Featured post

Just in case…

[NB: While the blog post below — from over two years ago — was in relation to something else, with the Great YouTube Purge about to begin it’s handy to remember and, perhaps, apply. –SN]

As you might have noticed, the video of episode #007 of the Barnhardt Podcast was pulled because YouTube deemed it to be “hate speech.” Ann will be writing more about that but in the mean time if you would like to download all of the videos on Ann’s YouTube channel, here are the steps.

Warning: these steps are not for casual computer users; you need to be somewhat nerdy to pull off the following and I’m afraid neither Ann nor I can provide technical support. We only need a handful of folks to do the following, not everyone who follows her blog.

  1. Install youtube-dl (on Windows use Chocolatey; on macOS use Homebrew; on Linux–if you’re using Linux you already know)
  2. Install ffmpeg (again: Chocolatey, Brew, or your own cleverness depending on your O/S)
  3. Copy and paste the following text into your terminal of choice and grab some popcorn… this will take a little while (Windows: PowerShell; macOS: Terminal; Linux: depends on your religion/distro of choice):
    youtube-dl https://www.youtube.com/user/AnnBarnhardt/videos
  4. Send and email to [email protected] with the text “Youtube Channel Backed Up” in the subject line so we have a rolodex of folks to contact in case we need to rebuild the content of the YouTube channel at some point.

Hey, remember in ARSH 2014 when Gänswein said that Pope Benedict retains all the signs of the Papacy because “this corresponds to reality”?


Archbishop Georg Gänswein is pretty much the poster-boy for “gaslighting”. Gaslighting is a tactic used by Diabolical Narcissists and other malefactors in an attempt to silence and discredit those who call them out on their lies and schemes. This is the clinical definition:

“A form of mental abuse in which information is twisted or spun, selectively omitted to favor the abuser, or false information is presented with the intent of making victims doubt their own memory, perception, and sanity…Sociopaths frequently use gaslighting tactics. Sociopaths consistently transgress social mores, break laws, and exploit others, but typically, are also charming and convincing liars who consistently deny wrongdoing. Thus, some who have been victimized by sociopaths may doubt their perceptions.”

Okay. You’ve read my post from a few days ago on Gänswein’s double-down interview with German EWTN one week after his now-infamous watershed speech at the Gregorianum in Rome on 20 May ARSH 2016 outlining in lurid detail the canonical invalidity of Pope Benedict’s failed attempt to partially resign by “bifurcation” of the Petrine Office in which Gänswein 100% confirmed the Greg speech.


Now read Antonio Socci’s ARSH 2014 reportage of Gänswein ALREADY confirming that Pope Benedict retains the external signs of the Papacy because it “corresponds to reality”.

Now, look at Gänswein’s full-throttle gaslighting when asked about this by Diane Montagna of LifeSite News in February ARSH 2019. Look at Gänswein’s contemptuous dismissal of even ASKING about his own CLEAR WORDS as “absurd”.

Folks, gaslighting, like Jedi mind tricks, only work on the weak-minded. The very fact of Gänswein’s clearly mendacious attempts at gaslighting is, in and of itself, informative.

Something is very, very wrong, and Gänswein has revealed himself to be a totally untrustworthy player in this situation. I’ve been saying this for years now. Gänswein is in this treachery up to his eyebrows. Gänswein’s pathetic attempts at gaslighting betrays him as a facile liar at bare minimum.

Let us revisit the ever-more shockingly accurate words of Anne Catherine Emmerich:

July, 1820

“I saw the Holy Father surrounded by traitors and in great distress about the Church. He had visions and apparitions in his hour of greatest need. I saw many good pious Bishops; but they were weak and wavering, their cowardice often got the upper hand…Then I saw  darkness spreading around and people no longer seeking the true Church.”  

August 10, 1820

“I see the Holy Father in great anguish. He lives in a palace other than before and he admits only a limited number of friends near him. I fear that the Holy Father will suffer many more trials before he dies. I see that the false Church of darkness is making progress and I see the dreadful influence it has on the people. The Holy Father and the Church are verily in so great a distress that one must implore God night and day…”

“I have been told to pray much for the Church and the Pope…The people must pray earnestly for the extirpation (rooting out) of the dark church.”

“Last night I was taken to Rome where the Holy Father immersed in his sorrow, is still hiding to elude dangerous demands (made upon him). He is still very weak, and exhausted by sorrows, cares and prayers. He can now trust but few people. That is mainly why he is hiding. But he still has with him an aged priest who has much simplicity and godliness. He is his friend and because of his simplicity they did not think it would be worth removing him. But this man receives many graces from God. He sees and notices a great many things which he faithfully reports to the Holy Father. It was required of me to inform him while he was praying, of the traitors and evil doers who were to be found among the high ranking servants living close to him, so that he might be made aware of it.”

Pray for Pope Benedict XVI, the one and only living Roman Pontiff whether he likes it or not, the Papacy, and Holy Mother Church.

Our Lady Undoer of Knots, pray for us.

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us.


A Pious Reflection on the Latin Mass, which the Faithful May Use to Derive Spiritual Fruit


1 Enters the Sanctuary……Enters the Garden of Olives
2 Begins prayers at the foot of the Altar……Begins prayer in the Garden
3 Says the Confiteor……Falls down in agony, sweats blood
4 Goes to the Epistle side of the Altar……Is bound as a prisoner & led to Annas
5 Reads the Introit……Is falsely accused by Annas & blasphemed
6 Goes to the middle of the Altar, recites Kyrie Eleison……Is brought to Caiphas, is denied 3x by Peter
7 Turns to the people and says “Dominus Vobiscum“……Looks at Peter and converts him
8 Goes to the Roman Missal and reads the Collect and Epistle……Is brought to Pilate
9 Goes to the middle of the Altar, then to the Gospel side……Is taken to Herod and mocked
10 Returns to the middle of the Altar……
Is led back to Pilate


11 Unveils the Chalice……Is stripped of His garments
12 Offers the bread and wine……Is scourged at the Pillar
13 Covers the Chalice with the pall……Is crowned with thorns
14 Washes his hands at the Epistle side of the Altar……Is declared innocent by Pilate
15 Turns to the people and says “Orate Fratres”…..Is shown to the people by Pilate who says “Ecce Homo”
16 Prays in a low voice the Secret prayer……Is mocked and spat upon
17 Recites the Preface and Sanctus – bell is rung……Christ is condemned; Barabbas is freed


18 Makes the Commemoration of the Living……Carries the Cross to Calvary
19 Blesses the bread and wine with the sign of the cross 5x……Is nailed to the Cross


20 Consecrates the Host, adores and elevates It……Christ is raised on the Cross
21 Consecrates the Wine and elevates the Chalice……Blood of Christ flows from His wounds
22 Prays in a low voice……Hangs on the Cross; sees His Mother kneeling
23 Says aloud, “Nobis quote peccatoribus“……Prays for all mankind
24 Recites aloud the Pater Noster (Our Father)…..Speaks the Seven Last Words on the Cross
25 Fraction of the Sacred Host……Dies on the Cross
26 Drops a particle of the Host into the Chalice……Christ’s Soul descends into Limbo
27 Recites the Agnus Dei (“Lamb of God”)……Christ is acknowledged to be the Son of God by those standing beneath the Cross


28 Receives the Body and Blood of Christ……Christ’s Body is laid in the sepulcher
29 Cleans the Chalice……Christ’s Body is anointed in the sepulcher
30 Prepares the Chalice on the Altar again……Rises from the dead
31 Turns to the people and says, “Dominus vobiscum“……Appears to His Mother and Disciples
32 Reads Communion and Post Communion prayers…..Teaches for forty days
33 Turns to the people and says the last “Dominus vobiscum……Bids farewell to His Disciples
34 Says the “Ite Missa est“……Commissions the Apostles to preach the Gospel to all nations; ascends into heaven
35 Gives the blessing to the people……Sends down the Holy Ghost at Pentecost
36 Reads the Last Gospel…..Is preached and worshiped throughout the world as the Son of God made Man

New Video Released: Amazonian Rite Confirmation

Video has just been released of the new Confirmation ritual in the Antichurch’s Amazonian Rite.

This is pure gold.  There will be lines around the block for this! This would cost north of $350 in any spa. Pure marketing genius!!

  1. Molestation by a mixed green salad
  2. SCALP MASSAGE (!!) with an egg
  3. Magic rocks!
  4. Scary knife!
  5. Maracas!
  6. Flower petal exfoliation
  7. Aromatherapy massage
  8. Cervical spine adjustment
  9. Ripping hair out by the roots (flesh offering to Pachamama – she will NOT be ignored, Dan…)
  10. Hair deep conditioning treatment
  11. “Deaconess” spits Mad Dog 20/20 all over you

Petrine MUNUS vs. Ministry: “The two realities are, however, CONCEPTUALLY DISTINCT.”

First things first:  HAVE YOU BOUGHT AND READ J. MICHAEL MILLER’S BOOK, “The Divine Right of the Papacy in Recent Ecumenical Theology” YET?

If not, why not?  It costs NINE BUCKS, downloads in seconds, and can be read in one evening.  Why in the world would anyone engaged in this, the most important question in the world today NOT buy and read a text that addresses DIRECTLY as its core thesis this business of “fundamentally transforming the Petrine Office” into a “collegial, synodal Petrine Ministry” consisting of multiple people simultaneously, with Pope Benedict cited multiple times, along with his mentor (Rahner) and close colleagues at Tubingen (Neumann and Kung), and the man Antipope Bergoglio immediately made one of his closest “advisors” and lauded as his “favorite theologian”, Walter Kasper?  What possible, possible reason could there be to NOT drop the nine bucks and three hours to read this book?

What possible, possible reason could there be to NOT engage the dataset?

It should also be mentioned that this book by now-Archbishop J. Michael Miller is actually Miller’s DOCTORAL DISSERTATION.  He completed his doctorate at the Gregorianum in ARSH 1979, and the Greg thought SO HIGHLY of his dissertation that they published it under their own imprint. It has been explained to me that when a Pontifical University publishes a doctoral dissertation, it is a very, very high compliment – the equivalent of getting an “A” or “A+”.

So, when journalists confront +Miller about the contents of his text, which I’m SURE they will after the Christmas break (ahem, cough, cough, ahem), there is absolutely no way he can play dumb, because if there is one thing that a man never, ever forgets, it is the contents of his OWN doctoral thesis.

Speaking of which, let’s look today at the opening sentence of Chapter 8 in Miller’s dissertation, “Contemporary Catholic Views on Papal Primacy Iure Divino”:

”The present crisis of the papacy is one of legitimation. (Footnote 1)”


And what is Footnote 1?  Why, it is none other than WALTER KASPER.

So, it is taken for granted by Miller that the papacy is in the midst of a crisis, and the crisis is one of the LEGITIMACY of the papacy itself, and he cites Walter Kasper for this turn of phrase.

As in, the papacy AS IT STANDS is ILLEGITIMATE, and needs to somehow be “changed” and “fundamentally transformed” so that it ceases to be ILLEGITIMATE, and move towards LEGITIMATION.

If you buy and read Miller’s dissertation, you will see that the previous seven chapters are an agonizing analysis of two sets of terms:




”Irreversibility” is the question of whether or not the papacy can be TOTALLY ABOLISHED, that is, is the very existence of the Papacy irreversible in and of itself.  THE DEBATE AMONGST THE GERMAN THEOLOGIANS ON THIS QUESTION IS ROBUST, TO PUT IT MILDLY.  The fact that total abolition of the papacy was discussed at all, much less so widely and openly is a testament to how far gone the German theological scene was and is.

”Immutability” is the question of whether or not the Papacy can be CHANGED, you know, like “FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORMED”.  It was taken for granted by the German theologians that the papacy was NOT IMMUTABLE, and yes, COULD BE CHANGED, even radically.  Again, to be clear, it was the MODERATE position that yes, the papacy could be changed, but that the “Petrine Office” could not be totally abolished.  Thus, the MODERATE position would include MULIPLE PEOPLE SIMULTANEOUSLY EXERCISING DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THE PETRINE MINISTRY, ALL UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF AN EXPANDED PETRINE OFFICE.

Thus, Miller’s dissertation is saturated with discussion of the DIFFERENCE between the Petrine OFFICE and the Petrine MINISTRY/FUNCTION, because so-called “ecumenical dialogue” with Lutherans and Anglicans ABSOLUTELY PIVOTS ON THIS PRECISION BETWEEN the PETRINE “OFFICE” and “MINISTRY/FUNCTION”.

Let me now blockquote page 195 with the screen cap below.  I am going to type up the text so that it populates onto the web and search engines. Emphases mine.

Although in dealing with the origins of the papacy contemporary theologians emphasize the close relation between ius divinum and ius humanum, when considering the permanence of the papacy they stress rather the distinction between the changeable and immutable elements.  This distinction within papal primacy as an institution is often formulated in terms of relation between a central unchangeable nucleus and its realization in changeable and historical forms. Theological (Footnote 98), exegetical (Footnote 99), and historical studies (Footnote 100) all make use of a similar distinction in explaining why a revision in the exercise of primatial authority is possible.

Another way of making the same point is to distinguish between the Petrine ministry or function, and the Papacy.   A sign and instrument of unity is needed for the government of the Church.  This task corresponds to what is also called the nucleus of the papacy.  For these theologians the papacy has been, and is, the historical realization of the Petrine ministry. The two realities are, however, conceptually distinct.

Footnote 98:
Burns, “Communion, Councils, and Collegiality,” 172; Kasper, in “Ministero petrino,” 56, contrasts the “essenza” of an institution, namely the Petrine office, with “una ben determinata forma della sua realizzazione;” McDonnell, “Papal Primacy,” 185-186; Thils in Primaute Pontificale, 171, distinguishes between “fond” and “forme.”  Rahner’s terminology varies, but he certainly hold that, although the papacy is iure divino, this does not exclude the possibility that “in the future the papacy, while retaining its basic ‘generic form’, will be able to present quite a different ‘image’ (if we may so express it) from that to which we have hitherto been accustomed” (“Basic Observations,” 18). Cf. Rahner, “Demokratie in der Kirche?” 8; Rahner, “Kirchliche Wandlungen,” 514; and Rahner, “Open Questions on Dogma,” 219.

Hmmmm.  Maybe I DO see why people are refusing to buy and read Miller’s dissertation after all….

I hope this helps.

Our Lady, Undoer of Knots, pray for us.

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us.

Behold the MADNESS.  Behold the SUBSTANTIAL ERROR.

“In the future the papacy, while retaining its basic ‘generic form’, will be able to present quite a different ‘image’ (if we may so express it) from that to which we have hitherto been accustomed.” -Karl Rahner, Pope Benedict’s mentor, colleague and close friend, and widely considered to be one of the most influential theologians of the 20th century.



Immacolata Request

Hi Ann –

I’m trying to find that beautiful essay you wrote about how Jesus’s stem cells cured Mary’s broken heart and then how the Eucharist is confirmed cells from a human heart and how that can heal us. Sorry if I butchered the synopsis. I want to share it with a family member who is suffering.

 Would you please be able to point me in the right direction? It would be a blessing for this person.

 Thanks kindly,

Can you feel the desperation in “O Come, O Come Emmanuel” yet?

With each passing year, the motif of desperate pleading for Christ to come grows stronger.

This isn’t the mere “Advent hymn” or “Christmas song” of seven years ago, now is it? Not if you’re paying any attention. The notion of ransoming captives isn’t external to our experience anymore the way it used to be.

Three versions. Original Latin, Bluegrass and Instrumental. Bluegrass is by definition a mournful, longing sound, and the Cello in the instrumental selection likewise carries the mournful, pleading sound.




“What makes a man like Bergoglio, Doc, what makes him do the things he does?”

Johnny Ringo Antipope Jorge Bergoglio: After I’m done with the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, take your Cowgirls and finish off The Knights of Malta and all of the Carmelites.  You burn ’em, Ike João.  Burn ’em all.

Ike Clanton João Braz de Aviz:  Hell, Johnny Jorge, they ain’t even gonna show.

Johnny Ringo Antipope Jorge Bergoglio:  They’ll show.


Wyatt Earp:  I spent my whole life not knowin’ what I wanted out of life. Just chasin’ my tail.  Now for the first time I know exactly what I want, and who. That’s the damnable misery of it.  What makes a man like Ringo Bergoglio, Doc, what makes him do the things he does?

Doc Holliday: A man like Ringo Bergoglio has a great empty hole right through the middle of him. He can never kill enough, or steal enough, or inflict enough pain to ever fill it.

Wyatt Earp:  What does he need?

Doc Holliday: Revenge.

Wyatt Earp: For WHAT?

Doc Holliday: Being born.

Hey, remember when Ganswein doubled-down on his 20 May 2016 speech a week later?

Excerpted below is Maike Hickson’s reportage and translation of Paul Badde’s EWTN interview with Archbishop Georg Gänswein one week after Gänswein’s 20 May ARSH 2016 speech at the Gregorianum in Rome, outlining the total illegality and canonical invalidity of Pope Benedict’s failed attempted partial resignation/bifurcation of the Petrine Munus.

If you have never taken the quarter of an hour it takes to sit down and read Gänswein’s 20 May speech in full, I beg you to click here and do so now.

Then read the reportage of the interview he gave one week later, excerpted below.

Then sit and stillness and consider the YEARS of ruthless, unrelenting insistence by Trad Inc. parti$an$ and the rest of the Novus Ordo world, consisting of ad hominem attacks, name-calling, personal insults, slanders, attempted character assassinations, and even malicious, calculated campaigns of full-blown personal calumny, that there is NO EVIDENCE of ANYTHING amiss or afoul; that ANY questioning whatsoever of Bergoglio qua Pope and the canonical validity of Pope Benedict’s attempted partial resignation is the domain of schizophrenic conspiracy theories and the mortal sin of SCHISM; and then contemplate that no one, not ONE PERSON inside the Roman Curia did ANY Canonical due diligence with regards to Pope Benedict’s attempted partial resignation in February ARSH 2013 because “it was obvious that there is no problem whatsoever with his resignation.” Riiiiiight.

Just dedicate less time than it takes to pray two sets of Mysteries of the Rosary to reading the citations above and below, and then just… think. Read the citations above and below and ask yourself if, “Nuh-uh! Shut up, Stupid!” is an honest, much less satisfactory response.

Badde reports in his interview that he knows of cardinals in the Vatican “who are still shocked that the Catholic Church has right now two living successors of Peter.” He continues: “You yourself have recently spoken about an enlargement of the Petrine ministry, of an exponentiation, I believe. Could you explain this a little more?”

Gänswein answers, as follows:

Yes, you refer here to the book presentation of an Italian professor, Roberto Regoli, who has written a book about the first evaluation of the pontificate [of Pope Benedict]. He is professor at the Gregorian University and that is where the book was presented, as well. I was one of the two persons who presented it, and indeed, I spoke about a exponentiated [enlarged] pontificate. It is clear – to say it clearly, because I have seen in some of the reactions how people insinuated things that I never said. Of course: Pope Francis is the lawfully elected and lawful pope. That is to say, there are not two popes – the one lawful, the other unlawful, that is simply not correct. And I simply said – that is also what Pope Benedict said – that he, after all, is still present with his prayers, with his sacrifices, in the “Recinto” of Saint Peter [within the walls and precincts of the Vatican], and that, through these prayers, through these sacrifices, there shall come forth spiritual fruit for his successors and for the Church. That is what I meant to say, and now we have had for three years two popes and I have the impression that the reality that I perceive is covered by what I have said.

Paul Badde then sums up how he understands what Archbishop Gänswein tries to say:

If I understand you aright, he [Benedict] remained in the office, but in the contemplative part, without having any authority to decide. Thus we have – as you said – now an active and a contemplative part which form together an enlargement of the Munus Petrinum [primacy and office of Peter]?

Gänswein responds:

That is what I have said, indeed, that – if one wishes to specify it – it is very clear, the Plena Potestas, the Plenitudo Potestatis [full power, incarnate authority] is in the hands of Pope Francis. He is the man who has right now the succession of Peter. And then there are no difficulties left, as I also have said it. These two are also not in a competitive relationship. That is where one has to make use of common sense, as well as the Faith and a little bit of theology. Then one does not have at all difficulties to understand properly [sic] what I have said.

Pope Benedict XVI, Archbishop Georg Gänswein (Pope Benedict’s personal Secretary), and Antipope Jorge Bergoglio

#TOLDYA Called it two years ago: Two male lead characters in Star Wars confirmed to be sodomites

I called this two years ago in Barnhardt Podcast Episode #039 at the 49:25 timestamp. The black storm trooper guy and the new Han Solo guy (Finn and Poe) are confirmed by J.J. Abrams to be sodomites in the upcoming Devil Mouse Star Wars movie. This has been planned since the first episode in this Devil Mouse trilogy. I saw it when I made the mistake of watching Episode 7 on someone’s bootleg. The black storm trooper guy and the new Han Solo guy had a TOTAL faggot moment of saucy, lingering eye contact in the ARSH 2015 movie. It was disgusting.

Remember folks, with Diabolical Narcissists, it’s all about CORRUPTION. They luxuriate in CORRUPTING things, and the better and more innocent the person or thing, the more demonic satisfaction they derive from CORRUPTING it. DNS hate innocence, purity, and especially sincere piety, and will attempt to degrade, subvert and/or overturn it whenever they see it. I am reminded of both women and men who chase and bed priests….

This is why sodomites go after children and adolescents. They relish in CORRUPTING them. It’s why there is such an attraction on the part of sex perverts of both sexes to the objective of the infiltration and corruption of the Church. It’s why sodomites in the Church chase seminarians relentlessly. And it is why these DN monsters are now going after a secular cultural touchstone like Star Wars. It really is true that yes, they want to utterly destroy and CORRUPT even people’s memories of childhood.

Steer well clear. And don’t throw money at these evil wretches by falling for this new “Baby Yoda” gimmick that they have just come out with. Don’t fall for it. Don’t feed this hellspawn.