ON THE PALMARIAN CHURCH July 20, 1989 Clément de Palmar was authentic, then blinded B = I must return briefly to Clemente de Palmar de Troya. He was authentic. He was a privileged soul. He prayed a lot at night; he got up on purpose and made many great sacrifices. This is worth blessings for the Church, even though he is no longer in the Good. Everything is taken into account. The sacrifices of all his priests are also taken into account. They did this with good intentions. Clement was then advised by some evil people, and magic was able to reach Palmar de Troya, as well as pride. Pride seized Clement. Pride seized Clement, and he is not truly Pope. He allowed himself to be deceived. It was other spirits who said that he should be Pope. It came from below. It was not God and the Holy Trinity, for he himself had spoken shortly before... I do not want to speak. He himself spoke so that everything would be put back in order, and he knew, even then, that he would not be Pope. He knew it, but he was blinded. As for the people who follow him, we cannot condemn them entirely. They think he is good and true. Ah, to whom will poor humanity soon run? They must not go to him. It is not right because he is not the true Pope. They can certainly pray. There is something else: Clement also severely condemned him. It is not in the spirit of the Most High to utter a curse. A priest must never say that, never in his life. Even if someone had sold his soul to the devil, a priest could not curse him. One must always help and lend a helping hand. But it was his hour, Clement's hour and the hour of darkness. Pray, pray that you do not fall into temptation! The Most High said that many false prophets would arise at the end of time. And it was harder for Clement than for others. We cannot condemn him. He will not be lost. But what he says and what he does is no longer in the truth. Many things are no longer in the truth...I don't want to say any more! Since he did so much good before falling into error, he will not be lost. The Most High has nevertheless inscribed them in the Book of Life.

DEMONS TRIED TO KILL ST. JOHN VIANNEY TO STOP HIM FROM SAVING SOULS “stupid” “did not even know Latin” B: It is true that they must reckon with this: the more someone sacrifices himself, the more we fight against him. That was the way it was for the priest Vianney. We started a fire in his room. But that is of no consequence, Those up there make me say (he points upward). In spite of everything, Those up there and the Great Lady will be victorious... and the priests who still practice the true priesthood will carry off an incomparable victory. That is why you priests must speak from the pulpit about the original sin, about pride. You should do your utmost to promote the virtue of humility. Speak about the Saints who have practiced this divine perfection to an eminent decree, for example, Catherine Emmerich; of thousands of other Saints, of Saint Theresa of the Child Jesus. Jean-Marie Vianney, for example, paid absolutely no attention to eating. That is why he used to receive graces for his sheep, because he used to fast rigorously and to pray. He scarcely noticed that his potatoes were bitter. He used to eat what he had; he did not even notice when he was hungry. Naturally, it would not be reasonable for a priest to stop eating altogether. It is absolutely necessary for him to eat, but he must not go from one extreme to the other, and get into slovenly ways through dissolute living and gluttony. Preach about Saint John Marie Vianney. He lived on potatoes for fifteen days, at a time he used to eat sour, moldy potatoes (he sighs). He did not even want to get into the bed that had been installed for him. He found that it was too comfortable for him. We do not have so much power over these people who have such a poor opinion of themselves that they don't even wish to sleep in a good bed; and who do not make this known to other people by saying such things as; “See, I am not using the good bed. I am good, I am using the uncomfortable bed.” They hide it from men. John Marie Vianney always kept it secret that he was not eating normally. He had true humility. Ah! How we hated this priest of Ars! We were in a terrible rage against him! He was so stupid, he did not even know Latin properly. How was he able to snatch such a great crowd of people away from us - people who, without him, would have come to Hell? Ah! She makes me say: “If only there were more priests like this Curé (parish priest) Vianney!” It is not money, nor possessions, nor intelligence that count. What does count, is what the priests do, what the state of their soul is, and the way in which they carry out the Will of God. That is what counts, even if they should be the least among men in the eyes of the world, and seem to be of no consequence and to occupy only the lowliest of positions. Those priests are much greater in the eyes of Those up there (he points upwards)... than he who wears a bishop's miter, or a cardinal's hat, or anything else you like! Ah! How we have been forced to say that! We have already had to say previously, in connection with celibacy, how Heaven must be earned through sacrifices and self-denials, and that it can be earned. Heaven cannot be earned through automobiles, television, creature comforts, dissoluteness and high living. It requires self-denial, fasting, the cross, the imitation of Christ... We do not want to speak any more! How we have been forced to say those things!

ON THE PALMARIAN CHURCH July 20, 1989 Clément de Palmar was authentic, then blinded B = I must return briefly to Clemente de Palmar de Troya. He was authentic. He was a privileged soul. He prayed a lot at night; he got up on purpose and made many great sacrifices. This is worth blessings for the Church, even though he is no longer in the Good. Everything is taken into account. The sacrifices of all his priests are also taken into account. They did this with good intentions. Clement was then advised by some evil people, and magic was able to reach Palmar de Troya, as well as pride. Pride seized Clement. Pride seized Clement, and he is not truly Pope. He allowed himself to be deceived. It was other spirits who said that he should be Pope. It came from below. It was not God and the Holy Trinity, for he himself had spoken shortly before... I do not want to speak. He himself spoke so that everything would be put back in order, and he knew, even then, that he would not be Pope. He knew it, but he was blinded. As for the people who follow him, we cannot condemn them entirely. They think he is good and true. Ah, to whom will poor humanity soon run? They must not go to him. It is not right because he is not the true Pope. They can certainly pray. There is something else: Clement also severely condemned him. It is not in the spirit of the Most High to utter a curse. A priest must never say that, never in his life. Even if someone had sold his soul to the devil, a priest could not curse him. One must always help and lend a helping hand. But it was his hour, Clement's hour and the hour of darkness. Pray, pray that you do not fall into temptation! The Most High said that many false prophets would arise at the end of time. And it was harder for Clement than for others. We cannot condemn him. He will not be lost. But what he says and what he does is no longer in the truth. Many things are no longer in the truth...I don't want to say any more! Since he did so much good before falling into error, he will not be lost. The Most High has nevertheless inscribed them in the Book of Life.

It's so sad to witness lost souls calling upon the name of Mary and not Jesus.

SAY WHAT??? THE PALMARIAN POPE HAS APPROVED VERY BOOK THAT DESTROYS THE PALMARIAN CHURCH No way. palmarianchurch.org/wp-conte…

SHOULD PRIESTS GIVE COMMUNION IN THE HAND? April 25, 1977 Exorcist: Should the priests give Communion in the hand when the people ask for it? Beelzebub: In no circumstances!Absolutely not! Do you believe that the priest is the puppet of his people? He has the right of command! Broadly speaking, we have to add this: if the priests were to give Communion in the mouth, as Those up there wish (he points upward), they would probably meet with opposition at the beginning, because we (demons) put oil on the fire, but in the long run, they would have many more faithful in their churches than in the ones where Communion is given differently, where there is this lukewarmness. E: And if I, as a priest, am going to help a colleague who gives Communion in the hand, what should I do? B: Then you should... E: In the name..., tell the truth and nothing but the truth! B: Then you should say to the priest whom you are going to help: “Father, I believe that Communion in the mouth is the correct thing. In no way can I take the responsibility of giving Communion in the hand. I hope you will accept this.” For you it is a fundamental obligation to give Communion in the mouth, because you know that there are many more blessings and much more respect. There are people everywhere who are going to make things difficult for you. The opposite effect also happens. But, essentially, they will raise their hats to you. Here is the way it is with such people: even if sometimes they contradict and vex you, in their heart of hearts, they say to themselves: “Perhaps he is right after all; he still knows what should be done and goes his way through all obstacles; he acts according to his conviction; his way of doing things is probably the correct one.” Those up there (he points upward) are of the opinion that he who is still able to, someway or another, must, for the love of Heaven, give Communion in the mouth, for it is a sin when one knows yet does not do it. “Happy those who believe without having seen.” Then there would be no more horrible profanation of the Sacrament as there is now. #TLM

COMMUNION IN THE HAND IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH E: In the name...! What is the story about Communion in the hand in the earliest times of the Church? B: Christ - we saw this ourselves at the time - when He broke the Bread, did not give It into the hands of the Apostles. We do not wish to speak any more! Not any more! We do not like saying that! But we particularly do not like saying it at this time! At the time when Christ said: “This is My Body”, at the Last Supper, He put the bread directly into the mouths of the Apostles.[87] There is no question about the Precious Blood; they drank It, and did not have It in their hands first. The Apostles who were present at the Last Supper never acted otherwise; they gave Holy Communion in the mouth ... Christ did not wish that later It would be received in the hand ... if later, they did receive It in the hand, it was because they had a wrong understanding of things... Christ never wished it. He Himself gave It into the mouth; and even the Blessed Virgin never received this Sacrament any other way, and always kneeling, bowing very deeply... Ah! We do not like saying this! We were full of fury against Her (he points upward) whenever She received Communion. She saw and, in a mystical way, experienced everything that happened at the Last Supper. She nearly always knew everything. She was destined to guide the Church. The Apostles were also destined for this, but She had in a very large measure, to work with them. We have had to say this before: She was on her knees day and night, praying for the Apostles, so that everything would go well in Christ's Church. The Apostles, who were at the Last Supper, never gave Communion any way but into the mouth. If that happened differently later on, it was not the fault of the Apostles. No more did Jesus and His Mother have any part in it. They (he points upward) neither planned for nor wished for that. It was absolutely not their intention. E: Who did want to introduce Communion in the hand? B: You must not ask that question! E: In the name of the Father...! B: It is we who schemed and plotted for that. We said to ourselves: If we can manage to introduce Communion in the hand among the early Christians, then later on they will be able to say: “There was Communion in the hand previously at the time of the first Christians.” And so it was that this Council, these men of today, would be able to say: “The first Christians communicated in the hand, therefore there is nothing wrong in it. They were the first Christians, It was the time of the life of Christ, they were near Christ. Therefore, it absolutely cannot be sinful.” True, they did not know that this was not wanted by God. At that very moment, even then, we said to ourselves that if we could make that happen, the result would be a certain lukewarmness. However, Communion in the mouth was brought back. Certain saintly souls and very great Doctors of the Church saw clearly where this was leading, and that it would be better and that there would be much more respect if He up there (he points upward) were received in the mouth... if they could not simply take Him into their hands, into their filthy hands ... with nails too long or varnished, or uncared-for hands. We cannot even say it all. There are often people who have not washed their hands all day, when they go somewhere... I do not want to say that! ... It is a frightful irreverence.

END COMMUNION IN THE HAND THERE IS ONLY SACRILEGE DEMONS CANT EVEN BRING THEMSELVES TO SAY IT E: Who did want to introduce Communion in the hand? B: You must not ask that question! E: In the name of the Father...! B: It is we who schemed and plotted for that. We said to ourselves that if we could make that happen, the result would be a certain lukewarmness… Communion in the mouth was brought back. It would be better and that there would be much more respect if He up there (he points upward) were received in the mouth... if they could not simply take Him into their hands, into their filthy hands ... with nails too long or varnished, or uncared-for hands. We cannot even say it all. There are often people who have not washed their hands all day, when they go somewhere... I do not want to say that! ... It is a frightful irreverence.