Re: The Priests

by Guest 18.05.12 14:37

friedtomatoes, have you got a link for this, i.e. the heel prick sample........ I have never read it before...

Further corroboration was provided by the spot of blood supplied, the heel prick test sample, and this matched the pillow sample and was different again from the other childrens dna

by friedtomatoes 18.05.12 14:47

candyfloss wrote:friedtomatoes, have you got a link for this, i.e. the heel prick sample........ I have never read it before...

Further corroboration was provided by the spot of blood supplied, the heel prick test sample, and this matched the pillow sample and was different again from the other childrens dna

Sorry CF I dont, its generally assumed that was the source because the blood was on a card, cant think what else it could be.

eta what confuses me is the blood was delivered to fss in october but their report was done in september, i must be missing something, so will have to go read it all again.

by Guest 18.05.12 14:54

friedtomatoes wrote:
candyfloss wrote:friedtomatoes, have you got a link for this, i.e. the heel prick sample........ I have never read it before...

Further corroboration was provided by the spot of blood supplied, the heel prick test sample, and this matched the pillow sample and was different again from the other childrens dna

Sorry CF I dont, its generally assumed that was the source because the blood was on a card, cant think what else it could be.

Yes, I thought it was not fact, as I have never seen this in the files. It is incorrect to make assumptions and write them as facts. I don't think they had a sample of blood, hence the pillowcase.

by Guest 18.05.12 14:58

I think the blood tested was from samples on the walls, and underneath the floor tile. Not actually a sample of Madeleines blood.

by friedtomatoes 18.05.12 15:14

OK CF I shouldnt have made it appear as fact the heel prick test sample was used but they did have a blood sample.

See about 3/4 of the way down

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Two seperate mentions.

On 12 October 2007, the Forensic Science Service(R) received a blood spot in a cardboard frame (object JRB/1) from Leicestershire Constabulary. That object was inside a sealed package.

Reference sample of blood
JRB/1 Madeleine Mccann
From this sample was obtained a DNA reference sample that was different from those of her immediate family, described above. This DNA profile was the same as that obtained from possible spots of saliva existing on the pillowcase (SJM/1).

by Guest 18.05.12 15:38

friedtomatoes wrote:OK CF I shouldnt have made it appear as fact the heel prick test sample was used but they did have a blood sample.

See about 3/4 of the way down

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Two seperate mentions.

On 12 October 2007, the Forensic Science Service(R) received a blood spot in a cardboard frame (object JRB/1) from Leicestershire Constabulary. That object was inside a sealed package.

Reference sample of blood
JRB/1 Madeleine Mccann
From this sample was obtained a DNA reference sample that was different from those of her immediate family, described above. This DNA profile was the same as that obtained from possible spots of saliva existing on the pillowcase (SJM/1).

I think this was the samples sent from apt. from tiles and walls.

They actually obtained DNA profile of Madeleine from the parents, and secondly from the pillowcase..................

Re: Abduction of Madeleine McCann on 3rd May 2007

A DNA profile has been obtained from the reference samples of Kate HEALY (51162896) and Gerald McCANN (511622897).

A DNA profile has also been obtained from a pillowcase (SJM/1).

DNA profiling reveals a series of bands, half of which a child inherits from their natural mother (maternal) and half of which it inherits from their natural father (paternal).

And later on at the end of the report............

The Forensic Science Service(R) received the [above] objects on 7 August 2007, in sealed, secure packages.

On 8 August 2007, the Forensic Science Service(R) received a piece of cloth/cotton wool (object MJN994) from Leicestershire Constabulary. That object was inside a sealed package.

On 12 October 2007, the Forensic Science Service(R) received a blood spot in a cardboard frame (object JRB/1) from Leicestershire Constabulary. That object was inside a sealed package.

Objective

Th objective of the laboratory examination was to examine the presented objects with respect to the presence of blood, cellular material and hair that may prove to be [have been] from Madeleine McCann or one or other member of her family, or from any of the Portuguese police who had been active [working/present] at the crime scene.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So the blood on the cardboard frame was not actually a DNA profile, but blood found at the crime scene

by Hummingbird 18.05.12 15:46

friedtomatoes wrote:OK CF I shouldnt have made it appear as fact the heel prick test sample was used but they did have a blood sample.

See about 3/4 of the way down

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Two seperate mentions.

On 12 October 2007, the Forensic Science Service(R) received a blood spot in a cardboard frame (object JRB/1) from Leicestershire Constabulary. That object was inside a sealed package.

Reference sample of blood
JRB/1 Madeleine Mccann
From this sample was obtained a DNA reference sample that was different from those of her immediate family, described above. This DNA profile was the same as that obtained from possible spots of saliva existing on the pillowcase (SJM/1).

Just a thought. If her medical records were never handed over then surely her heel prick test results would have been on that - where else are records like that kept? Surely they don't keep the blood sample once it has been tested! I don't have an idea, anyone able to enlighten me?

Sorry but to me the above two references are not in anyway definitive. Firstly it has been widely discussed that the Leics. Const. are 'close' to the McCanns and all it says is they received a spot of blood from the Leics Const., unless it then goes on to prove 100% this was MBM's blood sample who knows anything?

Also the 2nd reference again is by no means definitive as it states that the reference sample was obtained from this blood spot and the most reveiling word is 'possible spots of saliva' Certainly does not say MBM's saliva and we are always discussing exactly who slept where so who knows whose pillow case it was.

The only blood spot ever mentioned was that found behind the sofa, of course apart from the grazed knee and nose bleed. Any blood tests Madeleine had prior to her holiday the results would have been on her medical records which were never handed over. As I said I never for one moment would have thought they keep all the samples of blood ever taken from anyone for simple tests, like heel pricks etc but perhaps we have a Dr. Nurse or Lab Tech who works with blood on here that can say otherwise - an ideas?

by friedtomatoes 18.05.12 15:50

CF
But if the blood spot dna was identical to the pillowcase sample that means a 100% dna match was found in flat 5a if it came from there and there wasn't. All the samples from the flat and car had different reference numbers as well.

by **tigger** 18.05.12 15:55

I believe that the heel prick sample wasn't delivered to the FSS until after they had done all the other tests. IIRC their report states that the sample from Rothley came from a child of the McCanns but I do think they excluded Amelie as they had her full DNA of course.
In any case I believe the wording of the report is ambiguous.

It's interesting that lately they haven't disputed the fact that there was DNA in the boot and DNA from Maddie because it was their DNA in there as well.
One of the two Swedish interviews.

by friedtomatoes 18.05.12 16:00

Hummingbird, possible spots of saliva means the material could have been from saliva, it could have been from sweat or shed skin cells too, but the profile lifted, as I mentioned in my previous post, not only confirmed it was a female child of the mccannns but also proved to match the profile lifted from the blood, and this profile was different from the other female child, so it can only have been Madeleines. This is the way I have read it all but I am happy to be corrected. Re the heel prick test, I have agreed to drop that as it isnt a known fact.

by Hummingbird 18.05.12 16:15

jd wrote:I'm in a rush to go out and running late...But I never knew they gave dental records, this is news to me...any links please?

5231 is from Paulo Cristovão's book: A Estrela de Madeleine
"I don’t usually bet on Euromillions, my friend, but if I ever did, there would be at least four numbers where I would place my little crosses, to hit the winning key. And I bet that at least I would get those four right. As a matter of fact, I would even call it the Luz key. Those would be the 5, the 2, the 3 and the 1!"

Amaral also says the priests know the truth of what really happened that night. And also I think he said, that if only the church walls could talk. Remember the PJ know a lot more of the facts than they have released

Hummingbird "they are surrounded by people who belief and support them and the wealthier and more religious the better!!" This is my cryptic clue on the lines of Paulo Cristovão

And where is the best place to confess but not having to take the consequences of it...church? This is where they release their guilt. Why did the Vatican whoosh all references to the mccanns on their website? This is far worse than a physic having vision she is dead imo. They know the truth which goes against the catholic religion

jd thanks for this yesterday I was most interested to see the number reference and had no idea about this book, have found it on this site now though so more bedtime reading - it certainly looks interesting.
I am sure there is some relevance to their continual references to the Catholic church and how devout they are. It just seems such an odd thing to keep telling us after 5 years - we all know you went to see the Pope for goodness sake! (who by the way will have nothing to do with you now) Now why would that be I wonder?

by jd 18.05.12 16:18

Hummingbird wrote: jd thanks for this yesterday I was most interested to see the number reference and had no idea about this book, have found it on this site now though so more bedtime reading - it certainly looks interesting.
I am sure there is some relevance to their continual references to the Catholic church and how devout they are. It just seems such an odd thing to keep telling us after 5 years - we all know you went to see the Pope for goodness sake! (who by the way will have nothing to do with you now) Now why would that be I wonder?

Ive just posted some thoughts on the 5-2-3-1 theory from the book here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Hummingbird 18.05.12 16:41

jd wrote:
Hummingbird wrote: jd thanks for this yesterday I was most interested to see the number reference and had no idea about this book, have found it on this site now though so more bedtime reading - it certainly looks interesting.
I am sure there is some relevance to their continual references to the Catholic church and how devout they are. It just seems such an odd thing to keep telling us after 5 years - we all know you went to see the Pope for goodness sake! (who by the way will have nothing to do with you now) Now why would that be I wonder?

Ive just posted some thoughts on the 5-2-3-1 theory from the book here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for that!

Something just struck me - haven't even thought it through so shout me down if you like!!

IF Madeleine was a product of IVF - one or two people have stated that it is frowned upon in the Catholic religion, and IF she was suffering from some sort of condition maybe they had a 'calling' (one or the other or both) 'telling' them that Madeleines condition was because they had defied the laws of their religion. Perhaps a person with PND or who is a bit unstable could have these thoughts, perhaps the thoughts were an excuse for her not being as perfect as they wished her to be?

By a 'calling' it could be that one of them saw it as a way out, I don't know but I hope you understand what I am trying to say!

Now I said I haven't thought this through but we do keep getting these constant reminders about how religious they are and it has always bothered me.

One of the first calls they made, if not the first, was to a Priest and they certainly spent a lot of time in the church in PDL followed by a visit to the Pope, could this be their 'reason' for what ever happened - religion - IF of course we are looking at the pre planned angle.

I know that the twins were born through IVF - correct me if I am wrong, but if I am right then as they are not suffering from any 'conditions' behaviour or otherwise they perceive them to be 'holy' .

It all sounds mad, but you have to be mad to either cover up an accidental death of a child (or anyone for that matter) or plan their death, so I am thinking perhaps one of them cracked due to their religious beliefs and the other one is covering.??????????

by jd 18.05.12 17:11

Paulo Pereira Cristovão claims that the answer is in that book and has given clues to the truth, as due to legal reason he cannot say directly the truth. I personally don't think IVF as such has anything to do with the Vatican withdrawing all references to the mccanns. They originally were out there at that time for probably what is best termed as 'business' and it is this business that is central to the coverup

I believe the mccanns had 2 personalities. The public/media one we all see, but their real personality and feelings were behind closed doors in the Church. This is the only place they could feel safe in releasing all of their guilt with Maddie. A catholic priest will never say anything except to his superiors i.e. the Vatican. An anglican priest would not say anything except to try and force them to confess to the police. They were in a foreign country so the church would be the only place for them where they could safely release their guilt. They couldn't confess before because they had to execute the abduction theory first and once this had been done were desperate to see a priest, especially kate mccann

by dentdelion 18.05.12 18:02

This is a test done in hospitals on new born infants. The hospital would maintain the record and possibly the sample on which it was based. There was some discussion recently in Ireland where a hospital proposed destroying the original samples.

by **tigger** 18.05.12 19:22

Hummingbird wrote:
jd wrote:
Hummingbird wrote: jd thanks for this yesterday I was most interested to see the number reference and had no idea about this book, have found it on this site now though so more bedtime reading - it certainly looks interesting.
I am sure there is some relevance to their continual references to the Catholic church and how devout they are. It just seems such an odd thing to keep telling us after 5 years - we all know you went to see the Pope for goodness sake! (who by the way will have nothing to do with you now) Now why would that be I wonder?

Ive just posted some thoughts on the 5-2-3-1 theory from the book here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for that!

Something just struck me - haven't even thought it through so shout me down if you like!!

IF Madeleine was a product of IVF - one or two people have stated that it is frowned upon in the Catholic religion, and IF she was suffering from some sort of condition maybe they had a 'calling' (one or the other or both) 'telling' them that Madeleines condition was because they had defied the laws of their religion. Perhaps a person with PND or who is a bit unstable could have these thoughts, perhaps the thoughts were an excuse for her not being as perfect as they wished her to be?

By a 'calling' it could be that one of them saw it as a way out, I don't know but I hope you understand what I am trying to say!

Now I said I haven't thought this through but we do keep getting these constant reminders about how religious they are and it has always bothered me.

One of the first calls they made, if not the first, was to a Priest and they certainly spent a lot of time in the church in PDL followed by a visit to the Pope, could this be their 'reason' for what ever happened - religion - IF of course we are looking at the pre planned angle.

I know that the twins were born through IVF - correct me if I am wrong, but if I am right then as they are not suffering from any 'conditions' behaviour or otherwise they perceive them to be 'holy' .

It all sounds mad, but you have to be mad to either cover up an accidental death of a child (or anyone for that matter) or plan their death, so I am thinking perhaps one of them cracked due to their religious beliefs and the other one is covering.??????????

I don't think they're truly religious, it was part of the image. If they were (the twins were also IVF so why be guilty only over M?) it may well have been to pacify the family and some friends who have been very helpful to them, such as Michael Wright. It all fits nicely with the secretly observed duties to the departed of the 3rd, 12th, 40th days. (It's in another topic) they managed to slip under the radar. Now because she wanted the church for praying in on the 3rd, makes me think Maddie died on the first.
If Kate was so religious she would not have allowed filming in church, she would wear suitable clothing (no bare arms, low cut tops etc.) . She even wanted to organise a 'world-wide prayer band' or something, by phoning I think Jon Corner in the middle of the night and one headline read soon after that she was being persecuted because of her religion. Well played Kate!

Besides, the faked abduction was planned imo. Without a faked abduction - no money. No Fund. It went badly, lots of things went wrong, but that's Delboy for you, smartest boy in the class. We're working with some way-out characters here - you can't expect a perfectly executed plan from this lot.

by Guest 18.05.12 19:30

I came across this today, which I had never seen before, it was the 1 minute silence organised in PDL. Now I have heard of this for people who die but not for a person who has disappeared, plus also the shrine in Rothley, lots of pics in link below............

Yesterday a minute's silence for Madeleine was held in Praia da Luz to allow local people to focus their thoughts on the missing girl in the collective hope that the story can have a happy ending.
Her mother Kate marked the silence at midday in the same way as anyone else - although her daughter had of course already been on her mind for every single minute, of every hour, of every day.
The 'Silence for Madeleine' had been organised by anonymous outsiders to help sear her name into the public consciousness, the family's only weapon in their desperate campaign to get her back safely.
It had nothing to do with the McCanns, who have never abandoned the conviction that they will be reunited with their daughter. But they welcomed the initiative, as well as the solidarity it demonstrated.
When the clock struck 12 at Our Lady of the Light Roman Catholic church, it heralded some remarkable scenes.
In the local supermarket - normally the busiest place in town - loudspeakers announced the silence in English and Portuguese. The tills stopped beeping immediatelyand the piped muzak went mute.
Even holidaymakers fresh from the airport picked up the atmosphere and fell silent.

Read more: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Hummingbird 18.05.12 19:32

tigger wrote:
Hummingbird wrote:
jd wrote:
Hummingbird wrote: jd thanks for this yesterday I was most interested to see the number reference and had no idea about this book, have found it on this site now though so more bedtime reading - it certainly looks interesting.
I am sure there is some relevance to their continual references to the Catholic church and how devout they are. It just seems such an odd thing to keep telling us after 5 years - we all know you went to see the Pope for goodness sake! (who by the way will have nothing to do with you now) Now why would that be I wonder?

Ive just posted some thoughts on the 5-2-3-1 theory from the book here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for that!

Something just struck me - haven't even thought it through so shout me down if you like!!

IF Madeleine was a product of IVF - one or two people have stated that it is frowned upon in the Catholic religion, and IF she was suffering from some sort of condition maybe they had a 'calling' (one or the other or both) 'telling' them that Madeleines condition was because they had defied the laws of their religion. Perhaps a person with PND or who is a bit unstable could have these thoughts, perhaps the thoughts were an excuse for her not being as perfect as they wished her to be?

By a 'calling' it could be that one of them saw it as a way out, I don't know but I hope you understand what I am trying to say!

Now I said I haven't thought this through but we do keep getting these constant reminders about how religious they are and it has always bothered me.

One of the first calls they made, if not the first, was to a Priest and they certainly spent a lot of time in the church in PDL followed by a visit to the Pope, could this be their 'reason' for what ever happened - religion - IF of course we are looking at the pre planned angle.

I know that the twins were born through IVF - correct me if I am wrong, but if I am right then as they are not suffering from any 'conditions' behaviour or otherwise they perceive them to be 'holy' .

It all sounds mad, but you have to be mad to either cover up an accidental death of a child (or anyone for that matter) or plan their death, so I am thinking perhaps one of them cracked due to their religious beliefs and the other one is covering.??????????

I don't think they're truly religious, it was part of the image. If they were (the twins were also IVF so why be guilty only over M?) it may well have been to pacify the family and some friends who have been very helpful to them, such as Michael Wright. It all fits nicely with the secretly observed duties to the departed of the 3rd, 12th, 40th days. (It's in another topic) they managed to slip under the radar. Now because she wanted the church for praying in on the 3rd, makes me think Maddie died on the first.
If Kate was so religious she would not have allowed filming in church, she would wear suitable clothing (no bare arms, low cut tops etc.) . She even wanted to organise a 'world-wide prayer band' or something, by phoning I think Jon Corner in the middle of the night and one headline read soon after that she was being persecuted because of her religion. Well played Kate!

Besides, the faked abduction was planned imo. Without a faked abduction - no money. No Fund. It went badly, lots of things went wrong, but that's Delboy for you, smartest boy in the class. We're working with some way-out characters here - you can't expect a perfectly executed plan from this lot.

Yes I am sure you are right as I said I hadn't even really thought it through properly, was just typing thoughts as they happened - perhaps we should ignore what I said, having read it again now it does seem a bit 'out there' - sorry everyone - my lines for tonight - I must think before I write - LOL!!

by Nina 18.05.12 19:51

tigger wrote:
Hummingbird wrote:
jd wrote:
Hummingbird wrote: jd thanks for this yesterday I was most interested to see the number reference and had no idea about this book, have found it on this site now though so more bedtime reading - it certainly looks interesting.
I am sure there is some relevance to their continual references to the Catholic church and how devout they are. It just seems such an odd thing to keep telling us after 5 years - we all know you went to see the Pope for goodness sake! (who by the way will have nothing to do with you now) Now why would that be I wonder?

Ive just posted some thoughts on the 5-2-3-1 theory from the book here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for that!

Something just struck me - haven't even thought it through so shout me down if you like!!

IF Madeleine was a product of IVF - one or two people have stated that it is frowned upon in the Catholic religion, and IF she was suffering from some sort of condition maybe they had a 'calling' (one or the other or both) 'telling' them that Madeleines condition was because they had defied the laws of their religion. Perhaps a person with PND or who is a bit unstable could have these thoughts, perhaps the thoughts were an excuse for her not being as perfect as they wished her to be?

By a 'calling' it could be that one of them saw it as a way out, I don't know but I hope you understand what I am trying to say!

Now I said I haven't thought this through but we do keep getting these constant reminders about how religious they are and it has always bothered me.

One of the first calls they made, if not the first, was to a Priest and they certainly spent a lot of time in the church in PDL followed by a visit to the Pope, could this be their 'reason' for what ever happened - religion - IF of course we are looking at the pre planned angle.

I know that the twins were born through IVF - correct me if I am wrong, but if I am right then as they are not suffering from any 'conditions' behaviour or otherwise they perceive them to be 'holy' .

It all sounds mad, but you have to be mad to either cover up an accidental death of a child (or anyone for that matter) or plan their death, so I am thinking perhaps one of them cracked due to their religious beliefs and the other one is covering.??????????

I don't think they're truly religious, it was part of the image. If they were (the twins were also IVF so why be guilty only over M?) it may well have been to pacify the family and some friends who have been very helpful to them, such as Michael Wright. It all fits nicely with the secretly observed duties to the departed of the 3rd, 12th, 40th days. (It's in another topic) they managed to slip under the radar. Now because she wanted the church for praying in on the 3rd, makes me think Maddie died on the first.
If Kate was so religious she would not have allowed filming in church, she would wear suitable clothing (no bare arms, low cut tops etc.) . She even wanted to organise a 'world-wide prayer band' or something, by phoning I think Jon Corner in the middle of the night and one headline read soon after that she was being persecuted because of her religion. Well played Kate!

Besides, the faked abduction was planned imo. Without a faked abduction - no money. No Fund. It went badly, lots of things went wrong, but that's Delboy for you, smartest boy in the class. We're working with some way-out characters here - you can't expect a perfectly executed plan from this lot.

Good evening Tigger. Regarding Kate's dress code. She did wear a smart sombre outfit to meet the Pope but didn't cover her head. Yes I realize they were on holiday so she had low tops but she could have bought a cheap shawl/scarf to cover her shoulders when visiting the church in PdL, or is this not thought important in a holiday resort?

by **tigger** 18.05.12 19:56

@ Nina as it happened I just lifted this from ' a Estrada de...'

Benedict XVI was the high point of a campaign that had started much earlier, with the visible and well publicized visits at the church in Luz, constantly appealing to religion and to God. The visit to the Vatican represented a conquest for those that were coordinating the pro-McCann campaign; yet, nothing could be done when that State decided to redraw all references to Madeleine from their official site, a clear message that they wanted to distance themselves from the case.

unquote.

To add to my above post re their religious fervour. Makes a lot of sense to me.

by Nina 18.05.12 20:17

tigger wrote:@ Nina as it happened I just lifted this from ' a Estrada de...'

Benedict XVI was the high point of a campaign that had started much earlier, with the visible and well publicized visits at the church in Luz, constantly appealing to religion and to God. The visit to the Vatican represented a conquest for those that were coordinating the pro-McCann campaign; yet, nothing could be done when that State decided to redraw all references to Madeleine from their official site, a clear message that they wanted to distance themselves from the case.

unquote.

To add to my above post re their religious fervour. Makes a lot of sense to me.

No offence to any form of religion, but in their case it was the icing on the cake, parents who adored each other, lovely children, respected professionals and church goers. :puke:

by **tigger** 19.05.12 7:26

Nina wrote:
tigger wrote:@ Nina as it happened I just lifted this from ' a Estrada de...'

Benedict XVI was the high point of a campaign that had started much earlier, with the visible and well publicized visits at the church in Luz, constantly appealing to religion and to God. The visit to the Vatican represented a conquest for those that were coordinating the pro-McCann campaign; yet, nothing could be done when that State decided to redraw all references to Madeleine from their official site, a clear message that they wanted to distance themselves from the case.

unquote.

To add to my above post re their religious fervour. Makes a lot of sense to me.

No offence to any form of religion, but in their case it was the icing on the cake, parents who adored each other, lovely children, respected professionals and church goers. :puke:

You've put it in a nutshell!

by russiandoll 19.05.12 8:59

quote Nina
Yes I realize they were on holiday so she had low tops but she could have bought a cheap shawl/scarf to cover her shoulders when visiting the church in PdL, or is this not thought important in a holiday resort?

I have on my sightseeing trips visited many churches and cathedrals, for love of architecture more than being devout and I have only rarely seen bare shoulders...most women and esp practising Catholics show respect by taking and wearing any kind of top which provides cover for bare shouders, chest area.. the ones who did not I would guess were not especially religious and simply ignorant of etiquette.
This would not apply to an alleged devoted Catholic like Kate and I was surprised as even if not practising she would have known better than to wear any skimpy tops in church, did she actually attend church dressed like this?
The lack of even a simple mantilla for the visit to Rome and meeting with the Pope has a simple explanation imo. the green and yellow ribbons had to be seen, and as her outfit was dark and sober a dark headcovering would have given a strong impression of mourning attire. jmo

by Miraflores 19.05.12 11:22

Some churches in Italy refuse admission to women with bare shoulders. You either need a shawl to cover up or in some churches you are given a shoulder cover made of j-cloth type material. A devout Catholic, or even a non-devout one, should know about modest dress.

by Guest 19.05.12 11:32

When I used to go to church with my mom when I was a child all the women wore hats to church. It was like an Easter Parade, who was wearing the nicest one , they all tried to outdo each other:biggrin:

ETA Yes, Catholics don't go to church services dressed in casual attire.