Tom Horn: Petrus Romanus will soon replace Pope Francis

In the 6-minute video shown below, author Tom Horn explains why Pope Francis might not be the one who fulfills St. Malachy’s 878-year-old prophecy, which foretold specific details of each of the final 112 Popes, concluding with Petrus Romanus, which means Peter the Roman, who will be serving as Pope when Rome is destroyed and God judges His people.

Malachy wrote the following prophecy about the 112th Pope.

“In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit Peter the Roman, who will pasture his sheep in many tribulations, and when these things are finished, the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the dreadful judge will judge his people. The End.” (see the complete post)

In 2011, Tom Horn accurately predicted the 2012 resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, the 265th Pope. Pope Francis replaced him, taking office on March 13, 2013. Everyone agrees Pope Benedict XVI was the 111th Pope since Malachy’s prophecy. So, Pope Francis appears to be the 112th, the one who must fulfill the prophecy. However, Tom Horn believes Pope Francis is not the one.

“I believe Pope Francis was not canonically elected. I believe some hanky-panky went on in the conclave. In fact, I think that has something to do with why he picked St. Francis of Assisi as his namesake. His real name is Bergoglio, as you know, because Francis of Assisi prophesied about the final Pope and he said he will not be canonically elected. Now that means that he’s a placeholder for reasons that we can’t quite figure out, but I believe he’s either going to be removed from office or he’s going to step down like Benedict did, soon. And the guy that comes up to take his place is actually going to be the real Pope 112 by election, Petrus Romanus.

The people that actually… some of the Cardinals that voted for Pope Francis now want him to step down. They’ve published this. It’s in the news. They want him to step down and they want him to be replaced by the Secretary of State at the Vatican whose name literally means Petrus Romanus, Peter the Roman.”

The Vatican’s current Secretary of State, commonly known as the Cardinal Secretary of State, is Pietro Parolin, shown in the photo above with President Obama. Parolin seems to be a better fit for the title of Peter the Roman than Pope Francis for several reasons.

  • First, his real name is Pietro, which is Italian for Petrus (Latin) or Peter (English). I was unable to find the definition of Parolin.
  • Second, unlike Pope Francis, who is a native of Argentina, Parolin is a native of Italy, which makes him a better fit to be called Peter the Roman.
  • Third, Parolin is currently 62 years old, 18 years younger than Pope Francis which makes him more likely to live long enough to fulfill St. Malachy’s prophecy of being in office during the destruction of Rome. At age 80, it seems like a stretch for Pope Francis to live long enough to fulfill the prophecies.

If Tom Horn is correct about Pope Francis being replaced by Pietro Parolin, and if the final Pope is the second beast identified in Revelation 13, also known as the False Prophet, then it would appear Pope Francis has only been preparing the way for the one who comes after him, which fits two prophecies I posted two years ago. The first one is from Brian Carn:

“Pope Francis will have a health scare, but he will be fine. Pope Francis is being maligned, but he is not the one to worry about…it’s the next Pope that comes into office who will do very dark things. Be very prayerful about this.” (see the complete post)

The second one is from Pastor Benjamin Faircloth of Ignited Church in Lavonia, GA:

“Pope Francis will die and his successor will make way for the rising and appearance of the antichrist and his unholy spirit that shall increase and manifest throughout the earth. I do not know if this is a literal death or him resigning as Pope. I do know out of his own mouth he said he had 2-3 years left before he goes to the Father’s house.” (see the complete post)

James Bailey

Author: James Bailey

James Bailey is an author, business owner, husband and father of two children. His vision is to broadcast the good news of Jesus Christ through blog sites and other media outlets.

© 2017, Z3 News. Full text of Z3 News articles may be shared online in exchange for a clickable link to our site. Please include the author name and do not make any changes to text or titles. No image files from our site may be shared because we don’t own them. For permission to use our content in other formats, please contact us.

Donate to Z3 News. All major payment methods accepted.

Leave a Reply

Notify me of
avatar

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
John S
Member
October 4, 2017 2:04 PM

We can’t completely take into account Bro. Brian Carn’s prophecy because earlier he said a Woman will become the US President after Obama. So he may be wrong or got it wrong again. I dont know exactly but we have to pray a lot for the right discernment. Bro. Sadhu has a very strong prayer life and he prays like 6 – 8 hours daily and he has so many visitations and encounters unlike other prophets who dont even spend one hour in personal prayers. So we need to be very cautious and vigilant. Praying to our Lord for my own discernment daily.

RON
Member
October 12, 2017 11:05 AM

Mr. Horn,When are you people going to understand that Pope Francis is not named after St. Francis.Pope. Pope Francis is named after Sir Francis Bacon.
Look at what Pope Francis says and does and you will see he is saying and doing the same thing Sir Francis Bacon said and did centuries ago.

Hope
Member
October 13, 2017 7:23 AM

And ironically many believe that Shakespeare was really Sir Francis Bacon. This is just one link.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baconian_theory_of_Shakespeare_authorship

S. Peter
S. Peter
Member
October 4, 2017 2:37 AM

Interesting that Parolin was born in a town called Schiavon. The root word being “schiavo” when translated to English means “slave.”

The town’s patron saint is named Isadore, which means “Gift of Isis.” Isis with baby Horus on her lap was what Catholicism used as inspiration of statues of Mary holding the infant Jesus. In a recent conference, Bro. Sadhu Sundar Selvaraj makes the connection between the worship of a god named ashtaroth and Mary whom Catholics revere.

https://youtu.be/WPNsTYahW5g?t=38m23s

No, I am not attacking Catholics as I was one for 25 years until I got saved. I ask those true believers of Jesus to wake up and not be deceived by anything contrary to God’s Holy Word. I pray daily that my own family wake up out of their religious slumber and find salvation before it is too late.

God\'s Dirt Kid
God\'s Dirt Kid
Member
October 4, 2017 4:23 PM

Sometimes the truth can perhaps seem like attacking when it is not. My own writing a case in point. 50 years ago I moved to an intensely Catholic area. Got along well then and now. So I see/hear things. Finger on the pulse. Many are leaving, some mumbling about the day of going underground in home. One guy connected to church hierarchy and knowing a lot of archbishops due to his father’s career validated (with insider stories) how Pope JP I was murdered. Follow the money, BCCI, Vatican Bank, Alfo Moro. There are more and more thinkers in pews and on kneelers.

St Peter did NOT roost in Rome. He went to Great Britain. When he went back to Rome to see PAUL is when he was murdered. I have a lot of Jewish friends and Bris is the Hebrew word for male circumcision and “Brit” for circumcision of the Heart. Great Britain? Tremendous revival first Century. Infuriated Rome… and away it went with Celts Druids, etc etc.

There is a reason WHY the Vatican hides stuff away in the basement and the Smithsonian does, too!

Tardis Romulan
Tardis Romulan
Member
October 13, 2017 1:02 AM

Great Britain no longer exists–it was replaced by the United Kingdom around the time of the War Between the States here in America. The Antiochians claim that St Peter never went to Rome but was martyred in Antioch. But whether Peter or Linus, the Popes of Rome, like those of Alexandria, and the Patriarchs of Antioch, were originally Orthodox. The Catholic Church came into being in AD 800.

juanisaac
juanisaac
Member
October 12, 2017 6:20 AM

A mother with child is a universal thing. The Egyptians also believed that one of their gods, Osiris, died and resurrected. It does not take anything away from the real resurrection of Christ. The Zoroastrians believed in angels before they were described in the bible. Does not mean that angels are a pagan invention. The Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh is an older text describing a universal flood put into writing way before the Genesis one was written. Because things are similar does not mean they are the same or that they have sinister origins.

Tardis Romulan
Tardis Romulan
Member
October 13, 2017 1:04 AM

Early (Orthodox) Christians considered all these as prophesies of Christ, the Theotokos, etc.

Katherine Lehman
Katherine Lehman
Member
October 4, 2017 12:35 PM

Is anyone else confused by this wording – “…Francis of Assisi prophesied about the final Pope and he said he will not be canonically elected.” If Saint Francis said “the final pope” will not be canonically elected, then why/how does this disqualify Pope Francis (presuming Tom is correct about his ascension to the papacy?

Marcio Ferez Jr.
Marcio Ferez Jr.
Member
October 4, 2017 1:21 PM

Katherine, I had to really think to get your logic, but you make sense. If we take at face value that Tom Horn agrees that Francis of Assisi prophesied that the “final Pope” will not be canonically elected, and that Tom Horn believes that Pope Francis was not canonically elected, then Pope Francis IS the last pope, per Tom Horn’s logic. Tom Horn is an author, maybe with some inside knowledge, but is he a real prophet?

Katherine Lehman
Katherine Lehman
Member
October 4, 2017 3:19 PM

Marcio:

Tom Horn is a brilliant man, and a true man of God. I don’t know that he’s ever claimed to be a prophet. He may be; in these past days ALL His disciples will all walk in the prophetic, whether as teachers, apostles, warriors in His army, or whatever……..man, woman and child, or all ages.
I am not discrediting what Tom has said…I simply don’t understand what he apparently said. Perhaps he misspoke, was mis-quoted, or did not clearly state his position.

william m
william m
Member
October 4, 2017 3:57 PM

I read all Tom’s stuff when Francis became the Pope and he clearly and repeatedly identified him as the”Petros Romanos,” the 112th pope. However the mental convolutions used never really made sense. It was a stretch at best .I suspect he now realizes that himself which is good to hear!

Katherine Lehman
Katherine Lehman
Member
October 4, 2017 4:15 PM

Time will tell

william m
william m
Member
October 4, 2017 1:15 PM

I wondered about that too and we all saw the smoke come out the chimney, as sued to indicate a new pope had been elected by those who are in charge of that. he was canonically elected then! If not, then surely those whose position to do that would have spoken out. No one has ever protested that Francis was not properly elected.

Hernan
Hernan
Member
October 4, 2017 10:48 PM

Not exactly protested, but I remember a few mans that claimed that the renounce of Benedict was not valid, because he committed an “error” in redacting the document .

On the other hand, some people say Francis was the authentical pope elected in 2005, suceding JPll ..but in the conclave Francis pleased to be not elected, then Benedict XVI assumed ..

So if we respect the prophecy of Malachy (I don’t believe in this prophecy) he doesn’t wanted to be elected pope (I am argentine and can confirm that this is true and happened) maybe he is the real 111th pope and not Benedict XVI (an impostor).

He will be suffer anyway a health problem and will survive, standing there for a couple of years, then we will have the next pope (whatever if he will be Peter the Roman or not).

Katherine Lehman
Katherine Lehman
Member
October 4, 2017 1:25 PM

Yes, except…I also remember Father Malachi Martin writing about the overt evil of the Second Conclave (or Second Vatican Council?), and that Pope John Paul II was murdered in the Vatican, so I ascribe no veracity to anything associated with the Vatican.

Grumpy Granny
Grumpy Granny
Member
October 12, 2017 6:16 PM

Frankenpope is an antipope. You can’t have 2 popes at the same time and Benedict is still alive, regardless of the “spin” put on it.
There are rumors that Soros and the Clinton cartel had a hand in Benedict’s “resignation” and that Frankenpope is in bed with them. Current version of Operation Gladio.
Satan was enthroned in the Vatican in 1963.
The Church has been in apostasy since Vatican II.

Sujit Thomas
Contributor
October 4, 2017 2:06 PM

I personally believe there is more to this than meets the eye. Just like the identity of the antichrist cannot be discerned through pure research, I believe the same applies to the identity of the false prophet.

Also, I think it is worthwhile to mention that there are two kingdoms at war. Change of battle plans; repositioning of troops and commanders; and the use of decoys, propaganda, and disinformation are all strategies that can be used against one’s enemy.

While God has been gracious to us in declaring the end result of this war from the beginning, I believe the intricacies of his battle strategy including classified briefings of enemy plans and movements are reserved for those willing to become a part of his war council—that means remaining in close proximity to him and in constant communication with him.

And it is only those who know his battle strategy who will understand his moves on the chess board, which may make no sense to a commoner on the sidelines.

ask_question
ask_question
Member
October 4, 2017 11:21 PM

pastor Sadhu , Neville Johnson, Nita Johnson all said that pope francis is the false prophet.

Kristi L
Kristi L
Member
October 7, 2017 8:39 PM

Terry Bennett, a proven man of God has also revealed that the Lord has shown him Pope Francis is the false prophet in a couple of messages.

Kristi L
Member
October 10, 2017 1:11 PM

Sorry forgot to add it can be heard at the 1:49.15 mark!

Kristi L
Member
October 10, 2017 1:10 PM
Kristi L
Member
October 11, 2017 9:17 PM

I was able to find another reference to Terry Bennett saying the Current Pope was the False Prophet.
From Messengers of Shiloh, July 3rd 2016 https://soundcloud.com/terrybennettministries/prayer-directive-revised-terry-bennett

At the 16:35 mark, “The Thessalonian passage is extraordinary clear on this, they will believe a lie. That’s why The False Prophet, the Pope tells everybody what they want to hear. But his actions speak way louder than his words. Is that not true, and isn’t it the actions God says is the real fruit of things, not words. I saw that man in 2001 when Gabriel appeared to me for four days. I saw the present Pope. He showed him too me, as the False Prophet. You are not going to convince me he is a good guy. When I was shown in 2001 differently by Gabriel. Some say ‘well is he the False Prophet’? Whatever you want to argue about. If he’s not a false prophet, he’s at least that, a false prophet. I believe him to be The False Prophet. He will, and you will see it soon, he will introduce the world to the anti-christ. He will and this is not far in coming. We’re talking, we’re not talking about the next 20-30 years. No, no, no it’s way sooner than that, way sooner”.

Delusion and un-locking the souls power is Satan’s end-time game. We will see miracles, real working miracles done from the unleashing of the soul. It’s power is real but from the wrong source. Brothers and sisters we must be on guard continuously against the enemies deceptiveness. Our hearts constantly have to be cleansed and repented of, or we will fall victim to deception.

MVP
MVP
Member
October 4, 2017 12:54 PM

Sadhu sundar specifically quoted that the current pope is the false prophet.

Grace
Grace
Member
October 4, 2017 11:03 AM

Wasn’t there a recent post by Sadhu Sundar Selvaraj saying that Pope Francis is the false prophet?

Sujit Thomas
Contributor
October 4, 2017 3:19 PM
Yes, Grace. There was. However, I don’t believe he said that he must remain pope to fulfill that role (i.e., if he heard correctly). The prophecy of St. Malachy doesn’t seem to describe the 112th pope as an evil man. My stumbling block is the phrase “pasture his sheep.” If the phrase were instead “devour his sheep,” then perhaps there’d be no room for doubt. So if the current pope is forced to step down and another one takes his place, both could be fulfilling completely different roles—the former the role of the false prophet and the latter pasturing his sheep in many tribulations. I don’t think “pasturing his sheep” is a fitting description for the current pope. He seems to be setting up the Lord’s sheep for slaughter, and his acts don’t lend any credence to him being a defender of the Christian faith or the true church at large. I received a word on September 24: “Watch the Vatican. They will side with the man of sin. Their leader will be the false prophet.” So is it possible that if the current pope is forced to step down and a new one is appointed in his place, then at a certain point in time, the new pope and some remnant faithful Catholics are driven underground while the evicted pope returns as the head of the Vatican? Further, when I read about the city of seven hills, I am instantly drawn to Revelation 17:9, 18. Both verses have something to say about the woman with the cryptic name: “Babylon the Great.” Could the destruction of the woman at the hands of the first beast as described in Revelation 17 be God’s judgment on those who choose to remain at the Vatican instead of going underground as part of the… Read more »
Marcio Ferez Jr.
Marcio Ferez Jr.
Member
October 4, 2017 3:55 PM

Sujit, so it has been confirmed to you that the Vatican’s leader will be the false prophet and that they will side with the man of sin, who is the Antichrist. The Antichrist arises from this beast of Revelation 17 and is united to the Vatican and False Prophet. This beast has 7 heads and these are 7 hills or mountains on which the woman, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots, sits upon (Revelation 17:9). So you see, the Vatican can’t be the woman, it is part of the beast. The beast has the 7 heads, not the Harlot. The ten horns of the beast hate the woman, eat her flesh, and burn her with fire (Revelation 17:16). The Vatican will not hate, eat, and burn itself. This woman, Babylon the Great, the Harlot, is something else.

Sujit Thomas
Contributor
October 4, 2017 11:10 PM

God bless you, Marcio.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. You have a point, and I certainly don’t know how everything fits together. From what I gather from that chapter, the woman in the vision was described to be a great city that had an empire over the kings of the earth.

The woman was not only described to be seated on the beast but also on the seven heads of the beast and on many waters.

There were two descriptions given for the seven heads—seven mountains and seven kings.

The beast was described as an eighth king who was actually one of the seven.

The many waters were described as peoples, multitudes, nations, and languages.

So for a city to be seated on all three, could it mean that the city held sway or ruled over all these?

As regards the Vatican hating, eating, and burning itself (of course, this is all still conjecture), perhaps because the false prophet is aligned more with the beast than with the Vatican that birthed him, after his rise to power, he comes into tacit agreement with the beast that the Vatican’s influence is no longer required?

Perhaps the false prophet considers the Vatican to be no more than a ladder for his rise to power?

Another way to look at this is that in Daniel’s vision of the fourth beast, a little horn came up among the ten horns of the beast and uprooted three existing horns. The little horn did this even though the three existing horns were a part of the beast. So perhaps backstabbing and eliminating those in the kingdom once they are no longer required or useful to the kingdom’s cause is the reason why a city or entity considered to be a part of the beast is destroyed by another part of the beast?

scoopie
scoopie
Member
October 12, 2017 11:28 AM

Re “remaining pope to fulfill the role”.. I believe the same will happen with PM Netanyhu. It was prophesied to him that he would see the 3rd temple rebuilt. True, but doesn’t mean he will be PM at that time, just that he will live to see it rebuilt.

william m
william m
Member
October 4, 2017 3:54 PM

While on some regards all that seem plausible, I still can’t see how the A/C would choose a Pope who is so adamantly Pro Life and clearly does not support gay marriage! A kingdom divided….. and so on.

Katherine Lehman
Katherine Lehman
Member
October 4, 2017 12:37 PM

Yes, he did.

Ken L
Ken L
Member
October 4, 2017 12:22 PM

I was thinking the same thing.

John S
Member
October 4, 2017 1:55 PM

I strongly believe that the present Pope is the False Prophet, because I can very much trust Bro. Sadhu on this more than all the these dreams and visions from other sources. Sadhu says Lord Jesus himself appeared to him in 2015 and told him that Pope Francis is the False Prophet according Revelation 13 chapter. The next Pope may be leading the True Catholic during the Triulation period and will be against Antichrist and the False Prophet as per St. Malachy The Antichrist will not get the support of the new pope but the existing Pope Francis. Pope Francis then may have resigned or removed from the Vatican and he will forge an alliance with the Antichrist and many weak Catholics in faith and many weak Christians in faith will completely surrender their allegiance to the fallen Pope(False Prophet) and ANTICHRIST without even knowing what they are doing. It will be very subtle and deceiving.

juanisaac
juanisaac
Member
October 12, 2017 6:36 AM

Keep in mind that this pope is 80 years old, close to 81 now. This man is not very popular either.
Maybe Sadhu saw a future pope, but was confused by this one. Italian popes look the same to me as well.

Ken L
Ken L
Member
October 4, 2017 2:41 PM

In my spirit I believe more what Pastor Benjamin Faircloth prophesied.

Christopher Gremu
Christopher Gremu
Member
October 4, 2017 12:58 PM

BY RACHAEL MUSHALA,
The Lord showed me all this at 3 am morning on Friday 03, April 2015. It’s about the Last pope before the tribulation. The Full names of the current pope are Jose Mario Bergoglio. Then in the 15th century, a certain Prophet St Malachy had a vision of all the 112 popes before the tribulation and they were all accurate. Even up to Benedict who was the 111th Pope. Then St. Malachy prophesied that the Last Pope will be called St Peter the Roman “ Petrus Romanas”. Let me explain how Pope Francis is St Peter the Roman.
His real names are Jose Mario Bergoglio. Mario is the name of a river in Rome. Then Berg means Rock (and we all know that Peter means rock). Both of his parents are from Italy, the Capital city of Rome and so he is Roman. Then he named himself Francis after a certain Pope whose full names were Francis PETER of Asissi also called Peadro in Spanish meaning “Peter”
.Therefore, Pope Francis Is St Peter the Roman. The last Pope before the tribulation!!.

Felicity
Felicity
Member
October 4, 2017 4:42 PM

St. Francis of Assisi was never a pope.

Felicity
Felicity
Member
October 4, 2017 4:46 PM

Also, St. Francis of Assisi’s given name was Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone.

Hernan
Hernan
Member
October 4, 2017 11:02 PM

Sorry, but real name of Francis is Jorge (not Jose) but yes he is son of romans.

william m
william m
Member
October 4, 2017 3:50 PM

Wow, now that is a seriously good examination. Interesting!

Eduardo
Eduardo
Member
October 4, 2017 5:52 AM

This fits in the timeframe given by many on this site for major events to happen. We are really close. Perhaps this is too obvious, but does Peter the Roman simply mean that he is from Rome? As noted, he is Italian and his name is Peter.

Another question, has anyone verified Malachy’s prophecy? If it is valid, I’m wondering if God is making it that plain that this is THE false prophet.

I must say that picture impacted me. We really need to pray. God bless you all.

Cobus Brits
Member
October 5, 2017 11:55 AM

I have read a while back about someone examing the prophecy and list of Popes in their respective times and in the natural, very little made sense. He could also not find any spiritual connotations. The overwelming majority of inaccuracies by far outweighed the few possibles.

I am sure with a little bit of searching, you should be able to find it.

It would have been neat if it was consistently true but alas.

Cobus Brits
Member
October 5, 2017 12:11 PM

But must say I do believe a head of the Vatican to be the False Prophet. There is just too much evidence pointing that way.

The symbolism of a woman has always to do with Church, in this case a false church.

The colours of the Pope: red and purple.
The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet,
Rev 17:4

In Johns’ day, Rome was the Capital of the world, ruling over everybody.
And the woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth.”
Revelation 17:18 NKJV

juanisaac
juanisaac
Member
October 12, 2017 6:34 AM

The actual color of the pope and the Catholic Church is white and yellow.
Rome was the pagan capitol of the pagan Roman Empire. The hey day of the Catholic Church was the Middle Ages. And even then all the governments in Europe had two spheres of influence: the religious and the secular. Which means that power was shared and not a monopoly by the Church. So no, Rome did not rule the world. In fact, the kings of France at one time or another chose who was to be pope. One can see it in the Avignon Papacy. The Holy Roman Emperor and the Pope were at logger heads for a long time as to who had the right to appoint local bishops. It is called the Investiture Controversy. An all power papacy ruling the world would not have to go through all this stuff if they really ruled the world.

Cobus Brits
Member
October 12, 2017 4:49 PM

Dont think we are talking about the same thing here. The spiritual always rules over the physical world and the city which will have the spiritual say (from false church point of view) was shown to John as that great city which in his time was Rome.

Why the woman has been described as a city has to do with a religious counterfeit as the real church is described as a woman so which city today has the most religious connotation to it? Is it not Rome? Couldnt be Jerusalem because in Johns time it was seen as an unruly outpost by the powers that were.

As to the colors: http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-deception_end-time_Babylon_purple_riches

juanisaac
juanisaac
Member
October 12, 2017 8:44 PM

Rome is certainly a possibility and we should keep an eye out for what comes from there. But if you remember, John was told to look where the whore of Babylon is located: Revelation 17:3 “So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.” Last time I checked the wilderness in that part of the world is the desert of Arabia. Rome is not a wilderness or a desert. If you keep your eyes out on both places, I am sure you will be diligent.

Cobus Brits
Member
October 13, 2017 5:40 AM

Revelation is about imagery, talking about woman, beasts etc so the wilderness mentioned in that same chapter would symbolize a place of Godlessness.

When then refering to a physical place, Rev 17:18 says it was not a city but that city
And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
Rev17:18 KJV

The word ‘that’ indicates a knowing as opposed to ‘a’ city that is not known. Which city has been known by John and by us as a religious centre? Which city had ruled over kings for centuries?
Cant be Jerusalem because it was a wasteland before the Balfour Declaration.
That leaves Rome only. The city that house the Catholic religion and responsible for 70 odd million Protestants which sounds very much like Rev 17:6
And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.
Rev 17:6 KJV

I have come to realize that some things are only acquired after having a revelation which mostly wont happen overnight but through a series of interlinking truths.
Eph 1:17
Diligence is only the start of that process.

wpDiscuz