A corporal work of mercy.

A corporal work of mercy.
Click on photo for this corporal work of mercy!

Sunday 7 October 2018

Marc Cardinal Ouellet Writes Open Letter of Threat and Intimidation to Archbishop Viganò

Image result for cardinal ouelletMarc Cardinal Ouellet has issued a response to the most recent letter by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò calling on Ouellet to tell what he knows about McCarrick. What spin. What abuse, what open threats.

Typical of the Bergoglian Peronist regime.

I can imagine the next response from Viganò will be ground-breaking and provide even more evidence of the corruption of these prelates. He did not come into this, unarmed.


“Dear Brother Carlo Maria Viganò,

In your last message to the media, in which you denounce Pope Francis and the Roman Curia, you urge me to tell the truth about facts that you interpret as an endemic corruption that has invaded the hierarchy of the Church to its highest level. With due pontifical permission, (We can see that this is a set-up and a professionally drafted response. Bergoglio is not smart enough himself to provide the right spin, you can bet that this has been written by Greg Burke, Spadaro, Rosica and others. Ouellet is playing fast and loose,) I offer here my personal testimony, as prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, on the events concerning the Archbishop Emeritus of Washington Theodore McCarrick and his alleged links with Pope Francis, which are the object of your vehement public denunciation as well as of your demand that the Holy Father resign. I write this testimony of mine on the basis of my personal contacts and the documents in the archives of the above mentioned Congregation, which are currently the object of a study to shed light on this sad case.

Allow me to tell you first of all, in all sincerity, by virtue of the good relationship of collaboration that existed between us when you were nuncio to Washington, that your current position seems to me incomprehensible and extremely reprehensible, not only because of the confusion that it sows among the people of God, but because your public accusations seriously damage the reputation of the Successors of the Apostles. I remember a time when I enjoyed your esteem and confidence, but I observe that I have lost in your eyes the dignity you placed in me, for the mere fact of having remained faithful to the directions of the Holy Father in the service that he entrusted to me in the Church. (How far will Ouelette go in being "faithful" to the Pope? We already know. He will endorse heresy as he did in his vocal support of Amoris Laetitia.) Is not communion with the Successor of Peter the expression of our obedience to Christ who chose him and supports him with His grace? (This should be considered a threat, he is accusing Viganò of fomenting schism and is a shot across the bow at the same time as welcoming real excommunicated schismatic, bishops of the Communist Church in China.) My interpretation of Amoris Laetitia, which you complain about, is inscribed in this fidelity to the living tradition, of which Francis has given us an example with the recent modification of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the question of the death penalty. (A complete heresy to equate capital punishment with an intrinsic evil. Ouelette, right here, endorses Bergoglio's latest heresy.)

Let's get to the facts. You say you informed Pope Francis on 23 June 2013 about the McCarrick case in the audience he granted to you, as well as to many other pontifical representatives he then met for the first time on that day. I imagine the enormous amount of verbal and written information he had to gather on that occasion about many people and situations. I strongly doubt that McCarrick interested him to the extent that you believe, since he was an archbishop emeritus of 82 years and seven years without a post. (Why should it matter how old McCarrick was or is or that he was no longer the Ordinary? Were the "rumours" true or were they now? Why was there no investigation? Why no public denouncement? Does Bergoglio not care about perverted clerics and homosexual predators in the priesthood? Does he not care about the hundreds of thousands of suffering victims?) In addition, the written instructions prepared for you by the Congregation for Bishops at the beginning of your service in 2011 did not say anything about McCarrick, except what I told you about his situation as an emeritus bishop who had to obey certain conditions and restrictions because of rumours about his behaviour in the past. (Then why did Ouellete as Prefect not demand further action? Shame on Marc, an embarrassment to Canada.)

Since June 30, 2010, when I became prefect of this Congregation, I have never taken the McCarrick case to an audience with Pope Benedict XVI or Pope Francis, (Then that is a convictioin of Ouellet as a failure and someone willing to cover up the perverts. He has disgraced himself with this sentence.) except in the last few days, after his fall from the College of Cardinals. The former cardinal, who retired in May 2006, was strongly urged not to travel, nor to appear in public, in order not to provoke further rumours about him. (But Ouellet failed to investigate the rumours.) It is false to present the measures taken against him as "sanctions" decreed by Pope Benedict XVI and annulled by Pope Francis. After reviewing the archives, I note that there are no documents in this regard signed by either Pope, (Where are they then, were they destroyed as part of the whole cover-up?) nor a note of an audience of my predecessor, Cardinal Giovanni-Battista Re, which would have given a mandate to the archbishop emeritus McCarrick to live a private life of silence, with the rigor of canonical penalties. The reason for this is that, unlike today, there was not enough evidence of his alleged guilt at the time. (This is a lie, payouts were made by two dioceses, if there was no guilt why were there payouts?) Hence the position of the Congregation inspired by prudence and the letters of my predecessor and mine reiterated, through the Apostolic Nuncio Pietro Sambi and then also through you, the exhortation to live a discreet life of prayer and penance for his own good and for that of the Church. His case would have been the subject of new disciplinary measures if the nunciature in Washington, or any other source, had provided us with recent and decisive information about his behaviour. I hope, like so many others, that out of respect for the victims and the need for justice, the investigation underway in the United States and the Roman Curia will finally give us a critical, overall view of the procedures and circumstances of this painful case, so that such events do not recur in the future. (Ouellet is simply lying, the so-called rumours were reported as early as 2001 by Father Boniface Perry. John Paul II was Pope and Oulette was in Quebec. The perversion of McCarrick and his crimes were not properly investigated, they were covered up.)

How can it be that this man of the Church, whose inconsistency is known today, has been promoted on several occasions, to the point of holding the highest positions of Archbishop of Washington and Cardinal? I myself am very surprised by this and recognize the shortcomings in the selection process that has been carried out in his case. But without going into detail here, it must be understood that the decisions taken by the Supreme Pontiff are based on the information available at that precise moment and that they constitute the object of a prudential judgment that is not infallible. (The information was known, at least rumours, they were not investigated, or they were and covered up. It is disingenuous to deflect fault elsewhere. The dicastery for Bishops was responsible and they put the recommendation forward to a sick and suffering Pope.) It seems unfair to me to conclude that the persons in charge of prior discernment are corrupt even though, in the concrete case, some clues provided by the testimonies should have been further examined. The prelate in question knew how to defend himself with great skill from the doubts raised in his regard. (It seems unfair to Catholics that prelates such as Ouellet continue to deflect, obfuscate and manipulate.) On the other hand, the fact that there may be people in the Vatican who practice and support behaviour contrary to the values of the Gospel in matters of sexuality does not authorize us to generalize and to declare this or that, and even the Holy Father himself, unworthy and complicit. (And what, pray tell, are you doing about it Marc, and where is that dossier?) Should the ministers of truth not, first of all, guard themselves against slander and defamation? ((The Truth shall set you free," DNJC, and "It is better for scandal to rise than truth to be suppressed," St. Gregory the Great, Pope.)

Dear pontifical representative emeritus, I tell you frankly that to accuse Pope Francis of having covered up with full knowledge of the facts this alleged sexual predator and therefore of being an accomplice of the corruption that is spreading in the Church, to the point of considering him unworthy of continuing his reform as the first pastor of the Church, is incredible and unlikely from all points of view. (What about the coverup in Argentina? Shall we talk about his appointment of Barros in spite of the evidence? How about Don "Mercedes" Inzoli, come on Marc, the facts do not support this statement.) I can't understand how you could let yourself be convinced this monstrous accusation could stand. Francis had nothing to do with McCarrick's promotions in New York, Metuchen, Newark and Washington. (True, but in the matter of releasing him from the "sanctions" you do not know the private conversation between Bergoglio and Viganò and Bergoglio has lost all credibility based upon his past behaviour.) He removed him from his dignity as a Cardinal when a credible accusation of child abuse became apparent. I have never heard Pope Francis allude to this self-styled great adviser of his pontificate in relation to [episcopal] nominations in America, even though he does not hide the trust he gives some prelates. I sense these are not your preferences, nor those of your friends who support your interpretation of the facts. However, I find it aberrant that you take advantage of the sensational scandal of sexual abuse in the United States to inflict on the moral authority of your Superior, the Supreme Pontiff, an unprecedented and undeserved blow.
I have the privilege of meeting Pope Francis for a long time each week, to discuss the appointments of bishops and the problems that affect their government. I know very well how he treats people and problems: with much charity, mercy, attention and seriousness, as you yourself have experienced. Reading how you end your last, seemingly very spiritual message, making light of yourself and casting doubt on his faith, seemed to me really too sarcastic, even blasphemous! (One can only blaspheme God, is Marc equating Bergoglio with God? Has the disease of Rosica, that we know longer need scripture or tradition because we have Francis spread to Ouelett?) This cannot come from the Spirit of God. (Truth comes from God, Ouellet is calling Viganò a liar.)

Dear Brother, I would really like to help you rediscover communion with him who is the visible guarantor of the communion of the Catholic Church; (He insinuates that criticism of a Pope and calling out error is schism. This is abuse, this is a threat, and it is wrong.) I understand how bitterness and disappointment have marked your path in service to the Holy See, (A disgraceful attack on the motives of Viganò and another attempt to discredit him.) but you cannot end your priestly life in this way, in an open and scandalous rebellion, which inflicts a very painful wound on the Bride of Christ, whom you claim to serve better, worsening division and bewilderment in the people of God! What can I answer your question if I don't tell you: come out of your hiding place,  (So we can arrest you or even have you murdered.) repent of your revolt (I guess Jesus making a whip of cords and beating the prelates of his day out of the temple was a sin too?) and return to better feelings towards the Holy Father, instead of exacerbating hostility against him. How can you celebrate the Holy Eucharist and pronounce his name in the canon of Mass? How can you pray the Holy Rosary, Saint Michael the Archangel and the Mother of God, condemning the one she protects and accompanies every day in his weighty and courageous ministry? (How can Marc do the same on a daily basis with a pontiff who promotes heresy?)

If the Pope were not a man of prayer, if he were attached to money, if he favored the rich to the detriment of the poor, if he did not show an untiring energy to welcome all the poor and give them the generous comfort of his word and his gestures, if he did not multiply all the possible means to proclaim and communicate the joy of the Gospel to everyone and to all in the Church and beyond her visible borders, if he did not reach out to families, to abandoned old people, to the sick in soul and body and especially to the young people in search of happiness, perhaps someone else could be preferred, according to you, with different diplomatic or political attitudes. But I, who have known him well, I cannot question his personal integrity, his consecration to the mission and especially the charism and peace that dwell in him by the grace of God and the power of the Risen One.

In response to your unjust and unjustified attack, dear Viganò, I conclude therefore that the accusation is a political set-up without a real foundation that can incriminate the Pope, and I reiterate that it deeply hurts the communion of the Church. (Sorry Marc, heresy is worse than schism, you are both the real heretics and the real schismatics. This "political set-up" comment is defamation and deflection, it is you and your Peronist Pope who have created the problem.) May it please God that this injustice is quickly remedied and that Pope Francis continue to be recognized for what he is: an outstanding pastor, a compassionate and firm father, a prophetic charism for the Church and for the world. May he continue with joy and full confidence his missionary reform, comforted by the prayer of God's people and by the renewed solidarity of the whole Church with Mary, Queen of the Holy Rosary.

Marc Cardinal Ouellet, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops,

Feast of Our Lady of the Holy Rosary, October 7, 2018.”


Veri Catholici said...

Excellent and illuminating commentary.

John the Mad said...

The sound one hears is the hissing of Cardinal Ouellet's credibility deflating from his reputation. At least we know where he stands.

Kathleen1031 said...

I hope Abp. Vigano has an ace. If he does, I hope he throws it down on the table.

Thank you for the commentary, we agree with all of it.
Is it not stunning to watch two realms of the world, the sacred and the secular, deteriorate at the same moment in time, and are now culminating in a bizarre "go for broke" battle? In the US, we see an increasingly wide divide between Americans over politics, and a Democrat party which has adopted the most egregiously rabid Leftist ideology possible, and we are at the brink of breakdown and anarchy if the Democrats win elections in November. Truly, these people are mad with their lust for power.
In the church, we see the same phenomenon! The same realities, but in different realms. The church is at the same point, with the same two camps. It is a raging battle, and must be raging in the spiritual realm as well.
Who will be victorious. We know in the end that God is. But that doesn't mean it won't get especially hairy between now and then. The Democrats have expressed they are not going to accept Brett Kavanaugh, and are going to continue their divisive and destructive campaign against a man falsely accused but vindicated. Truth, does not matter to evil men. The same is true in the church. They have circled the wagons, they will cover for each other, everything else be damned. If these men remain victorious, the church is gone, there is no point hanging on to a memory. Please God, come to our aid soon.

Fr. G said...

Should we expect anything else? Ouellet is just another Bergoglio sycophant....pathetic.

Brian said...

Ouellet, an outstanding graduate of the Modernist Canadian church, is another boot licking sycophant for Bergoglio. C'mon Vigano now it is really time to roll up your sleeves.

Anonymous said...

I can't believe you're overlooking the fact that Ouellet has confused the meeting of Vigano and other nuncios with Francis on June 21st with Vigano's one-on-one meeting with Francis on June 23rd. Ouellet gives the latter date to the former meeting, and so overlooks or suppresses the much more important meeting, the latter, at which Vigano told Francis that McCarrick has corrupted generations of seminarians and priests and there's a dossier about him this thick in the Congregation for Bishops. Astounding arrogance and folly of Ouellet and his staff.

Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas said...

Thank You, Vox.

I believe Archbishop Vigano.

There should not be unity between good and evil. Contrary to Bergoglio's repulsive designs, there should never be unity between Christ followers and Christ deniers, between the City of God and Sodom.

Truth and lies do not attract each other. Therefore, every single one of Bergoglian anti-Christs finds Archbishop Vigano appalling. He is like a flash light pointed at their gutter.

But even without the flash light, the repugnant odor we can smell, gives them all away.

William Callaghan said...

Very disappointed with Cardinal Ouellet, I thought he was better than this. I will pray for him and, along with Archbishop Vigano, for the Church.

Anonymous said...

Mario Derksen anticipated this scenario playing out back on September 3. He also dug up this article from way back in 2013 placing Abp. Vigano among nine prelates and a young publicist linked to Opus Dei in Jorge’s intimate circle: http://www.perfil.com/noticias/internacional/Francisco-formo-un--circulo-magico-que-lo-asesora-en-temas-clave-20131103-0024.phtml
To summarize his article, he wondered if Jorge could effectively prove these claims false and set himself up as the sympathetic victim of evil rad trads. I think the article is worth a read: https://novusordowatch.org/2018/09/word-of-warning-vigano-testimony-drama/
And if you are already aware that you can’t fire the Pope for being incompetent and corrupt then I’d suggest skipping down about 16 paragraphs.

Justina said...

OK, so the Bergoglians have had time to regroup, confer, and come up with their talking points. Since it will evidently be impossible for them to maintain the fiction of Pope Francis' innocence,they are going with the "he's only human" defense. After all, he couldn't be expected to act on what he didn't know--right?

The question then becomes, was his ignorance invincible or not? If he didn't know (which remains an awfully big "if"), did he have any right not to know? We're back to Tobin saying he heard about McCarrick years ago, but did nothing because he didn't find the allegations credible. Not good enough! Investigate, don't presume.

What Cardinal Ouellet leaves out of his juvenile and cringeworthy fan mail to Pope Francis (inadvertently addressed to Archbishop Vigano) is the pattern of obstruction of justice which Bergoglio has characteristically displayed wherever sexual abuse is concerned. If Cardinal Ouellet considers Jorge Bergoglio a good spiritual father to --say--Grassi's victims, then there is simply nothing left to be said. In that case, Amoris hasn't just permitted Holy Communion for the divorced and invalidly remarried; it has abolished the distinction between good and evil themselves.

Dan said...

The liars call themselves "Ministers of Truth" in "Brave New Church."

Irenaeus said...

No coincidence this came out on October 7th, the feast of our Lady of Lepanto. Our Lady is cleaning house, like she used to do when she was on Earth.

What a disgrace, the Archbishop of the prima see of Canada is.

jim norwood said...

Glad to see Marc Cardinal Ouellet finally getting around to outing miscreants like Vigano (sarc). Maybe he will now clean up his own backyard, you know, all those loud and proud sodomite priests. Or how about Rosica who isnt fit to lick Viganos boots.

Anonymous said...

I would be absolutely astounded if this was written voluntarily by Ouellet, not FOR him to sign by the Bergoglio propogandists (with the proverbial gun at his head). The language wreaks of Bergoglio-speak, from the absurd not-so-subtle claims to his pseudo-divinity, to its incomprehensible and smarmy incongruity.

It really does seem the Bergoglio camp is becoming increasingly desperate. They are certainly now facing attacks on many sides (including from former liberal "allies" such as Der Speigel, among others).

What this situation now needs is for Vigano to pull out some correspondence signed by Ouellet which clearly contradicts what he has (allegedly) just written. May Our Blessed Mother, the Glory of Lepanto, (whose patience Bergoglio must be sorely testing by impudently suggesting she is on his side!) deliver such a blessing. After all, didn't Simeon prophesy that her immaculate heart would be pierced by a sword so that the secrets of many would be revealed?

O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee. especially at this critical time for your glorious Son's holy Church.


Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas said...

I pose a question:
Was Bergoglio's refusal to answer to the first letter by Archbishop Vigano (his slimy "I won't say a word") a delay tactic until the "youth synod", a synod to affirm the... unique gifts of sodomy to the Church, which now has the authority of official teaching, and is conducted without transparency by sodomy practitioners and/or endorsers, constructs claims of sexual abuse by homosexuals into backwardness and homophobia?

If so, they are almost there. Soon Bergoglio will cry crocodile tears, apologize and kiss the feet of sodomites, and roll in dust in reparation for millenia of persecution and exclusion. And... all the yoooooofs and young at heart will have a party on the beach. Half-naked circus performers and exotic actors will be present. Bridges will be built everywhere. James Martin and Krzysztof Charamsa will probably get married right then and there.

C. LaSalle said...

I no more believe Ouellette than I do PF. They both have too much to lose to be honest and transparent.

What a Church we have created by ignoring all of Our Lady's warnings over the many years! I continue to pray for us all.

Anonymous said...

Awesome commentary Vox, I can not believe that omelette has tried to turn this into a B-tch fight. Jorge's low life pretend men will do and say anything to protect Jorge. We are not stupid, McCarrick is just the tip of the iceberg, what about the rest of the homosexuals that Jorge not only covered up for, but elevated them to the highest positions. This is not going to go away, we are praying for Arch Vigino, the only one that is taking on the smoke of Satan inside the Church. St Michael protect and defend Arch Vigino against these wicked liars!

Tom A. said...

Neither of which are in the Church that Christ established. Both Vigano and Ouellet being modernist heretics cannot by reason and logic be Catholic. Pray for their conversion to the true Faith as handed down from the Apostles. Do not pray for the conciliar false church.

Anonymous said...

You blew it Vox on at least 2 occasions (and I don't have time to read this whole thing seeing as how I have to work tomorrow):

"My interpretation of Amoris Laetitia, which you complain about, is INSCRIBED IN this FIDELITY to the LIVING TRADITION, of which Francis has given us an example with the recent modification of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on the question of the death penalty. (A complete heresy to equate capital punishment with an intrinsic evil. Ouelette, right here, endorses Bergoglio's latest heresy.)"

Here MO is equating 2 heresies those in Amoris Laetitia w/that of the death penalty where Bergoglio changed the catechism (he has done the same w/AL) but the part you blew over is "fidelity to the living tradition" (go back and read Pascendi) to find out what MO is telling you (he is declaring faithfulness to modernism/VC2). It's the same as the living U.S. constitution--where they find rights to abortion and sodomite marriage. Living tradition means a tradition they can change whenever they please--like they already did on the mass. Vigano goes along w/the changes he likes (like maybe to capital punishment) but goes all traddie when they change something like sodomy.


The other thing you blew over is that McCarrick was removed from ministry for PEDOPHILIA. Church Militant, LifeSite News and a host of other Opus Dei groups are making a concerted effort to make it about sexually harassing seminarians, but McCarrick's removal was for PEDOPHILIA. Both Vigano's statements and MO's statements re: the sanctions against McCarrick are probably true. They both work/ed at the Vatican so like all lawyers they know how to lie (give false impressions) while (technically) telling the truth. You could be sinning w/false accusations.

BillyHW said...

Check this out Vox:


Anonymous said...

@ Paul Morphy

How is Cardinal Ouellet being pressurised? Why is Ouellet sayin what he is saying here?

Archbishop Vigano is giving Ouellet the opportunity to come clean. Before issuing his letter presumably Vigano is confident that he has the proof that
Ouellet knows, to borrow that awful phrase, the bodies are buried.

So why is Ouellet trying to continue to hold out? Is he compromised too?

These forces - they are demonic and diabolical - are very very strong. Too strong in fact.
Father Malachi Martin alluded to the strength of these forces when he spoke about them to Art Bell on his radio show. Father Martin testified then to how senior members of the Catholic hierarchy in Rome were captured and trapped and in thrall to these diabolical and demonic forces.

We are in the maelstrom.

Lynda said...

Bergoglio becoming more bold with his satanic symbols, holding a satanic staff, known as a "stang", given him by a woman wearing the wiccan knotted red thread bracelet, at the opening of the wicked Synod of Sodomy:
(At barnhardt.biz) "It is a MORAL CERTAINTY that the stick that Antipope Bergoglio tried to pass off as a ferula yesterday in the Mass opening the Sin-nod on Sodomy is a “STANG”. Antipope Bergoglio said is was a “gift” from “young people” who SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED that he use it in the opening Mass of the Sodo-synod. That story right there by itself is DAMN PECULIAR.

A Stang is a witch/warlock’s ceremonial staff. It is always forked, and always has an iron nail driven through it. Ideally it has a human form carved or integrated into it somehow. The Stang signifies several things, the first being a satan himself. Read the quote below from a witchcraft blog: . . . "

geneticallycatholic said...

Please pray for this young priest. He is a true shepherd, but he may now have a target on his back.


He is Canadian, by the way, and does not want to see Catholics walk away from the Church as they did in Quebec.

Peter Lamb said...

Dear Lynda, Thanks for pointing the stang out. The conciliar false popes have been wearing the satanic pallium for years!

Anonymous said...

I don't believe that the presentation of the staff is an innocent gesture (who has one just laying around?)- it is definitely a satanic/witches stang and its use in the youth synod "mass" was meant to make a statement to those who understand these type of symbols. Apparently that's not the only item in the papal wardrobe that received a satanic makeover...please check out this for an eye opening education (remember that symbols are important to them):


The entire website is full of vital information:


Johnno said...

In other news...

Looks like Coco-puffs has some explaining to do... as does the boss of these cereal rapists.


Lynda said...

May God have mercy on us in this great apostasy. God bless and protect you, dear Dr Lamb, brother in Christ, Our Saviour.

Lynda said...

There is not a shred of Catholicism, Christianity, Faith or just plain moral truth in this clever, wicked, prideful response from Vardinal Ouellet. Shockingly hideous, perverse, demonic.

Anonymous said...

@ Paul Morphy

Ouellet is compromised in some way. This is why he's batting for this papacy.

Malachi Martin told the world on the Art Bell interviews during 1990's that senior prelates were diabolical/demonic influence. One effect of this influence leads to torpor and sloth. So, as Martin said, even though these prelates know and recognise their situation, they cannot summon up even the will to try to release themselves. That is how malevolent this diabolical force is, and only exorcism can release a person captive.

Ouellet is compromised, I believe. The forces ranged against the church have Ouellet and other prelates captive.

Let us be crystal here. Satan is throwing the kitchen sink here. He feels emboldened - even though in his very soul he knows that the war is lost. He knows full well and can remember clearly his expulsion from Heaven. So he knows the score. Of course he won't tell his adherents the score because even he knows that many would be repelled. So he has to have literally an ace to play. That ace can be bribery, blackmail, shame. So he has tabs on many fallen prelates - and he plays those tabs to keep them in a state of torpor and spiritual and physical sloth where they believe their possession cannot be broken.

But God is far far greater in power and domain. Who created the Universe and everything in it? Not Satan. Who maintains the Universe in it's splendour and fine tuning? No Satan.

Satan has no power except through human agency.

It is time to turn to God. It is time for these prelates to turn to God. God forgives the sinner penitent.

We are in very very interesting times folks. Satan feels emboldened right now. He likes to think he's winning! Defy him, defy his works, defy his tricks, defy his duplicity. Fight the good fight. Ask God for His help, and He will come to your aid.

God be with each one of you.