued every time I fell over, I’d be in court more often than Judge Judy, so that calmed them down! Truly, I do have sympathy for anyone who falls over, as it is a frightening experience, so please take the above in the spirit of a deep love for the papal office that inspired it 😀 I know! I’m naughty! Very!

      • Editor

        I disagree with your agreement with RCA Victor’s disagreement, if you catch my drift!

        They say it takes a clever man to play the fool. Well, this daily stumbling through his Pontificate that Francis projects is not what it appears. He is a very well educated and intelligent Jesuit who knows exactly what path he’s taking the Church down. He has it all mapped out in his Modernist (sadly Marxist) mind. Just review his words and actions since his election as Pope and you’ll see that he has a very clear plan to undermine the supernatural in favour of naturalism. That’s why today’s Communist world loves him.

  3. To answer the question in the final paragraph:

    Ne. Nein. Non. Nyet. NO.

    (Ukrainian, German, French, Russian and English respectively).

    • Well said Margaret….. here’s another two …NON (Latin) and NAW (Glaswegian)

      Maybe we should add “From the Synthesis of all Heresies, Domine Libera Nos.”

      • Gerontius,

        “Glaswegian – Naw”! Brilliant! Why didn’t I think of that?

        Strictly rhetorical. Any cheeky replies will see you banned to outer Paisley!

          • Gerontius,

            You neatly side-stepped Athanasius’s question! We ALL hope you are keeping well – I’ve been assuming that you are making good progress, so if I’m wrong (unthinkable, I know….) please tell us – no need for details, just instruct us to redouble our prayers!

            God bless.

            • Thanks for post Ed.

              I’m progressing as well as can be expected – So I hope to be at St.Andrew’s soon. Until then, please give my regards to all.

              BTW, have you any news from Christina?

              • Gerontius,

                That’s good to hear.

                I’m overdue making a phone call to Christina, but last time I spoke with her, she was making very good progress indeed, in much less pain. I’ll let her know you were asking for her next time we speak.

                Look forward to seeing you soon.

                God bless

  4. I’m not surprised that Bishop Keenan and Maurice Taylor are supporting the Pope’s desire to change the Our Father. We know plenty about Bishop Keenan from other blogs on him here, but not a lot of people might know that Bishop Maurice Taylor was a disgrace when he was Bishop of Galloway, even covering up a paedophile scandal and openly supporting the priest. This is one of the many reports about him. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-23459459

    I just hope these two don’t persuade the rest of the bishops to make that change formal. I wouldn’t put it past them.

    I will definitely never accept the new Our Father. If it changes, What needs to happen is that Catholics keep saying “and lead us not into temptation” wherever the prayer is being publicly recited. Some here might think that is wrong but otherwise we’re going along with a completely illegal change – I agree with the poll on the website that nobody has the authority to change the prayer given to us by Jesus, himself, not even a pope. I wonder at the 14% who think the Scottish bishops do have the authority to change the Our Father. What planet are they on?

    • Lily,

      I well remember that shocking case of Fr Paul Moore and the Bishop openly showing his support for him on at least one occasion publicly at an event. Details escape me but it scandalised the faithful who were in touch with us about it.

      Bishop Taylor also vigorously opposed the new English translation of the novus ordo when Pope Benedict tried to restore the liturgy to some semblance of order and dignity.

      So, yes, no surprise there that Bishop Taylor – like Bishop Keenan – is willing to consider changing the words of the Our Father.

  5. I suppose the leftist quibble is that the Pope isn’t changing the words of the Our Father, but the *translation* of the Our Father.

    This still leaves the problem that the Fatima Center points out: “We and our ancestors have apparently been permitted, even enjoined, to recite the Our Father in an inaccurate and misleading way.”

    Indeed. To follow the lead of Margaret USA: What тріп / gekröse / tripes / рубец / tripe!

    • Wurdesmythe,

      The quibble certainly IS that the Pope is moving to a better “translation” however, as the Fatima Center article reminds us: “All authorities agree that the traditional translation from the New Testament Greek is accurate, and it has never posed a problem — until now.”

      As for your conclusion – spot on! Tripe is the word. Along with Margaret’s resounding “NO!”. Or, as we Glaswegians say (as Gerontius points out) – NAW! Or – to emphasise – as the more articulate Glaswegians would say: “AW NAW gonnae no DAE that!” [Tr. “oh no, please do not do that… i.e. change the Our Father] 😀

      • She is a sweetheart, and a gracious host to a pilgrim visiting her home city from abroad. I was introduced to St. Mungo, treated to a picnic during my Loch Lomond visit, and in general made to feel very welcome indeed.

        • Wurdesmythe,

          Very kind. We all enjoyed your visit here and you were made to feel very welcome indeed because you WERE very welcome indeed. Only a week or two ago, the boys showed me some of the photos from the visit to Loch Lomond – they have very happy memories of your visit.

  6. When I was a Third Order Carmelite several years ago, a Novus Ordo group, I noticed they used a “simplified” form of the Gloria Patri, though thankfully I can’t remember what it was. So I’m sure the Church is full of people who, thinking they are being devout and obedient, will follow Francis into the flames. What a tragedy.

    • RCA Victor,

      A “simplied form of the Gloria Patri “? How on EARTH could that short prayer be simplified? From “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost, Amen” to… what?

      Pity you can’t recall because that’s a corker. I’d love to know how that short and very simple prayer could be further “simplified”.

      As for your closing comment – sadly I think you are probably right. There are still sufficient gaggles of “useful idiots” who will follow Papa Francis right to the gates of Hell and think (wrongly) that they are pleasing God by their “obedience”. God help them at their judgment for not making sure that they really knew the Faith and could do their Confirmation duty by defending it when it is attacked – including by the upper hierarchy, and even a pope.

      • Editor,

        “A common version of the Liturgy of the Hours, as approved by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, uses a newer, different translation for the Latin:

        Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit: as it was in the beginning, is now, and will be for ever. Amen.”

        I think the version used by the Carmelites was even further revised and stranger, but I can’t find it.

        • RCA Victor,

          No, that’s OK – what was I thinking. We do, of course, pray “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit – as it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end, AMEN”.

          That’s what I’ve always known. What was I thinking! Who was it said: “Of all the things I’ve ever lost, I miss my mind the most”!

  7. For my part, I still use the old translation up to Vatican II Council: “…do not let us succumb to temptation…” / “…ne nous laissez pas succomber à la tentation…” which is close to “…ne nous laisse pas entrer en tentation…” (do not let us give in to temptation).

    • Lionel,

      I don’t know the source of those translations but, as the Fatima Center article points out, “Resonating through the corridors of time, from the first century until our own, are the words, “lead us not into temptation.” (ne nos inducas in tentationem — in the Latin Vulgate).

      I’m sticking with that!

      • Editor,
        God cannot “lead us into temptation”, on the other hand He can indeed “lead us into trial” (l’épreuve), do you not agree?
        The tempter is the devil, is he not?
        Happy Epiphany to you all!

        • Lionel,

          If you read the Fatima Centre article again, you will see that the author points out that Christians have always understood the meaning of “and lead us not into temptation”. Even as a child I (and my classmates) knew that God does not cause us to be tempted, but that the prayer is asking God to protect us from the devil. It’s been easily understood by generations of supposedly less well educated people down the centuries – do you really think anyone today believes that we are asking God not to tempt us?

          It is important to remember that one of the reasons for sticking to the original translation (which is not in doubt, according to the scholars/theologians) is because once the “let’s change this” mentality takes root, as we have seen since Vatican II, there’s no end to it.

          Even the Modernist Bishop Taylor (former Bishop of Galloway in Scotland, now retired) urged caution because if we change the Our Father, soon others will be seeking changes to other prayers.

          Do we really want to be debating changes in the Hail Mary, Hail Holy Queen and even the Creed itself?

  8. I’ve also noticed a tendency to ‘update’ the Hail Mary in some quarters as well. “Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with YOU. Blessed ARE YOU among women, and blessed is the fruit of YOUR womb Jesus, etc. They might be minor changes but they grate whenever I’ve heard them – and sadly, I’ve even heard them at Fatima. What’s wrong with ‘Thy’ and ‘art Thou’?
    The changing of the Lord’s Prayer will only serve to cause more division, as some will go along with it and others won’t.

    • WF,

      I hate that “you” as well in the Hail Mary – this idea that everything has to be changed to everyday parlance is irritating and insulting to our intelligence.

    • WF, when I was last in Lourdes (2011) I heard the exact same version of the Hail Mary during the Rosary procession. I spoke to the person involved about this and he apologized and said he would not use that form again.Hopefully……

    • That is one of those things that really get on my nerves. When someone replaces “Thou” with “You” they change the whole sound of the prayer, which was translated into late medieval English from Latin. It’s not just the second person pronouns that would have to be modernised, but the whole structure of the prayer is thrown off. Why not change “Hail” to “Hello”?
      Of course, in late medieval English, “Thou” was the familiar form while “You” was both the plural and the formal form, similar to how it works in modern French. Calling one’s own father “you” instead of “thou” would have sounded like you didn’t like him very much. So really, when people try to familiarise God and Our Lady by changing “Thou” to “You” they actually do the opposite.

      • Alex,

        Well, look at you! I’m going to call you The Professor from now on – you sure do know your stuff – or should I say, thou knowest thy stuff, perchance to dream… 😀

        Seriously, excellent and informative post. Thank you for educating us all – much appreciated.

  9. On a different but related issue, I have read that the Lutheran Church of Sweden has changed the words of their rite of baptism. Instead of saying ” I baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ” they have changed to “I baptise you in the name of God and the Holy Trinity.” This is in an attempt to de-genderise God. It will almost certainly render Swedish Lutheran baptism invalid and will probably be copied in other places.

    This is relevant to Catholics because Church has always recognised Lutheran baptism as valid, but this changes things. Converts from the Church of Sweden will surely have to be baptised and I would think that the baptism should be absolute rather than conditional. It’ll be interesting to see how the Church reacts to this.

    • Alex F

      The way Pope Francis, and Benedict XVI before him, is fawning over the Lutherans, it will be the Catholic baptismal form that will change in line with the Lutheran one. Don’t hold your breath waiting for Pope Francis to do anything about this, he wants to canonise Luther!

              • Margaret,

                No! You cannot be serious! You mean, there’s a man related to the Equalizer, who helps you breathe properly? WOW! The way science is progressing is just amazing, isn’t it? 😀

                • A nebulizer is a device that a person uses to breathe properly. One of my coworkers,
                  +Mary Ann (now deceased 4+ years 😢) used a nebulizer because she had stage 4 lung cancer. That woman never went to university, but she knew human nature like no else I know except possibly my late father Eugene.

                  She could take one look at you and say: “She’s a good person.” while she’d say about someone else: “Stay away from so-and-so. That person is trouble.”

                  She taught me a lot about human nature. I, being very naieve, always thought most people were good. God used her to open my eyes. Oh, how I miss her. 😢

                  • Margaret,

                    I’m teasing you – I do know what a nebulizer is, honest! I thought you understood my (strange) sense of humour, but obviously not, so for the record, you read it here first: I DO know that a nebulizer is not a male person but, as you define it, “a device that a person uses to breathe properly”.

                    Sorry for my silliness.

                    • You’re like my old boss N.

                      He’d say to me: “I need you to A, B and C, and I need it done in 2 hours.”

                      I’d say to him: “N., are you pulling my leg?”

                      He’d say: “Do I look like I’m kidding?”, cross his arms, give me a penetrating look, then say: “I’m serious.” Then he’d slowly give me a 😀, and I’d say: “N. !!!”

                      He was always kidding around so you didn’t know whether or not he was being serious.

                      He was a good boss, though.

            • Brilliant Editor, you should pitch that to the BBC.

              “The Nebuliser” – a new breed of TV thriller, blending detective work and medical drama. A cross between ‘Casualty’ and ‘The Bill’.

      • Athanasius,
        Depressing as it is, I fear you are right. Am I right in believing that the SSPX has an apostolate in Sweden? It’s something they’ll have to be aware of when receiving converts into the Church, but I’m sure they’ll have done their homework. They don’t need me to teach them how to suck eggs!

    • WOW!!! And this is coming from the sect founded by an ex-Augustinian monk who favored sola Scriptura and held to the literal sense of Scripture! How are they going to reconcile that with the Great Commission in Matthew 28, where Our Lord Himself gives the form of Baptism???

      Have mercy on us, O Lord, have mercy on us! Since we have no defense, we sinners offer this supplication to You, our Master: Have mercy on us!

      Troparion of General Intercession and Penitence, Tone 6

  10. In my novus ordo days, I remember being on holiday in Florida at the time of the new translation of the English missal.

    For mass, we went along to the Basilica of Mary, Queen of the Universe – which was actually built to cater for the large numbers of tourists in the area.

    In his sermon, the American priest was discussing the new translation and how it was OK to change it to make it more faithful to the original latin, even if it might be an adjustment for some people.

    But, as if to reassure us, he went on to say “But don’t worry, we could never change something like the “Our Father”. No-one would DARE touch that.

    At the time I believed him, but it seems no-one had bargained for Jorge Bergoglio!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: