Head of the Sankt Gallen Mafia, Cardinal Walter Kasper: The Man’s Life’s Work Has Been the Dissolution of the Papacy

As I said in Sunday’s post, the fact that pretty much every other Catholic website or blog is either totally silent or engaging in gaslighting and/or calumny in an effort to sweep the illegitimacy of Pope Benedict’s attempted partial abdication under the rug is telling.  “Trad, Inc.” isn’t a very big market, but it IS a market, and I have have heard with my own ears more than one major name in the Tradisphere say, “Francis is great for business! Traffic is up, subscriptions are up, donations are up!”

How strange that they can’t see (or maybe they can) that the whole “ignore it, dismiss it, deny it” tactic is EXACTLY what is being done with regards to the sex abuse stuff.  Folks, priests chasing after and molesting lads is considered “no big deal” and “just the way it is” outside of North America.  It is very similar to the way Europeans view adultery.  The French consider it completely normal and not at all scandalous for a man to have a mistress.  Europeans were completely mystified by the whole Clinton-Lewinsky scandal in the late 90’s.  To be scandalized by priests and bishops literally raping lads and young men is considered by these “elites” to be proof of unsophistication to the point of stupidity.  “Oh, grow up.  There will always be queers hanging around sacristies.  That’s just how it is….”  They think that if they just keep ignoring it and denying it, that the “American hillbillies” will forget about it and move on.  There is about as much impetus to purge the priesthood of sodomites as there is to purge the world of ballet of sodomites.  That is, ZERO.

And so it is with the Substantially Erroneous failed partial abdication of Pope Benedict XVI.  Just ignore it, and it will eventually go away…. Just keep saying, “There is no evidence, no matter what.”

Here’s the thing.  There is a veritable MOUNTAIN of evidence.  I have been poring over texts, and readers have been sending in citations, and it just keeps going and going.  One of the most prolific sources of citations is none other than Cardinal Walter Kasper.  Folks, this business of essentially dissolving the Petrine Office has been Kasper’s life’s work.  He has been writing about this basically NON-STOP for darn near fifty years.

Looking at the timeline, it has become clear that Cardinal Walter Kasper is at the absolute epicenter of the whole conspiracy to “depose” Pope Benedict (his life-long enemy) and install the puppet Bergoglio.

Walter Kasper is the head of the group called the “Sankt Gallen Mafia” and has been since the death of Cardinal Carlo Martini.  Martini died on 31 August, ARSH 2012.  Note that date.  Martini, like Kasper, was a massive proponent of essentially dissolving the Petrine Office and decentralizing the Church into a loose confederation or “synod” of “bishops conferences”.

Pope Benedict XVI said that he started contemplating his partial attempted abdication “several months” before he announced it.  That would put it right after Martini’s death and Kasper’s ascension to the top of the Sankt Gallen Mafia.

The faux-conclave convened in March of ARSH 2013 and Walter Kasper’s lapdog, Bergoglio, was named Antipope.  Antipope Bergoglio immediately referred to Kasper as his “favorite theologian” and began implementing Kasper’s evil agenda point for point.  Kasper wanted Bergoglio as his puppet front precisely because Bergoglio is an idiot who was and is dependent on Kasper and others to provide him with his talking points.  Bergoglio was dismissed after only six months from doing a Ph.D. in Germany in the 1970s because he wasn’t intelligent enough to do the work, and has ever since then been trying to ingratiate himself to and prove himself the equal of the German intellectuals.  It’s really quite sad.

I strongly suspect that it was Walter Kasper, who had hated and been the enemy of Joseph Ratzinger since the 1960s, that pressured, coerced, threatened, blackmailed, whatever it was, Pope Benedict XVI to leave in the autumn of ARSH 2012.

“I’m SMART, right Walter?” “Yes Jorge, you are very, very smart.”

Let’s look at some citations.  First, let’s look at a chilling citation from Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger’s 1996 book “Salt of the Earth”.  The book is written in a question-and-answer interview format with Peter Seewald. Here is page 257.  I will transcribe the text so that it populates online in search engines. Emphases mine.


RATZINGER: In its core it will remain. In other words, a man is needed to be the successor of Peter and to bear a personal final authority that is supported collegially.  Part of Christianity is a personalistic principle; it doesn’t get vaporized into anonymities but presents itself in the person of the priest, of the bishop, and the unity of the universal Church once again has a personal expression. This will remain, the magisterial responsibility for the unity of the Church, her faith, and her morals that was defined by Vatican I and II.  Forms of exercise can change, they will certainly change, when hitherto separated communities enter into unity with the Pope.  By the way, the present Pope’s [John Paul II] exercise of the pontificate – with the trips around the world – is completely different from that of Pius XII.  What concrete variations emerge I neither can nor want to imagine.  We can’t foresee now exactly how that will look.

He neither could nor wanted to imagine…. Well, that’s not ominous or anything.

Now let’s turn to Walter Kasper.  Let’s start with a paper written in ARSH 2002 by Kilian McDonnell, a Benedictine monk.  The title of the 19 page paper is, “WALTER KASPER ON THE THEOLOGY AND THE PRAXIS OF THE BISHOP’S OFFICE” with the introduction stating, “The author reviews the discussion between Kasper and Ratzinger on the ontological priority of the universal Church, and then summarizes several studies by Kasper on the papacy and episcopacy at Vatican I….”  Yeah, nothing of any relevance or interest here, right folks?

Let’s go to pages 12 and 13, which are numbered pages 722-723 in the journal:

Kasper does not enter into the long discussion, preconciliar, conciliar, and postconciliar on the importance of involving bishops in the governance of the universal Church. But the discussion is both an inner-Catholic question and an ecumenical imperative. In his encyclical Ut unum sint (no. 96), John Paul II issued a call for practical suggestions on how the Petrine ministry might be exercised. “Such a dialogue,” Kasper suggests, “would make sense only if it led to a new historical formation of the office of Peter. A new form would be similar to that which the office of Peter had in the first thousand years, but in a form appropriate to the differences in historical periods and the relationships of the various churches.”51 This appears to point to an exercise of the Petrine function which is more participatory in style, involving the bishops of the world.
Kasper could call on a number of historical studies to support the con- tention that the Petrine office has historically experienced a number of epochal transformations, and none of its historical forms is identical with the office, including the one that obtains today. “One must indeed say that in the present form of its exercise, the Petrine ministry has far from completely exhausted its ecumenical possibilities.”52 In any new form the essential nature of the Petrine office would have to remain unchanged. But the call for a new form needs to be understood in reference to Kasper’s reading of the development of Catholic ecclesiology, read through the eyes of Vatican I and II. He is obviously convinced that the Catholic sense of the Church demands a strong, even vigorous, papacy. Any new form issuing from Pope John Paul II’s call for help in rethinking the Petrine ministry would not mean a diminished Petrine role, but, on the contrary, as he said in a different context, “an even bigger role.”53 The new expression of the Petrine office would include a significant role for the whole episcopacy in the governance of the Church.

This business of demythologizing, decentralizing and essentially trying to turn the Papacy into a Synod of Bishops has been Kasper’s life’s work.  His Sankt Gallen Mafia predecessor, Cardinal Martini, wanted EXACTLY the same thing.  Kasper is referred to as a “center-conservative” only because in comparison to monsters like Hans Kung and Johannes Neumann who advocated the TOTAL ABOLITION of the Papacy, Kasper was “conservative” by comparison, and Ratzinger was an arch-conservative… by comparison.

Now let’s go to page 18 of the same paper, and THIS extremely prescient nugget:

But Kasper doubts the necessity, in view of the cultural pluralism in the world, to have pastoral questions determined in all of their details in a binding way by the universal Church, so that factually no room to maneuver remains to the individual bishop as he seeks a pastoral solution appropriate to the specific conditions of his diocese, conditions he alone knows in their particularities. This question comes to mind in view of the document of the CDF “On the Reception of Communion for the Faithful Who Have Divorced and Remarried” (1994),73 as also in the case of the many small determinations of the “Instruction on Some Questions Concerning the Cooperation of Laity in the Ministry of the Priest” (1997),74 even though one agrees with the basic concerns of this instruction.
If there is not a certain flexibility given in the concrete application of the universal discipline, then the individual pastor will not concern himself with the application of universal norms he considers cannot be put into practice; when this happens then one is rightly faced with a pastoral practice out of control. Centralism, in this case, effects exactly the opposite of what is intended and lessens the authority of both pope and the bishops. Then the bishop must helplessly stand by and see the continuation of a “pastoral practice from below,” which is full of problems. The local bishop is hindered in finding appropriate solutions in his diocese on his own pastoral responsibility by his loyalty to Rome and by loyalty to the universal detailed legislation which issues from the Curia. In this perspective, fewer documents and individual instructions from Rome would increase the au- thority of the office of Peter in the really basic issues touching the unity of the Church.75
In concluding, Kasper reflects on the meaning for the pastoral practice of a bishop in a world experiencing two opposing movements. On the one hand, the ecumenical and technological globalization efforts are pushing the world toward the global village. But there is a contrary movement in which all things are being westernized, issuing in a new form of the tradi- tional identities of a plethora of cultures, resulting in a conflict of cultures. The forces impelling toward the unity of the global village are being resisted by the clash of cultures. A peaceful future is only possible when the unity of the multiplicity of cultures is achieved. Such a unity in multiplicity is also of great importance for the Church. When the faith and the essence of the Church is inculturated into the multiplicity of cultures then evangelization is possible. In carrying out the mandate to evangelize in the present situation of unity in the multiplicity of cultures the Church will grapple anew with its own unity in multiplicity.

Now you know why Antipope Bergoglio demands the destruction of Europe and more specifically EUROPEAN CHRISTIAN CULTURE by trafficking in musloid conquerors.  Because this has been his master Walter Kasper’s agenda for decades.

Now let us turn to the book “The Theology of Walter Kasper: Speaking Truth in Love” published in ARSH 2014.

What I need is for our German readers to attack “Wozu noch einen Papst?”  I mean, the guy wrote an entire book called, “Why is there still a Pope?”  Do you think MAYBE there is something of interest and relevance in such a book?  And hey, no one else is going to do this, so either we do it, or it doesn’t get done.


“In the papacy, as in every church office, the authority of Jesus should take on a “Kenotic form.”

Kenosis is a Lutheran theology (shocker!) that uses Christ’s self-emptying (Philippians 2:7) to essentially deny the Social Kingship of Christ, and to demythologize at best and outright deny at worst, the Petrine Office. A King without a Kingdom, a Papacy with no authority.

Yep.  Walter Kasper, who is a proven liar (remember the Edward Pentin scandal when Kasper denied saying that the African bishops need not be paid any attention, except Pentin had recorded the whole thing on his phone and posted the audio file?  Pentin’s career would have been FINISHED had he not been able to rebut Kasper’s filthy lying mouth with the recorded audio.  Kasper was perfectly happy not just to lie through his teeth, but to destroy a man’s career, reputation and livelihood in the process) is at the very epicenter of the faux-abdication and subsequent usurpation by Antipope Bergoglio.  This whole thing is a Walter Kasper production.  Don’tcha think maybe someone should be asking some questions?

Blessed Emperor Karl and Servant of God Zita, pray for us!
St. Vincent Ferrer, pray for us!
St. Catherine of Siena, pray for us!
St. Peter, pray for us!

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us!

Barnhardt Podcast #071: Spam and Several Semi-related Sidebars

[Direct link to the MP3 file]

In this episode we discuss unsolicited commercial email — spam — before taking off on several semi-related tangents.

(SuperNerd is still updating the shownotes but doesn’t want to hold up the publishing anymore… check back for links on how to mirror Ann’s videos, how to recognize spam emails, what phishing and spear phishing are, how to find talks by Steve Rambam, and more.)

Feedback: please send your questions, comments, and suggestions to [email protected]

The Barnhardt Podcast is produced by SuperNerd Media; if you found this episode to be of value you can share some value to back to SuperNerd at the SuperNerd Media website. You can also follow SuperNerd Media on Twitter.

Do the BigMac Maneuver!

Click here for The Stale Big Mac Maneuver

Listen on Google Play Music

Jorge Bergoglio’s “Other Gustavo”: Why Bergoglio Elevated, Placed and Now Protects Zanchetta

“Come give us a kiss, you naughty, naughty girl!”

The Associated Press’ Rome correspondent Nicole Winfield REALLY hates child molesters.  Hence her relative zeal for reporting on Antipope Bergoglio’s corruption.

Today she has broken the completely not-shocking news that Antipope Bergoglio knew of the formally lodged complaints of sodmitical predation (complete with naked selfies!) of one of his very favorite Argentinian prelates, Gustavo Zanchetta, for YEARS.  Of course he did.  Antipope Bergoglio elevated Zanchetta to the episcopacy almost immediately upon usurping the Petrine See in ARSH 2013.  And where did Antipope Bergoglio send his beloved Gustavo Zanchetta upon naming him a bishop?  To Oran, a backwater diocese Northwest of Buenos Aires on the Bolivian border, nestled at the base of the Andes.

So?  Antipope Bergoglio sent one of his pet sodomites to a backwater.  Why is that of any significance?

Because, as I have reported here and tried unsuccessfully to get actual journalists to pick up, Jorge Bergoglio, through his very, Very, VERY intimate “friend” Gustavo Vera (it is widely known in Argentina that Bergoglio and Vera were sodomite lovers – hence Bergoglio’s installation of Vera in the luxury hotel that Bergoglio lives in in the Vatican – a choice made not out of “humility”, but in order to facilitate “encounters of exquisite tenderness and caressing”) is up to his eyebrows in the trafficking of child sex slaves.  Gustavo Vera is known to essentially hold the monopoly on boy prostitutes working the gay bars of Buenos Aires.  Vera uses his racketeering front of heading an NGO dedicated to – wait for it – fighting child traffficking, and his drifting in and out of government office to A.) protect his monopoly pimping boys to sodomites in the gay bars by cracking down on freelance rent boys working in the streets outside the bars and B.) facilitate running his pipeline of children which are essentially bought from destitute Bolivian Indian peasants living in remote, high Andean mountain villages in Bolivia.

The fact that Antipope Bergoglio IMMEDIATELY put the boy-chasing sodomite (but I repeat myself) Gustavo Zanchetta in Oran, the critical bordertown on the Gustavo Vera child trafficking pipeline between Bolivia and Buenos Aires, is no surprise whatsoever.  The fact that there was a seminary there that Zanchetta was given license to use as his own personal harem/hunting ground was just a consolation for Zanchetta being sent to a backwater town.

Once Zanchetta’s flaming sodomite activities reached critical mass, with PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE, Antipope Bergoglio brought Zanchetta to Rome and installed him in a very plush position overseeing the Vatican’s massive real estate holdings in Rome.  Zanchetta now lives a life of luxury and no doubt gets as much sodomy as he wants with whatever AGE he wants.  Why?  Because he could blackmail the crap out of Bergoglio.

Why don’t Zanchetta and all of the rest of the filth blackmail Bergoglio?  Well, A.) in a sense, they already are.  They live in protected luxury and get all the sodomy (and drugs) that they want, so why jeopardize this form of mutually agreeable blackmail/quid pro quo?  And B.) Bergoglio is well-known in Argentina for enforcing his rule with contracted physical violence and being involved in political assassinations.  In short, like Archbishop Viganò, they all know that to cross Antipope Bergoglio is to take your life in your own hands.

I spoke to some journalists about picking up the Argentinian aspects of Jorge Bergoglio’s criminality, but all declined giving the extremely weak excuse that the whistleblowers are people with morally dubious backgrounds.  AS IF WHISTLEBLOWERS FROM THE CHILD PROSTITUTION SCENE IN BUENOS AIRES ARE GOING TO BE CLOISTERED CARMELITE NUNS????

The reason that Antipope Bergoglio has so very conspicuously NEVER traveled to Argentina as the “heroic son returning in glory” since usurping the papacy is because he is known as a wildly corrupt criminal and is HATED by the Argentinian people.  Bergoglio’s criminal and sodomitical activity is discussed OPENLY on Argentinian television.

But, as with so much these days, the preferred way to deal with this is to TURN A BLIND EYE.

Turning a blind eye is one of the most ubiquitous manifestations of effeminacy today, because confronting sin is perceived to be something that would “reduce one’s own personal pleasure or comfort” even though it is the right thing to do.  Turning a blind eye is also one of the NINE ways of cooperating in sin.


Huh.  I just noticed…. The talking points above are EXACTLY the same as those used by the people who refuse to acknowledge the substantially erroneous nature of Pope Benedict’s attempted partial abdication.  EXACTLY. THE. SAME.

Funny, that.

Here is a short compendium of posts I made last year, all sourced from Argentine readers (“The Argentine Armada”) who desperately want the truth about Antipope Bergoglio, which is so widely known and discussed in Argentina, to make it into the English-speaking world.











Hey, remember the last time the Freemasons tried to coerce a reigning monarch to abdicate – except he only renounced “participation in state affairs” and never abdicated?

Freemasonry exists for the purpose of destroying the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.  The explicit tactic in this, as openly stated by Freemasons is

1.) the destruction of all Monarchies, especially in Europe because European Monarchs were Catholic.  It started with France, and ended in November ARSH 1918 with the abdication of Charles I of Austria, now known as Blessed Karl and German Emperor Wilhelm II. Fascinatingly, Emperor Charles I did NOT abdicate.  He… wait for it… “RENOUNCED PARTICIPATION IN STATE AFFAIRS.”  That has an oddly familiar ring to it, no?

Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany warned the Archbishop of Cologne, Cardinal Felix von Hartmann, of the Freemasonic warplan, and Hartmann wrote a letter on November 8, ARSH 1918 to the Apostolic Nuncio (Vatican Ambassador) to Germany who was, at the time, Archbishop Eugenio Pacelli – who was to become Pope Pius XII in March of ARSH 1939.

The letter opened thusly:

“Your Excellency,

His Majesty the Emperor just has let it be known to me that, according to news that came to him yesterday, the Grand Orient [Freemasonic Lodge] has just decided first to depose all Sovereigns – first of all him, the Emperor – then to destroy the Catholic Church, to imprison the pope, etc., and finally to establish on the ruins of the former bourgeois society a world republic under the leadership of American Big Capital….”

Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany abdicated the next day, 9 November ARSH 1918, and Emperor Charles I of Austria “renounced participation in state affairs” two days after that, on 11 November.  Charles I DID NOT ABDICATE.

(Read more HERE at Maike Hickson’s piece from 2017.)

2.) the attempted destruction of the Papacy is the next necessary Freemasonic step in destroying the institutional Church and establishing a one world government and humanist religion.

Remember the piece posted just below this one in which the “demythologizing” of the Papacy is exposed as a buzzword in the Modernist agenda driven toward dissolving the Petrine Office – which is an Absolute Monarchy directly established by Christ Almighty – and replacing it with a counterfeit “collegial, synodal Petrine Ministry”?

In the piece just below that you will recall, Joseph Ratzinger opens his ARSH 1978 piece, Der Primat des Papstes und die Einheit des Gottesvolkes (The Primacy of the Pope and the unity of the People of God) with this paragraph:

Das Thema Papsttum gehört nicht zu den populären Themen der Nachkonzilzeit. Es hatte ein gewisses Maß an Selbstverständlichkeit, solange ihm in politischen Raum die Monarchie entsprach. In dem Augenblick, in dem der monarchische Gedanke praktisch erloschen und durch die demokratische Idee abgelöst ist, fehlt der Primatslehre das Bezugsfeld in unseren allgemeinen Denkvoraussetzungen. So ist es gewiß kein Zufall, daß das Erste Vatikanum von der Primatsidee, das Zweite aber von dem Ringen um den Begriff der Kollegialität beherrscht wurde.

“The topic of the papacy is not one of the popular themes of the post-conciliar era. It had a certain measure of implicitness as long as it corresponded to the monarchy in political space. At the present moment, when the idea of monarchy has practically died out and been replaced by the democratic idea, the doctrine of primacy lacks the frame of reference in our general presuppositions. So it is certainly no coincidence that the First Vatican Council was dominated by the primacy idea, but the Second by the struggle for the concept of collegiality.”

Ratzinger then continued on in the piece to implicitly accept the notion of the “expiry” of the monarchic model of the Papacy.  If you read Miller’s dissertation, you will clearly see that Ratzinger, even as the MOST CONSERVATIVE voice in the bunch, has still fallen for this lie, planted in the German academic zeitgeist by Freemasons decades before, and really dating back to the Lutheran Revolt itself.

Let’s look back now to Pope Leo XIII and his explicit warning of this Freemasonic treachery given in his Encyclical Letter on Freemasonry “Humanus Genus”.  Let’s blockquote paragraph 15:

15. But against the apostolic see and the Roman Pontiff the contention of these enemies has been for a long time directed. The Pontiff was first, for specious reasons, thrust out from the bulwark of his liberty and of his right, the civil princedom; soon, he was unjustly driven into a condition which was unbearable because of the difficulties raised on all sides; and now the time has come when the partisans of the sects openly declare, what in secret among themselves they have for a long time plotted, that the sacred power of the Pontiffs must be abolished, and that the papacy itself, founded by divine right, must be utterly destroyed. If other proofs were wanting, this fact would be sufficiently disclosed by the testimony of men well informed, of whom some at other times, and others again recently, have declared it to be true of the Freemasons that they especially desire to assail the Church with irreconcilable hostility, and that they will never rest until they have destroyed whatever the supreme Pontiffs have established for the sake of religion.

For those of you who have spent the $9 and bought the online version of J. Michael Miller’s doctoral dissertation and read even the tiniest section of it, four words in that pullquote from Pope Leo XIII will have jumped off the page at you.  Those four words: FOUNDED BY DIVINE RIGHT.

Miller’s dissertation is a 300 page discussion of the difference between TWO sets of terms:

MUNUS (Office) ——— MINISTERIUM (ministry/function)

IUS DIVINUM (Divine Law) ————- IUS HUMANUM (Human Law)

These terms are then applied to the concepts of REVERSIBILITY and MUTABILITY, namely, can the Papacy be reversed – that is, TOTALLY ABOLISHED (Kung and Neumann said “yes”, most others, “no”) and can the Papacy be CHANGED, even radically (nearly all cited said “yes”, and not only “yes”, but “yes, and it MUST be changed”).

Which brings us to just yesterday, wherein VaticanNews itself glowingly reported on Antipope Bergoglio’s letter to the “Pontifical Academy for Life” which was pure, unadulterated Freemasonic agitprop.  Understand that Freemasonry is the worship of man (humanism), of man as god-in-the-making.  Humanism is the very name of this wicked false religion.  “Fraternity” and “Equality” are the mantras Freemasons use to advance toward their goal of a tandem one world government and religion.  Now look at Antipope Bergoglio’s remarks, reported and posted on the VaticanNews website under the headline, “Pope (sic) to Academy for Life: Promote Humanism of Fraternity”:

A difficult task for the Church

In response, the Pope (sic) said, the Church is called to react against the negativity that “foments division, indifference, and hostility.” This is a difficult task for the Church, which is in danger of failing to recognize the gravity of the contemporary emergency. “It’s time,” he said, “for a new vision aimed at promoting a humanism of fraternity and solidarity between individuals and peoples.”

In the video below, recorded in October of ARSH 2013, Auntie Blanche McCarrick, serial lifelong sacriligious sodomite predator, says the following:

“About, maybe, just before we went into the general conversations when everybody could talk, a very interesting and influential Italian gentleman came, asked to come to see me, and I said “Sure”, and he came to see me at the seminary, at the American College, where I was staying.  We sat down. This was a very brilliant man.  Very influential man in Rome. And he, we talked about a number of things. He had a favor to ask me from back home in the United States.  But then he said, “What about Bergoglio?” And I was surprised at the question.  I said, “What about him?” He said, “Does he have a chance?” I said, “I don’t think so, cause I, no one’s mentioned his name. He hasn’t been in … I don’t think its on anybody’s mind to vote for him.” He said, “He could do it, you know.” I said, “What could he do?” He said, “He could reform the Church.” He gave him five years, he could put us back on target.  “He’s 76.” He goes, “Yeah, five years.  If he had five years, if the Lord working through Bergoglio in five years could make the Church over again.” I said, “That’s an interesting thing.” He said, “I know you’re his friend.” I said, “I hope I am.” He said, “Talk him up.”


But NAH, there’s nothing to see here, folks.  There is absolutely no evidence of anything whatsoever so shut up stupid insane schismatic stupid crazy stupid crazy stupid schismatic! 

Like St. Vincent Ferrer, I think that in these days we should especially enjoin as intercessors Blessed Karl (Charles I of Austria) and his wife Zita, who is now a Servant of God.  They lived being forced out of their rightful monarchical state by the Freemasons, but Blessed Charles, with Zita at his side, stood firm and refused to abdicate.  How can they but be powerful advocates and intercessors in these dark days now that the Freemasonic plot that forced them from their rightful throne has now reached its ultimate target of the Petrine See itself?  Personally, I could kick myself for not making this connection sooner.  Here is a lovely picture of their wedding day.  By all accounts they were truly beautiful people, both inside and out.

Blessed Karl and Servant of God Zita, pray for us!
St. George, pray for us!
St. Joan of Arc, pray for us!
St. Michael the Archangel, pray for us!

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us!

The “Demythologizing” of the Papacy Means the Attempted Dissolution of the Petrine Office (Munus) in Preparation for the Antichurch with only Human “Ministries” Devoid of Grace

The importance of the precision between the terms “munus” (OFFICE) and “ministerium” (MINISTRY) can not be overstated.

Have you bought and read Archbishop J. Michael Miller’s ARSH 1979 doctoral dissertation, “The Divine Right of the Papacy in Recent Ecumenical Theology” yet?  The text is a 300 page Rosetta Stone – in AMERICAN ENGLISH, no less – on the 20th Century mostly-German madness (although the American Cardinal Dulles figures in) to “fundamentally transform” the Papacy precisely along the lines of OFFICE vs MINISTRY.  My paper copy has arrived, so it is now much easier to flip through and cross-reference the text, and what has absolutely leapt out at me ties together a quote by +Fulton Sheen, a quote from +Ganswein’s infamous May 20, ARSH 2016 speech at the Gregorianum in Rome, and the news that just broke that Antipope Bergoglio is ordering the final, complete dissolution of the Papal Household, which until Paul VI changed its name was called since the SECOND CENTURY the “Papal Court.”

The key term that just keeps cropping up is “DEMYTHOLOGIZE”.  As in, “demythologize the papacy”.

DEMYTHOLOGIZE:  reinterpret (a subject) so that it is free of mythical or heroic elements; reinterpret what are considered to be mythological elements of (the Bible)

In so-called “ecumenical” circles, it was the Lutheran heretic Rudolf Bultmann who brought the term to prominence in the early 20th century, having said, “We cannot use electric lights and radios and, in the event of illness, avail ourselves of modern medical and clinical means and at the same time believe in the spirit and wonder world of the New Testament.”

Speak for yourself there, Rudy.

+Miller’s dissertation is 300 pages of arguing the necessity of demythologizing the Papacy for the sake of “ecumenical unity” by moving away from the notion of the Petrine Office as a divinely instituted, unchangeable monarchy and focusing instead on the changeable “Petrine ministry” which is continually “emerging” through the workings of “the Spirit”.  (I get the feeling that “the Spirit” ain’t who most people think….) Miller’s concluding section (pages 285-287) titled “Recommendations For Future Dialogue” contains such nuggets as:

”First, ecumenical dialogue might well gain in clarity if the term “ius divinum” is abandoned in the future.”


”A second term to be avoided is ‘the primacy’. Because it can refer to either Petrine primacy or to papal primacy, it is ambiguous. We recommend therefore that the term ius divinum be replaced, and that the Petrine function always be distinguished from its realization in the historic papacy.”


”Thirdly, the consequences of agreeing to accept a Petrine function should be drawn out to show its ecumenical significance.  This allows non-Catholics to reconsider their present need for a ministry of unity directed to the universal church, without limiting their reflections to the present form of papacy.”


”Catholics must ask themselves whether the papal ministry must necessarily be exercised as it has been in the past and is in the present.”


The “demythologizing” of the Papacy has cropped up as a trendy buzzterm, and we see it used by no less than +Ganswein himself, in his May ARSH 2016 speech, which was approved by Pope Benedict:

”It was “the least expected step in contemporary Catholicism,” Regoli writes, and yet a possibility [Papal retirement] which Cardinal Ratzinger had already pondered publicly on August 10, 1978 in Munich, in a homily on the occasion of the death of Paul VI. Thirty-five years later, he has not abandoned the Office of Peter — something which would have been entirely impossible for him after his irrevocable acceptance of the office in April 2005. By an act of extraordinary courage, he has instead renewed this office (even against the opinion of well-meaning and undoubtedly competent advisers), and with a final effort he has strengthened it (as I hope). Of course only history will prove this. But in the history of the Church it shall remain true that, in the year 2013, the famous theologian on the throne of Peter became history’s first “pope emeritus.” Since then, his role — allow me to repeat it once again — is entirely different from that, for example, of the holy Pope Celestine V, who after his resignation in 1294 would have liked to return to being a hermit, becoming instead a prisoner of his successor, Boniface VIII (to whom today in the Church we owe the establishment of jubilee years). To date, in fact, there has never been a step like that taken by Benedict XVI. So it is not surprising that it has been seen by some as revolutionary, or to the contrary as entirely consistent with the Gospel; while still others see the papacy in this way secularized as never before, and thus more collegial and functional or even simply more human and less sacred. And still others are of the opinion that Benedict XVI, with this step, has almost — speaking in theological and historical-critical terms — demythologized the papacy.

Now, let’s tie it all together with the famous quote from +Fulton Sheen on the Antichrist and the Antichurch:

“He will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of the Church, because he, the Devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the Antichrist that will in all externals resemble the mystical body of Christ. . . .”

That’s the key, right there.  That is why the words “munus” and “ministerium” matter so very much.  In the context of the Papacy, the OFFICE is DIVINELY INSTITUTED and is protected by a specific and unique SUPERNATURAL GRACE.

Now, think about the Antichurch.  The Antichurch, by definition is NOT Divinely instituted – it is exactly the opposite, it is set up by satan.  Therefore, the Antichurch will contain NO DIVINELY INSTITUTED OFFICES, only man-made “ministries”, including its visible head or heads – its Antipope/s.

Pope Benedict XVI went out of his way to say he was NOT resigning the Petrine OFFICE, but only the “active ministry”.  +Ganswein confirms this repeatedly and in no uncertain terms above.

Now we have Antipope Bergoglio, who EVERY DAY has even the “elect” denying the GRACE OF STATE and UNIQUE SUPERNATURAL PROTECTION of the Papacy, because that is the only way they can hold the false premise of Bergoglio being the Pope, which they are for various and sundry reasons desperate to do. (Ahem, MONEY, ahem, careerism, ahem, EFFEMINACY)

So, what has happened over the past almost six years, is that the entire world, including the so-called “elect” have become completely desensitized to and even vicious partisans and defenders of the false notion of a “papacy” devoid of any supernatural grace.  DEMYTHOLOGIZATION!!

In other words, the pump has been totally primed for the full manifestation of the graceless, satanically instituted Antichurch with “even the Elect” merrily skipping into it, and congratulating themselves as they go for their “theological sophistication and dazzlingly humble submission to authority”.

Anyone who DARES point out that Antipope Bergoglio CLEARLY, OBVIOUSLY does NOT enjoy the GRACE OF STATE promised by Christ Himself to the Petrine OFFICE, ius divinum, is browbeaten, gaslighted, calumniated – whatever.  Every time you read a so-called “Trad Catholic” talking head arguing that Antipope Bergoglio is “in bounds”, “totally within historical precedent” and that “maybe Vatican I was wrong” and that having faith in the supernatural protection and grace of state attached to the PETRINE OFFICE, which, remember, Pope Benedict went out of his way to NOT resign, is some sort of manifestation of stupidity, insanity, affective immaturity or “hyper-Uber-ultramontanism”, realize what is going on.  +Fulton Sheen nailed it.  Everything in the Antichurch MUST be devoid of Divine content.  Including its head/s.  But we know that many of the “elect” will be deceived by it.  Thus, the “elect” MUST come to accept a thing they wrongly call “the papacy” that is totally devoid of supernatural grace, and not only that, but ACTIVELY REJECT THE TRUE POPE.

Now, to news that broke just the other day: Antipope Bergoglio is looking to dissolve the Papal Household/Papal Court.  Of course he is.  Because this is all part of the satanic pogrom of trying to convince the world that the PETRINE OFFICE, a DIVINELY INSTITUTED AND SUPERNATURALLY PROTECTED MONARCHICAL OFFICE no longer exists. Only a “synodal ministry”.


Except it does exist, and will continue to exist. No matter what they try to do.

St. Peter, pray for us.

Monarch. Not myth.

THERMONUCLEAR SUBSTANTIAL ERROR: In 1978 Joseph Ratzinger considered hypothesis that a monarchical Papacy was intrinsically “Arian” in nature, and the Papacy should reflect the Trinity, a “Pope-Troika” consisting of One Catholic, One Protestant and One Orthodox, “through which the papacy, the chief annoyance of non-Catholic Christendom, must become the definitive vehicle for the unity of all Christians.”

St. Vincent Ferrer came through.  Quickly.  Less than 24 hours after my post enjoining his prayers went up, this stupefying citation with translation landed in my email box from the German readership.

Here is the trail of breadcrumbs:

-I posted a screen cap and citation from the opening of Chapter 8 of J. Michael Miller’s doctoral thesis citing Walter Kasper.  The quote was, “The present crisis of the papacy is one of legitimation.”  

-This quote of Kasper’s was drawn from a work called “Dienst an der Einheit”, page 83.

-“Dienst an der Einheit”, which means, “Service to Unity”, is a collection of papers edited by…wait for it… JOSEPH RATZINGER.  So Kasper’s quote was EDITED BY RATZINGER.

One of the contributuions to “Dienst an der Einheit” is a paper written by Joseph Ratzinger himself, titled “Der Primat des Papstes und die Einheit des Gottesvolkes” which is in English, “The Primacy of the Pope and the Unity of the People of God.”

Here now blockquoted is the original German and English translation (translated by hand by a fully bilingual German reader – NOT an algorithmic translation) of the opening section of this paper, found on pages 165-167:


Der Primat des Papstes und die Einheit des Gottesvolkes

The Primacy of the Pope and the unity of the People of God.

  1. I. Der spirituelle Grund von Primat und Kollegialität
    (The spiritual basis of primacy and collegiality)

Das Thema Papsttum gehört nicht zu den populären Themen der Nachkonzilzeit. Es hatte ein gewisses Maß an Selbstverständlichkeit, solange ihm in politischen Raum die Monarchie entsprach. In dem Augenblick, in dem der monarchische Gedanke praktisch erloschen und durch die demokratische Idee abgelöst ist, fehlt der Primatslehre das Bezugsfeld in unseren allgemeinen Denkvoraussetzungen. So ist es gewiß kein Zufall, daß das Erste Vatikanum von der Primatsidee, das Zweite aber von dem Ringen um den Begriff der Kollegialität beherrscht wurde.

The topic of the papacy is not one of the popular themes of the post-conciliar era. It had a certain measure of implicitness as long as it corresponded to the monarchy in political space. At the present moment, when the idea of monarchy has practically died out and been replaced by the democratic idea, the doctrine of primacy lacks the frame of reference in our general presuppositions. So it is certainly no coincidence that the First Vatican Council was dominated by the primacy idea, but the Second by the struggle for the concept of collegiality.

Dem ist freilich sofort hinzuzufügen, daß das Zweite Vatikanum die Kollegialitätsidee, mit der es Impulse aus dem Lebensgefühl der Gegenwart aufnahm, so zu umschreiben suchte, daß darin der Primatsgedanke enthalten ist. Heute, da wir ein wenig Erfahrung mit der Kollegialität, mit ihrem Wert und auch mit ihren Grenzen gewonnen haben, müssen wir wohl gerade an dieser Stelle wieder ansetzen, um die Zusammengehörigkeit scheinbar gegenläufiger Traditionen besser zu begreifen und so den Reichtum der christlichen Gestalt zu wahren.

It should, however, be immediately added that Vatican II sought to rewrite the idea of collegiality, with which it received incentives from today’s attitude to life, in such a way that it contained the idea of primacy. Today, as we have gained a little experience of collegiality, of its value, and also of its limits, we need to start again at this point in order to better understand the unity of seemingly contradictory traditions, thus preserving the richness of the Christian expression.

1. Kollegialität als Ausdruck der Wir-Struktur des Glaubens

Collegiality as an expression of the we-structure of the faith

In Zusammenhang mit der konziliaren Debatte hatte seinerzeit die Theologie versucht, Kollegialität über das bloß Strukturelle und Funktionale hinaus als Ausdruck eines bis in die innersten Wesensgründe des Christlichen zurückreichenden Grundgesetzes zu erfassen, das sich daher in je verschiedener Weise auf den einzelnen Ebenen der praktischen Verwirklichung des Christlichen darstellt: Es ließ sich zeigen, daß die Wir-Struktur zum Christlichen überhaupt gehört. Der Glaubende steht als solcher nie allein: Gläubigwerden heißt, aus der Isolation heraustreten in das Wir der Kinder Gottes; der Akt der Zuwendung zu dem in Christus offenbaren Gott ist immer auch Zuwendung zu den schon Gerufenen.

In connection with the conciliar debate, theology had tried at that time to grasp collegiality beyond the merely structural and functional, as the expression of a fundamental law reaching back into the innermost essence of the Christian, which therefore presents itself in different ways on the individual levels of the practical realization of the Christian: It could be shown that the we-structure belongs to the Christian in general. The believer, as such, never stands alone: Believing means stepping out of isolation into the We of the children of God; the act of devotion to the God revealed in Christ is always also devotion to those already called.

Der theo-logische Akt ist als solcher immer ein ekklesialer Akt, dem auch eine soziale Struktur eignet. Die Initiation ins Christliche ist daher konkret immer auch Sozialisation in die Gemeinde der Gläubigen hinein, ist Wir-Werdung, die das bloße Ich überschreitet.

As such, the theo-logical act is always an ecclesial act that also lends itself to a social structure. The initiation into the Christian is therefore always concrete socialization in the community of believers, is We-Formation, which is beyond the mere self.

Dem entsprach dann, daß die Jünger-Berufung Jesu sich in der Figur der Zwölf darstellt, die die Chiffre des alten Gottes-Volk-Gedankens aufnimmt, dem ja auch wiederum wesentlich ist, daß Gott eine gemeinsame Geschichte schafft und an seinem Volk als Volk handelt.

This corresponded to the fact that the disciples’ calling by Jesus is represented in the figure of the Twelve, which takes up the cipher of the old conception of God’s people, to whom it is once again essential that God creates a common history and acts on his people as a people.

Nach der anderen Seite zu zeigte sich als der tiefste Grund für diesen Wir-Charakter des Christlichen, daß Gott selbst ein Wir ist: Der Gott, den das christliche Credo bekennt, ist nicht einsames Selbst-denken des Gedankens, ist nicht absolutes und unteilbar in sich geschlossenes Ich, sondern ist Einheit in der trinitarischen Relation des Ich-Du-Wir, so daß das Wir-Sein als die göttliche Grundgestalt allem weltlichen Wir vorangeht und Gottebenbildlichkeit sich von vornherein auf solches Wir-Sein verwiesen findet.

On the other hand, as the deepest reason for this we-character of the Christian, it has become apparent that God Himself is a We: The God, whom the Christian Credo professes, is not solitary self-thinking of thought, is not absolute and indivisible in a self-contained ego, but is unity in the Trinitarian relation of the I-Thou-We, so that We-Being, as the divine basic form, precedes all worldly We’s, and the likeness of God finds itself referenced from the outset to such a We-being.

In diesem Zusammenhang rückte damals ein zuvor weithin vergessener Traktat von E. Peterson über “Monotheismus als politisches Problem” neu in Bewußtsein, in dem Peterson zu zeigen versucht hatte, daß der Arianismus deshalb politische, von den Kaisern begünstigte Theologie war, weil er zur politischem Monarchie die göttliche Entsprechung gewährleistete, während das Obsiegen des trinitarischen Glaubens die politische Theologie zersprengte und Theologie als Rechtfertigung von politischer Monarchie aufhob.

In this context, a previously largely forgotten treatise by E. Peterson on “Monotheism as a Political Problem,” again attracted attention, in which Peterson had attempted to show that Arianism was a political theology favored by the emperors, because it provided the divine equivalent of the political monarchy, whereas the triumph of the Trinitarian faith shattered political theology and overturned theology as a justification for political monarchy.

Peterson hatte seine Darlegung an dieser Stelle abgebrochen; jetzt wurde sie aufgenommen und zu einem neuen Entsprechungsdenken weitergeführt, dessen Grundansatz lautete: Dem Wir Gottes muß kirchliches Handeln im Modell des Wir entsprechen. Dieser allgemeine, vielfältig ausdeutbare Ansatz wurde vereinzelt bis zu der Aussage vorangetrieben, demgemäß folge die Ausübung des Primats durch einen einzigen Menschen, den Papst in Rom, eigentlich einem arianischen Modell.

Peterson had broken off his analysis at this point; now it was taken up and continued into a new analogical thought, the basic idea being that the We of God must correspond to ecclesiastical agency according to the We model. This general, multi-faceted approach has occasionally been advanced to the point that according to it, the exercise of primacy by a single man, the pope in Rome, actually follows an Arian model.

Entsprechend der Dreipersönlichkeit Gottes müsse auch die Kirche durch ein Dreierkollegium geleitet werden, dessen drei Inhaber zusammen der Papst seien. Dabei fehlte es nicht an findigen Spekulationen, die (etwas unter Anlehnung an Solowjews Geschichte vom Antichrist) herausfanden, daß auf diese Weise ein römischer Katholik, ein Orthodoxer und ein Christ aus dem Bereich der reformatorischen Bekenntnisse zusammen die Papst-Troika bilden könnten.

According to the triune nature of God, the church must be led by a triumvirate, whose three occupants together are the pope. It was not lacking in resourceful speculation, which (somewhat following Solovyov’s story of the Antichrist) found that, in this way, a Roman Catholic, an Orthodox and a Christian from the Reformation confessions together could form the Pope-Troika.

Damit schien, unmittelbar aus der Theo-logie, dem Gottesbegriff, die Schlußformel der Ökumene gefunden, die Quadratur des Kreises geleistet, durch die das Papsttum, Hauptärgernis der nicht-katholischen Christenheit, zum definitiven Vehikel für die Einheit aller Christen werdem müßte.*SEE FOOTNOTE

Thus, directly from theology, the concept of God, the complimentary close of ecumenism, seemed to have squared the circle, through which the papacy, the chief annoyance of non-Catholic Christendom, must become the definitive vehicle for the unity of all Christians.

*FOOTNOTE (*(Derlei war gelegentlich in mündlichen Äußerunger zu hören, die sich vergröbernd auf Ausführungen von H. Mühlen beziehen mochten, bes. in dessen Werk Entsakralisierung, Paderborn 1971, 228 ff.; 240 ff.; 376-396; 401-440.Obwohl Mühlens eigene Darlegungen beeindrückend und weiterführend sind, scheinen sie mir von der Gefahr eines neuen Entsprechungsdenkens nicht frei, das die ekklesiologische Anwendbarkeit der trinitarischen Aussage überdehnt.)

*FOOTNOTE (This was occasionally heard in oral remarks, which sought to refer in an unrefined manner to H. Mühlen’s work, especially in his work Entsakralisierung, Paderborn 1971, 228 ff.; 240 ff.; 376-396; 401-440.Although Mühlen’s own expositions are impressive and advanced, they do not seem to me to be free from the danger of a new analogical thought which overstretches the ecclesiological applicability of the trinitarian statement.)


So, he we have proof of Joseph Ratzinger, like his German and Nouvelle Theologie colleagues and peers of the day, positing RADICALLY SUBSTANTIALLY ERRONEOUS IDEAS about the Petrine Office, casually referring to it as an “annoyance”, and echoing Kasper’s words that the papacy suffered a “crisis of legitimation”.  The driving point was that the papacy MUST be “radically and fundamentally transformed” by some sort of expansion into a “collegial, synodal office”.  He we see Joseph Ratzinger taking this SUBSTANTIALLY ERRONEOUS MADNESS so far as the say that the Petrine Ministry could eventually include NON-CATHOLICS and thus become the “definitive vehicle for the unity of all Christians.”  But first, it has to be “expanded” into a “collegial, synodal ministry”.


THIS is what Canon 188 was written to protect against.  THIS is why the “substantial error” clause is there.  So that when this MADNESS was attempted or even approached, that it would FAIL SPECTACULARLY.  Why?  Because the CHURCH IS INDEFECTIBLE.  Because the Petrine Office is SUPERNATURALLY PROTECTED.  Because the very act of attempting to execute such madness would nullify the attempt in and of itself, and the situation would just keep reverting to the status quo – the Papacy as established by Christ.

There is absolutely NOTHING that Pope Benedict XVI or anyone else can ever, ever do to successfully effectuate this abject madness described by Ratzinger above or anything remotely related to it, because Canon Law itself is standing like a monolith protecting Holy Mother Church and the Petrine Office from this.  They can drive headlong into that monolith as hard as they like, but they will never, ever so much as leave a SCRATCH on Holy Mother Church, Indefectible, nor can they EVER “fundamentally transform” the Petrine Office, Divinely Instrituted by Jesus Christ Himself, and thus IMMUTABLE.

Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger is the one and only living Pope, whether he likes it or not.  The illegitimacy of his attempted “transformation and expansion” of the Papacy in February ARSH 2013 was completely and totally null, and he remains, per Canon 188, the one and only living Pope.

This madness MUST end here, and be resisted with every fiber of our being.  Every journalist, blogger, priest and bishop of good will should be bombarded with communiques every day from every mere pew sitter, to DEMAND that the illegitimacy and SUBSTANTIAL ERROR of Pope Benedict’s attempted action in February 2013 be fully exposed and acknowledged, and that Antipope Bergoglio be immediately removed, the Bergoglian Antipapacy totally nullified, and Bergoglio be repatriated to Argentina, hopefully to face civil charges for financial, political and child abuse-enabling crimes.

Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger should be given either the option to repent and resume his exercise of the Petrine Office, OR be asked to live out his earthly life in prayer and seclusion, with an emergency “state of suspense” regency established to pay the electricity bills and other bare necessities of the Vatican City State.  While Popes CAN validly resign, at this point I think that there would be too much suspicion and uncertainty surrounding a resignation now submitted by Pope Benedict, that the path forward IN PRUDENCE is CLEARLY that NO CONCLAVE should be called until Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger has died, in God’s good time.  That just seems like common sense to me.  Let there be NO AMBIGUITY NOR CONFUSION.

There will certainly be more to be said about this.

I hope this helps.

St. Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.
St. Catherine of Siena, pray for us.
St. Athanasius, pray for us.
St. Peter, pray for us.
Holy Family, pray for us.

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us.

Our Advocate in Exposing the Bergoglian Antipapacy: St. Vincent Ferrer – the Saint Who Backed an Antipope (for a time)

Thanks to one and all for the kind words and encouragement as we make strides in this effort to expose the Bergoglian Antipapacy and defend Holy Mother Church, the Divinely Instituted Petrine Office, the one and only Living Pope, Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger, and to hopefully keep others in the Church Militant from falling into despair, sedevacantism or even being misled or browbeaten into embracing the Antichurch and its wretched mascot, Antipope Jorge Bergoglio.

I want to encourage one and all to enjoin a saint in this battle who, I think, is probably more solicitous to this cause than perhaps any other – St. Vincent Ferrer. I often pair St. Vincent Ferrer with St. Catherine of Siena because they were contemporaries who were backing two different men as Pope for a time. As it turned out, St. Catherine was right and St. Vincent was wrong, and it is precisely because St. Vincent was wrong that we should seek his intercession.

The confusion about the identity of the true pope in St. Vincent’s day was a political question. St. Vincent never backed a raging heretic, nor would he have. Let that be said and well understood. However, St. Vincent was lied to and misled, and thus, for a time, called an antipope “Pope” and commemorated an Antipope at the Te Igitur every day as he celebrated Mass. St. Vincent was such a holy man that he continued to perform spectacular miracles even while he was mistakenly commemorating an Antipope.

When the truth was fully exposed, and the controversy surrounding the identity of the Pope resolved, St. Vincent corrected his error immediately. But, can you imagine how St. Vincent felt knowing that he had commemorated an antipope hundreds of times in the Mass? Even though St. Vincent’s mistake was a completely honest one, and others had deceived him, being such a holy man, he must have felt awful. No one sane is ever happy to have made a mistake, even an honest one.

Given this, can you imagine how solicitous St. Vincent is for ALL OF US in these days? Can you imagine how keenly he wants to intercede for the correction of the people who are wrong, and how much he wants to intercede in assistance to and support of those who are right? And because St. Vincent has the Beatific Vision, he has all information and knows EXACTLY what the truth is.

Please join me in asking for St. Vincent Ferrer’s intercession as we fight for Holy Mother Church, the Petrine Office, the Pope, and for our fellow man.

St. Vincent Ferrer, Giovanni Bellini, ARSH 1465, Church of Sts. John and Paul, Venice

Don’t forget the Matthew 17:20 Initiative as well: full fasting twice per week and daily prayer that:

-the Bergoglian Antipapacy be publicly acknowledged, that Antipope Bergoglio be removed and the entire Antipapacy be publicly nullified.

-Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger be publicly acknowledged as having been the one and only living Pope since April ARSH 2005.

-Jorge Bergoglio repent, revert to Catholicism, eventually die in a state of grace and someday achieve the Beatific Vision.

-Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger repent, eventually die in a state of grace and someday achieve the Beatific Vision.

St. Vincent Ferrer, pray for us!

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us!

So… What is it going to take, exactly?

Yep. The OFFICIAL logo of Antipope Bergoglio’s upcoming pollution of Morocco is a warped Cross INSIDE the crescent moon. And they openly, proudly acknowledge this. No conspiracy THEORIES here, folks. Just Conspiracy Facts.

“Antipope Bergoglio, Vicar of Soros, Servant of Satan.”

Pray for Pope Benedict XVI, and if I may ask, for efforts and initiatives coming to fruition on this end. “Act, and God will act.” No truer words, folks. No truer words. The Tiny Toe…doth wiggle. To-and-fro, to-and-fro….

We Are All the More Blameworthy, Because So Little Would Be Needed On Our Part…

“To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe.

In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind.

This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good.

Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful.

After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted.

Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: “Have confidence; I have overcome the world.”

Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace.

Pope Leo XIII
Paragraph 14

Folks, anyone who tells your that we should not proactively fight the evil in the Church and the world because it would be “too human” and thus deprive God of a chance to intervene supernaturally is basically preaching Calvinistic double predestination heresy, and should be ignored.

God delays in intervening supernaturally precisely so that we may STAND UP FOR HIM, so that we may, in a certain sense, “come to His aid”, thus giving us the chance to be truly happy in this world – the true happiness that comes only from doing the right thing.

He’s waiting.  He has been waiting for all of our lives.  How much longer He will wait, none of us knows.  But at some point, the chance will pass, and when it is gone, it will be gone forever.

Big God, Tiny Toes

Happy Feast of the Epiphany!

This is one of my favorite paintings, and today is the feast of its depiction: the Epiphany, or Adoration of the Magi.  This painting makes me smile every time I see it.  I love the depiction of Our Lady because she is so very beautiful. (Sometimes the Blessed Virgin in paintings is depicted as… maybe not what I would consider jaw-droppingly gorgeous – but in this painting she is.) But the Star of this Show is the Baby Jesus – and His Big Toe.

Adoration of the Magi, Ottavio Vannini, early 1600s, Florence

When I look at this image, it seems not like a painting to me, but like a .GIF.  What do I mean by that?  I can see the movement of Our Lord’s toe as He is wiggling it, and I can see the subtle smile come across Our Lady’s face as she looks down at the scene of the very serious and lofty king leaning in to kiss the tiny toe of the Creator of the Universe and King of Kings, and He is PLAYFULLY wiggling it and making cooing baby sounds as the Magi puckers up and leans in to “get that Toe!” as so many of us have done exactly with other babies.

We have been discussing over the past few days the infinite HUGENESS of God, using galaxies and galactic clusters as metaphors for His infinite bigness and our infantesimal smallness.  I am reminded of something Our Lord said to St. Catherine of Siena, to whom, let us not forget, He was MYSTICALLY ESPOUSED.  Listen to His words to His beloved Catherine:

“Do you know, daughter, who you are, And who I AM? If you know these two things, you will be blessed. You are she who is not; whereas I AM HE WHO IS. Have this knowledge in you and the enemy will never deceive you….

God Almighty can say to His beloved, “you are she who is not” because it is true relative to Him, and because ALL EXISTENCE, REALITY AND TRUTH is through Him, with Him and in Him.

And that brings us back to the Tiny Wiggling Toe. It is precisely through these infinite juxtapositions that we draw closer to God in our contemplation of Him.  The selfsame God that created and sustains the galaxies, galactic clusters and the entire universe is also the cooing Baby wiggling His Big Toe at the Magi crawling on the ground to kiss It.  Without the Majesty of the Bigness, you can’t appreciate the Humility of the Smallness, and without the Condescension of the Smallness, you can’t appreciate the incomprehensible Love of the Bigness.

This is the same idea with the two species of Fear of the Lord – without the servile fear of the Lord as Our Judge, you can’t fully appreciate the filial fear that He established Himself with the words, “I no longer call you slaves, but friends….” The paradigm shifted with the Incarnation and proclamation of the Gospel from not sinning primarily for fear of punishment, to not sinning because He loves us so much that to disappoint or hurt Him in any way is (should be) revolting to us.

And likewise, without the filial fear of breaking Our Lord’s Heart, one can very easily cast aside the fact that He is, in fact, the Fearsome and Terrible Judge and He can turn into the horrific cartoon character “Jesus my Boyfriend”, or even worse, “Jesus my pet Golden Retriever”. People with no healthy servile fear of the Lord are called “cheap grace” Protestants, or just universal salvationists.

So what exactly is the Good News?  Is it that God is NOT the Just and Terrible Judge of Mankind who will sort the sheep from the goats, and sift men like wheat from chaff, burning the chaff?  No.  The Good News, the GOSPEL is that the Just and Terrible Judge is also the Baby wiggling His Tiny Toe as the Three Kings crawl forth to kiss It.  The Gospel is that the Just and Terrible Judge ALSO loves you infinitely, and is thus 100% on your side.  Do you understand that?  THE JUDGE IS ON YOUR SIDE TO AN EXTENT THAT YOU SIMPLY CANNOT COMPREHEND.

All you have to do is say “yes” to Him.  All you have to do is say and believe, “Jesus, I know that You love me”, and then ACTUALLY ACT LIKE YOU BELIEVE IT.  Keep His commandments.  Don’t break His heart.  Enter His One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Avail yourself of the Sacraments He established for YOU and YOUR SALVATION, most especially the Sacrament of Confession and the Sacrament of the Altar, which is His very Physical Substance.

Look at the Tiny Wiggling Toe.  Then go look up at the stars and galaxies and galactic clusters that He made and sustains without effort.  Put the two together and know that you are he who is not, and the Tiny Toe is HE WHO IS.

I hope this helps.

“I’m gonna get it! I’m gonna get that TOE!”