Monthly Archives: April 2021

Novena to St. Catherine of Siena: April 22 – April 30

St. Catherine of Siena in prayer, Cristofano Allori, ARSH 1610

Won’t you join me in a Novena to St. Catherine of Siena, beginning April 22nd and concluding on her feast, the 30th of April?

Below is the text, and of course my main intention is for the Matthew 17:20 intention, but please add your own intentions for St. Catherine to go to work on!

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Heavenly Father, Thy glory is in Thy saints. We praise Thy glory in the life of the admirable St. Catherine of Siena, virgin and doctor of the Church. Her whole life was a noble sacrifice inspired by an ardent love of Jesus, Thy unblemished Lamb.

In troubled times she strenuously upheld the rights of His beloved spouse, The Church. Father, honor her merits and hear her prayers for each of us, and for Thy Holy Catholic Church.

Help us to pass unscathed through the corruption of this world, and to remain unshakably faithful to Thy Holy Catholic Church in word, deed, and example.

Help us always to see in the Vicar of Christ an anchor in the storms of life, and a beacon of light to the harbor of Thy Love, in this dark night of Thy times and men’s souls.

Grant also to each of us our special petition:

The Matthew 17:20 intention:

-that Jorge Bergoglio be publicly recognized and removed as Antipope, and his entire antipapacy be publicly nullified.

-that Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger be publicly recognized as having been the one and only Vicar of Christ, uninterrupted, since April 19, ARSH 2005.

-that Jorge Bergoglio repent and believe in the Gospel, revert to Catholicism, die in the state of grace in the fullness of time, and someday achieve the Beatific Vision

-and that Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger repent of anything requiring repentance, die in the state of grace in the fullness of time, and someday achieve the Beatific Vision.

(Add your own petitions here…)

We ask this through Jesus Christ, Thy Son, in the unity of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

St. Catherine of Siena, Pray for us.

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

At Last…

From: saintlouiscatholic@…..

Subj: at last

Dear Ann,

I am, at last, idiot that I am, proud as I am, now finally morally convinced that our Pope is Benedict XVI. Not kinda, not playing at dragons, but really.

Barnhardt + Mazza + Acosta = all possibilities covered.

My personal belief: intentional, good-faith, non-renunciation.

But no matter how you slice it, he is pope on your thesis, Mazza’s thesis, or the words themselves regardless of whether in good faith, bad faith, or in error.

God bless you again and again for your courage and persistence. Oremus pro invicem.

In Christ,


Saint Louis Catholic

Dr. Mazza’s latest paper – “Leave the Throne, Take the Ministry”: The Sacred Powers of Pope Emeritus

Leave the Throne, Take the Ministry”: The Sacred Powers of Pope Emeritus

Edmund J. Mazza, PhD

“I became convinced that the commission of Peter demanded concrete decisions, insights, from me, but then, when it was no longer possible for me for the foreseeable future…the Lord…freed me from the burden…”

Pope Benedict, Last Testament with Peter Seewald, 2017


How does Pope Benedict understand the Papacy? To answer this question, we must first find out how His Holiness understands Sacred Power.

In the history of the Church, the Sacred Power (potestas sacra) of the clergy has been divided into two categories indicating two separate origins of that one power: 1) Power of Order (potestas ordinis) and 2) Power of Jurisdiction (potestas iurisdictionis, also known as missio canonica, or potestas regiminis). 

The Power of Order is received at Priestly Ordination and gives power to a man to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and other sacraments. It changes a man ontologically: once made a priest, he can never be unmade a priest. His being receives a sacramental character that is indelible. As Rev. Pius Pietrzyk, O.P. writes: although the Church acts as the medium through which a man is ordained, it is Christ who does the ordaining. The Church cannot undo what Christ has done.

The Power of Jurisdiction, on the other hand, is traditionally understood as authority flowing from the Vicar of Christ and granted to bishops to govern specific dioceses. As Pietrzyk writes: “The whole reason for the developed distinction of the potestas iurisdictionis was that, unlike the potestas ordinis, it could be lost. Since sacred character cannot be lost, but potestas iurisdictionis may, it must have a different proximate source.”

To licitly exercise the Power of Order a man must first be in communion with the Pope and bishops. Even Vatican II recognized this: “Without hierarchical communion the sacramental-ontological munus [potestas ordinis], which ought to be distinguished from the canonical-juridical aspect[potestas iurisdictionis], cannot be exercised.” (emphasis mine)Passing over the issue of hierarchical communion, let us highlight instead the “buried lead” above: the Council affirmed that ordination gives a “sacramental-ontological munus” to the priest/bishop quite apart from any juridical/legal power of administration.

In this, the Council fathers were taking their lead from Pope Pius XII, who in 1947, issued a new document on the rite of ordination. None other than Joseph Ratzinger, in his 1987, Principles of Catholic Theology contrasts the change in theologybetween that magisterial document and previous ones:


The rite that Pius XII decrees represents a return to the form used in the early Church. It is pneumatologically oriented in terms of both gesture (since the imposition of hands signifies the conferral of the Holy Spirit) and word: the Preface is a petition for the Holy Spirit. Accordingly,the key word is now ministerium or munus: service and gift; (emphasis mine)


The significance of this passage cannot be overestimated for anyone who has been following the controversy over Benedict’s own use of “munus” and “ministerium in his 2013 “resignation. This is especially so in light of his personal secretary, Archbishop Georg Gänswein’s words of May 2016: 


The key word in that statement [Benedict’s renunciation] is munus petrinum, translated — as happens most of the time — with “Petrine ministry.” And yet, munus, in Latin, has a multiplicity of meanings: it can mean service, duty, guide or gift, even prodigy. Before and after his resignation, Benedict understood and understands his task as participation in such a “Petrine ministry [munus].” He has left the papal throne and yet, with the step made on February 11, 2013, he has not at all abandoned this ministry. (emphasis mine)


Gänswein was roundly criticized by Catholic experts for this explanation. Distinguished Church historian Roberto De Mattei among them:


If the pope who resigns from the pontificate retains the title of emeritus, that means that to some extent he remains pope. It is clear, in fact, that in the definition the noun [pope] prevails over the adjective [emeritus]. But why is he still pope after the abdication? The only explanation possible is that the pontifical election has imparted an indelible character, which he does not lose with the resignation. The abdication would presuppose in this case the cessation of the exercise of power, but not the disappearance of the pontifical character. This indelible character attributed to the pope could be explained in its turn only by an ecclesiological vision that would subordinate the juridical dimension [potestas iurisdictionis] of the pontificate to the sacramental[potestas ordinis].

It is possible that Benedict XVI shares this position, presented by Violi and Gigliotti in their essays, but the eventuality that he may have made the notion of the sacramental nature of the papacy his own does not mean that it is true. There does not exist, except in the imagination of some theologians, a spiritual papacy distinct from the juridical papacy. If the pope is, by definition, the one who governs the Church, in resigning governance he resigns from the papacy. The papacy is not a spiritual or sacramental condition, but an “office,” or indeed an institution. (emphasis mine)


“An ecclesiological vision that would subordinate the juridical dimension [potestas iurisdictionis] of the pontificate to the sacramental [potestas ordinis] is precisely how Benedict understands Sacred Power. Benedict is, in fact, diametrically opposed to De Mattei’s dictum: “The papacy is not a spiritual or sacramental condition, but an office, or indeed an institution.”Listen to Ratzinger’s scathing criticism of the Church’s traditional understanding of the Power of Jurisdiction and“office” in contrast to the Power of Order with regard to the priest/bishop:


While the medieval textsaw the ordination as resulting from the indicative of the conferral of power, ordination is accomplished according to the 1947 text…in the manner…of a prayer. Thus, it is apparent even in the external form that the true conferrer of power is the Holy Spirit, to whom the sacramental prayer is addressed, not the human consecrator.

The medieval rite is formed on the pattern of investiture in a secular office. Its key word is potestas…[however, since 1947] the key word is now ministerium or munus: service and gift;

The most crucial event in the development of the Latin West was, I think, the increasing distinction between sacrament [potestas ordinis] and jurisdiction [potestas iurisdictionis], between liturgy and administration as such

I think we should be honest enough to admit the temptation of mammon in the history of the Church and to recognize to what extent it was a real power that worked to the distortion and corruption of both Church and theology, even to their inmost core. The separation of office as jurisdiction from office as rite was continued for reasons of prestige and financial benefits; (emphasis mine)


Did Benedict just condemn the Church’s theology of potestas iurisdictionis? Did he just characterize her understanding ofpower of governance through office as something distorted and corrupt to the core?

Benedict, as it turns out, represents one of two schools of thought with regard to the ontology of Sacred Power. According to Msgr. Fredrik Hansen:


The first current [of thought] emanates from…K. Rahner, J. Ratzinger and Y. Congar…They all support the view that potestas sacra comes from the sacrament of orders [potestas ordinis]. In the case of the potestas sacra of the Bishop they advocate its complete origin in episcopal consecration [potestas ordinis]…Further this position teaches that also the power of teaching and governance comes from episcopal ordination although its exercise must take place within hierarchical communion. The missio canonica [potestas iurisdictionis] as the juridical determination for the two latter powers [teaching and governance] renders this potestas sacra available for its exercise…The Primacy of jurisdiction of the Supreme Pontiff (cf. can. 331, PAE chap III, LG 18b) becomes difficult to explain in relation to this current. On a sacramental level (the power of order) there is no difference between the Roman Pontiff and the other Bishops of the Church. The difference in jurisdiction comes from a non-sacramental source…The power he then acquires comes directly from Christ, not from the election, and not from the College of Cardinals. (emphasis mine)


“The Primacy of jurisdiction of the Supreme Pontiff” does indeed “become difficult to explain in relation to” Ratzinger’s nouvelle theologie! Tradition teaches the Power of Jurisdiction can be lost! Thus, De Mattei’s filial correction of Benedict/Gänswein. The unfortunate truth of the matter is that Benedict is unconcerned about accounting for the Primacy of Jurisdiction of the Supreme Pontiff. Witness what he had to say on the matter:


[Orthodox] Patriarch Athenagoras when he greeted the Pope [Paul VI in Jerusalem, 1964 exclaimed]: “Against all expectation, the bishop of Rome is among us, the first among us in honor, ‘he who presides in love’...” It is clear that, in saying this, the Patriarch did not abandon the claims of the Eastern Churches or acknowledge the primacy of the West. Rather he stated plainly what the East understood as the order, the rank and title, of the equal bishops in the Church—and it would be worth our while to consider whether this archaic confession, which has nothing to do with the “primacy of jurisdiction” but confesses a primacy of “honor” (τιμή) and agape, might not be recognized as a formula that adequately reflects the position Rome occupies in the Church—“holy courage” requires that prudence be combined with “audacity”: “The kingdom of God suffers violence.” (emphasis mine)


In one audacious sentence, Ratzinger completely side-steps the De Fide definition of Vatican I regarding the Supreme Power of Jurisdiction of the Pope! The Pope’s Power of Order suffices,it seems, to account for the essence of Who and What he is! He does not occupy “an office of jurisdiction,” which comes and goes, so much as a spiritual “office of rite which is indelible:


The office of the papacy is a cross, indeed, the greatest of all crosses. For what can be said to pertain more to the cross and anxiety of the soul than the care and [personal] responsibility for all the Churches…attachment to the Word and will of God because of the Lord is what makes the sedes [throne] a cross and thus proves the Vicar [the Pope] to be a representative [of Christ].

But the witness is not an individual who stands independently on his own. He is no more a wit ness by virtue of himself and of his own powers of memory than Peter can be the rock by his own strength. He is not a witness as “flesh and blood” but as one who is linked to the Pneuma, the Paraclete who authenticates the truth and opens up the memory and, in his turn, binds the witness to ChristThis binding of the witness to the Pneuma and to his mode of being-“not of himself, but what he hears” -is called “sacrament” in the language of the Church. –Sacrament designates a threefold knotwordwitness, Holy Spirit and Christwhich describes the essential structure of succession in the New Testament. We can infer with certainty from the testimony of the Pastoral Letters and of the Acts of the Apostles that the apostolic generation already gave to this interconnection of person and wordin the believed presence of the Spirit and of Christ the form of the laying on of hands.

Here, allow me to go back once again to 19 April 2005. The real gravity of the decision [to accept the Papacy] was also due to the fact that from that moment on I was engaged always and forever by the Lord. Always – anyone who accepts the Petrine ministry no longer has any privacy. He belongs always and completely to everyone, to the whole Church…The “always” is also a “for ever”


Benedict “left the throne,” but “not his participation in the Petrine Ministry [munus]. In the Power of Order, it is not the Church, but Christ Himself who makes a man a priest. Thus, he cannot be unmade a priest. Likewise, Benedict seemingly argues, since it is Christ Himself and not the Church who makes a man a pope, he cannot be unmade a pope: 


I had to…consider whether or not functionalism would completely encroach on the papacy …Earlier, bishops were not allowed to resign…a number of bishops…said ‘I am a father and that I’ll stay’, because you can’t simply stop being a father; stopping is a functionalization and secularization, something from the sort of concept of public office that shouldn’t apply to a bishop... He remains a father in a deep, inward sense, in a particular relationship which has responsibility, but not with day-to-day tasks as such… If he steps down, he remains in an inner sense within the responsibility he took on, but not in the function…


Benedict went so far as to tell Seewald that the “office enters into your very being.” In fact, he once criticized Martin Luther precisely for misunderstanding the difference between office as jurisdiction (or function) and office as rite:


[For Luther] the priest does not transcend his role as preacher. The consequent restriction to the word alone had, as its logical outcome, the pure functionality of the priesthood: it consisted exclusively in a particular activity; if that activity was missing, the ministry itself ceased to exist…There was purposely no further mention of priesthood but only of “office”; the assignment of this office was, in itself, a secular act;


Benedict does not see the priesthood, or better yet, the papacy as “consisting exclusively in a particular activity, so that if that activity is missing, the ministry itself ceases to exist:


My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministrydoes not revoke thisI am not abandoning the cross, but remaining in a new way at the side of the crucified Lord. I no longer bear the power of office for the governance [potestas iurisdictionis] of the Church, but in the service of prayer I remain, so to speak, in the enclosure of Saint Peter [potestas ordinis]. (Emphasis mine)


And in Seewald’s latest interview released in German in May2020, Benedict doubles down on his “Petrine” status:

This word “emerito” meant that he was no longer an active bishop but was in the special relationship of a former bishop to his seat…the spiritual connection to his previous seat was now also recognized as a legal quality…It does not create any participation in the concrete legal content of the episcopate [potestas iurisdictionis], but at the same time sees the spiritual bond as a reality. So there are not two bishops, but there is a spiritual mandate [potestas ordinis], the essence of which is to serve from the inside, from the Lord, in praying with and for his previous bishopric.(Emphasis mine)

Seewald then directly asks His Holiness: “But does that also apply to the pope?”

It is not clear why this legal figure should not be applied to the Bishop of Rome either. In this formula, both are given no specific legal power of attorney anymore, but a spiritual assignment that remains – albeit invisible. This legal-spiritual form avoids any thought of a coexistence of two popes: a bishopric can only have one owner. At the same time, a spiritual connection is expressed that cannot be removed under any circumstances. (Emphasis mine)


But is Benedict’s ontological vision of the papacy an accurate one? As Hansen maintains, the other school of thought opposed to Ratzinger has centuries of traditionand contemporary canon law behind it:


The second current of thought…makes a distinction between the episcopal consecration [potestas ordinis] on the one hand and the missio canonica on the other. The result is a position diametrically opposed to the first [Ratzinger’s] school of thought, holding that the power of governance comes from the missio canonica [potestas iurisdictionis] by which an office is entrusted…it allows an explanation of the difference between the Pope and the Bishops as regards jurisdiction…this second line of thought is echoed in the canonical doctrine found in the 1983 Code [of Canon Law] and the post-codal papal and curial documents, whereas the first [Ratzinger’s] is not: neither CIC 1983 nor Pastores gregis, or Apostolorum successores speak of power as the first current[Ratzinger’s] does…It is, therefore, important to underline that the distinction between the power of order and the power of jurisdiction was by the Council or Code neither negated nor suppressed, it remains a part of canonical doctrine. (emphasis mine)


Benedict would argue to the contrary, that Vatican II teaches: “the sacramental-ontological munus [potestas ordinis]…ought to be distinguished from the canonical-juridical aspect [potestas iurisdictionis]” (Lumen gentium AAS 57 (1965) 5-75 at 75.)This is why His Holiness went to great pains NOT TO RENOUNCE THE PETRINE MUNUS AS SUCH in his 2013 “Declaratio.” 

But Vatican II was referring to the priesthood and episcopacy, not the papacy. 

In the end, what Pope Benedict proposes regarding his ongoing Petrine status is, to use his words, audacious and violent. And if Benedict is objectively wrong, then when he renounced the throne thinking he could still keep the Petrine Ministry [munus], he committed a substantial error, invalidating his renunciation.

Q: Explain this to me like I’m five. I’ll wait. A: Sure. No problem at all. Covidism is a RELIGION, and the mask is a mandatory, visible sign of assent and submission to the satanic Coviet religion.

And THAT, is why the mask is a flagrant violation of the First Commandment.

Folks, this isn’t satire. This is real. It also demonstrates beyond any doubt that masks are nothing more than a dehumanizing luciferian religious submission garment. People wear them because they have embraced and converted to the OneWorld Covid religion/political system, and almost all consider the mask to be a talisman that by the power of magic protects them from seasonal respiratory viruses.

NonVeniCrosspost: 18 ways to leave your Vaxxer

Tour de Force must read: 18 ways to leave your Vaxxer

[Crossposted from Mark Docherty at NonVeniPacem.]

This is EPIC. Fully annotated. The most complete compendium of scamdemic/deathvaxx that I have seen. The only minor error I caught is that he says the mortality rate is 0.27%… this has actually been revised down to 0.15%… and that probably includes flu. Folks, PLEASE copy and paste, share the links, do whatever you can to spread the TRUTH. People are dying and many more will probably die next cold/flu season because they blindly took the vaxx. All the evidence, all the science points towards this. People are NOT being told that these are experimental, unapproved vaccines, and that they themselves are participating in an experiment, all of which are violations of the Nuremberg Code and Federal Law. You can’t give Informed Consent if you are not informed.

Following is a taste of the first four reasons; follow the link at the end for the rest.

-Mark Docherty

18 Reasons I Won’t Be Getting a Covid Vaccine

by Christian Elliott


The only industry in the world that bears no liability for injuries or deaths resulting from their products, are vaccine makers.

First established in 1986 with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, and reinforced by the PREP Act, vaccine makers cannot be sued, even if they are shown to be negligent.

The covid-vaccine makers are allowed to create a one-size-fits-all product, with no testing on sub-populations (i.e. people with specific health conditions), and yet they are unwilling to accept any responsibility for any adverse events or deaths their products cause.

If a company is not willing to stand behind their product as safe, especially one they rushed to market and skipped animal trials on, I am not willing to take a chance on their product.

No liability. No trust.

Here’s why…


The four major companies who are making these covid vaccines are/have either:

  1. Never brought a vaccine to market before covid (Moderna and Johnson & Johnson).
  2. Are serial felons (Pfizer, and Astra Zeneca).
  3. Are both (Johnson & Johnson).

Moderna had been trying to “Modernize our RNA” (thus the company name)–for years, but had never successfully brought ANY product to market–how nice for them to get a major cash infusion from the government to keep trying.

In fact, all major vaccine makers (save Moderna) have paid out tens of billions of dollars in damages for other products they brought to market when they knew those products would cause injuries and death–see Vioxx, Bextra, Celebrex, Thalidomide, and Opioids as a few examples.

If drug companies willfully choose to put harmful products in the market, when they can be sued, why would we trust any product where they have NO liability?

In case it hasn’t sunk in, let me reiterate…3 of the 4 covid vaccine makers have been sued for products they brought to market even though they knew injuries and deaths would result.

Let me reiterate this point:

Given the free pass from liability, and the checkered past of these companies, why would we assume that all their vaccines are safe and made completely above board?

Where else in life would we trust someone with that kind of reputation?

To me that makes as much sense as expecting a remorseless, abusive, unfaithful lover to become a different person because a judge said deep down they are a good person.

No. I don’t trust them.

No liability. No trust.

Here’s another reason why I don’t trust them.


There have been many attempts to make viral vaccines in the past that ended in utter failure, which is why we did not have a coronavirus vaccine in 2020.

In the 1960’s, scientists attempted to make an RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) vaccine for infants.

In that study, they skipped animal trials because they weren’t necessary back then.

In the end, the vaccinated infants got much sicker than the unvaccinated infants when exposed to the virus in nature, with 80% of the vaccinated infants requiring hospitalization, and two of them died.

After 2000, scientists made many attempts to create coronavirus vaccines.

For the past 20 years, all ended in failure because the animals in the clinical trials got very sick and many died, just like the children in the 1960’s.

You can read a summary of this history/science here.

Or if you want to read the individual studies you can check out these links:

  • In 2004 attempted vaccine produced hepatitis in ferrets
  • In 2005 mice and civets became sick and more susceptible to coronaviruses after being vaccinated
  • In 2012 the ferrets became sick and died. And in this study mice and ferrets developed lung disease.
  • In 2016 this study also produce lung disease in mice.

The typical pattern in the studies mentioned above is that the children and the animals produced beautiful antibody responses after being vaccinated.

The manufacturers thought they hit the jackpot.

The problem came when the children and animals were exposed to the wild version of the virus.

When that happened, an unexplained phenomenon called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) also known as Vaccine Enhanced Disease (VED) occurred where the immune system produced a “cytokine storm” (i.e. overwhelmingly attacked the body), and the children/animals died.

Here’s the lingering issue…

The vaccine makers have no data to suggest their rushed vaccines have overcome that problem.

In other words, never before has any attempt to make a coronavirus vaccine been successful, nor has the gene-therapy technology that is mRNA “vaccines” been safely brought to market, but hey, since they had billions of dollars in government funding, I’m sure they figured that out.

Except they don’t know if they have…


When vaccine makers submitted their papers to the FDA for the Emergency Use Authorization (Note: An EUA is not the same as a full FDA approval), among the many “Data Gaps” they reported was that they have nothing in their trials to suggest they overcame that pesky problem of Vaccine Enhanced Disease.

They simply don’t know–i.e. they have no idea if the vaccines they’ve made will also produce the same cytokine storm (and deaths) as previous attempts at such products.

As Joseph Mercola points out…

Previous attempts to develop an mRNA-based drug using lipid nanoparticles failed and had to be abandoned because when the dose was too low, the drug had no effect, and when dosed too high, the drug became too toxic. An obvious question is: What has changed that now makes this technology safe enough for mass use?”

If that’s not alarming enough, here are other gaps in the data–i.e. there is no data to suggest safety or efficacy regarding:

  • Anyone younger than age 18 or older than age 55
  • Pregnant or lactating mothers
  • Auto-immune conditions
  • Immunocompromised individuals
  • No data on transmission of covid
  • No data on preventing mortalityfrom covid
  • No data on duration of protection from covid

Hard to believe right?

In case you think I’m making this up, or want to see the actual documents sent to the FDA by Pfizer and Moderna for their Emergency Use Authorization, you can check out this, or this respectively. The data gaps can be found starting with page 46 and 48 respectively.

For now let’s turn our eyes to the raw data the vaccine makers used to submit for emergency use authorization.

Read the rest:

UPDATED: Comeuppance: I remember an employee of VaticanRadio saying to me in 2013, “Liz Lev is the most vindictive b**** in Rome. If I say anything against her, she’ll destroy my ability to work in Rome. I can’t burn that bridge.”

Looks like the chalice-snatching psychopath grifter Liz Lev’s run is finally, at long last ending.

For the record.  EVERYONE I met in Rome, including people that Liz Lev considers to be her closest ‘friends’ and colleagues, DESPISE HER. Her #1 beta-narcissist pet faggot, who was instrumental in the laughable attempted cover-up of her two sacrilegious pregnancies by Fr. Thomas Williams (yes, TWO, the first sadly miscarried, the second born with severe Down’s syndrome), referred to her in conversation with me, numerous times, as “Stupid F***ing Liz.”

I have never, in my life, been aware of a person who is so universally hated and held in utter contempt by everyone who REALLY knows and has to interact with her in person, as Liz Lev. This woman’s entire life revolves around sleeping her way into money and then power, first by shrewdly and calculatedly becoming the public mistress and baby-mama of THREE children by a wealthy attorney in Bologna (anchor babies aren’t just a Mexican thing, folks), and then ESPECIALLY at the Vatican Museums (through the Legionaries of Christ, specially her priest baby-daddy, Fr. Thomas Williams).  All the while riding the satanic horse of “feminism”.

Add her notorious pathological mistreatment of colleagues and subordinates, and her imagined belief – not jokingly – that she is the reincarnation of the 15th century psycho-whore Caterina Sforza, and Queen Christina of Sweden, to the crazy potpie. Liz Lev ACTUALLY believes that she and her baby-daddy, Fr. Thomas Williams, are the “NEW ROMAN ARISTOCRACY.”

If you want to see a Roman laugh so hard that he cries, just mention THAT.

I had a seminarian tell me several years ago before the CoronaScam, that he eyewitnessed Liz Lev walk into a work-a-day bar in Rome and demand that the owner come kiss her hand in obeisance.  And she wasn’t being silly.  It was a manifestation of a woman, as the seminarian said, “clearly losing her mind.” Interestingly, I had another English-speaking ex-pat friend, who worked in Rome as a tour guide, volunteer out of the blue EXACTLY the same sentiment at a dinner a few months later. “I think Liz is actually insane. She thinks she is a medieval queen, and we are all her subjects or something…”

Now, this repugnant, trailer park slob of a woman, complete with two-inch roots, DARES complain that her “tour guiding” scam has dried up?? This woman DARES grift for DONATIONS?

Let me add to what others have already pointed out:

Liz Lev has presided over, employed, and protected for almost a quarter century a mafia of sodomite men who have literally used their credentialed access to St. Peter’s Basilica and the Vatican Museums as their entry pass to ENGAGE IN SODOMITICAL ENCOUNTERS, WHICH THEY OPENLY BRAG ABOUT, WITH CURIAL BISHOPS AND CLERICS.

“Happy hunting, my dear.  If you’re not ‘his type’, send him over to me.”

“Oooooh. Bless me father, for I AM SINNING….”

Sacrilegious fornication and sodomy are a literal JOKE to these criminal degenerates, Liz Lev first among them.

I have said for YEARS that St. Peter’s Basilica and probably most of the Vatican, INCLUDING THE SISTINE CHAPEL, will be destroyed because of the SODOMY and moral degeneracy that LIZ LEV has happily enabled for TWENTY-FIVE LOOOOOOONG YEARS. Why? Because as St. Paul tells us in his letter to the Romans, SODOMITES ARE SHAMELESS FLATTERERS.  Liz Lev’s entire personal economy is built upon people lyingly telling her how ‘fabulous’ she is… to her face, so they can get licensed as Rome-Vatican tour guides, or networked into the Rome-Vatican-Legionaries mafia.

These are not TOURIST ATTRACTIONS.  They are PILGRIMAGE destinations. Not cash cow profit centers.

I’m sorry, folks, but I’ve had it with these people.  Let it ALL come out.  And let them NEVER, EVER be able to re-start the gay desecration of the Basilica of St. Peter, the Vatican, Rome, or the world.  ENOUGH!!!


Dear, dear Ann,

I once was invited to attend a Liz Lev “lecture” on the Sistine Chapel Last Judgement fresco. I could not endure to stay and listen for more than 15 minutes, about 13 of which I spent trying to figure out how to leave without offending my host.

It was obvious to me (trained in art history) from the minute she opened her mouth, that she was a fraud and held the sacred in contempt.

The Vatican cliques are disgusting to me. I quite identify with your horror. The picture of corruption you describe is important to expose.

But please refrain from gossip. You risk giving the impression that you have a personal score to settle, rather than being motivated by a holy indignation.

Praying for you, and thanking you for your clear-headed vision, and courage,


“Covid is the freaking flu.”

Full post here.

And yeah, you didn’t need ex post facto statistics to have known this glaringly obvious truth over a year ago – Event201 laid it all out on a Louis Quatorze sterling silver platter (or Kangxi, if you are transitioning to Chinese imperial temporal references…)

Masks and distancing work

Or so we are told:

Influenza cases in the USA, 2016-2021
2016-2017: 29 million
2017-2018: 45 million
2018-2019: 36 million
2019-2020: 38 million
2020-2021: 0.0015 million
Masks and distancing work.

Actually, they don’t. Covid cases in the USA, 2020-2021

2020-2021: 32 million

Ignore the corrupt scientists. There is absolutely no question anymore. Covid is the freaking flu.

Of course it is. A textbook Madison Avenue-esque rebranding ad campaign. Meticulously pre-planned with full malice aforethought.

And by the way, folks, the dataset above is a ROCK SOLID way to size-up other people, because in this final war, there are no state-issued uniforms.  Any human being who looks at that objective dataset above and says ANYTHING other than, “yes, it’s clearly a re-branding of the seasonal flu” is either FUNDAMENTALLY, CRIMINALLY DISHONEST, TERMINALLY STUPID, or so intensely morally blinded by their own unrepentant sin that they MUST, at all costs, be totally ignored and vociferously discredited.

The DeathJab is FIRST a SIN AGAINST PRUDENCE. Therefore the entire question of it containing murdered baby is moot from a moral theology perspective.

Folks, it’s becoming clearer every day that Chris Ferrara’s sneering question, “Do you have a degree in theology, Miss Barnhardt?” might just be credentialism after all, because by the looks of it, almost no one with any sort of “ed-u-mah-ka-shun” can think their way out of a wet paper sack at this point.  To be unlettered IS A CREDENTIAL. Mindblower, eh?

Taking the DeathJab in any form is an obvious sin against PRUDENCE.


Let’s review the tactical situation briefly, shall we? And I say ‘briefly’ because this is so simple that there is no reason why this needs to be a 2500 word diatribe.

The billionaire oligarchy, led by Bill and Melinda Gates, George Soros, and Klaus Schwab have for DECADES been loudly proclaiming as their number-one agenda point that the human population MUST be reduced drastically, within a matter of a few decades, if not faster.  Their mantra for DECADES has been that the global population, currently at 7.7 billion, needs to be reduced to under one billion – as quickly and as soon as possible.

The Gates Foundation was proven to have maliciously sterilized millions of Kenyan women and girls under the cover of a “tetanus vaccine”.

The entire “climate change” movement is a very, very, VERY thinly veiled cover for human population reduction and installation of totalitarianism and total economic control. The sun controls global climate. Every rational human being knows this.

On October 18, ARSH 2019, the Gates Foundation held a final organizational meeting in New York City between oligarch NGOs, governments, BigPharma, and the Media, called Event 201.  The details of the CoronaVirus global fraud were laid out in detail, including the fictional backstory – only the location – Brazilian bats versus Chinese bats, was changed.  The most important tactical point drilled home in the Event201 planning session was the absolute necessity for the media to “FLOOD” the planet with terroristic fear-porn, non-stop. READ THIS LINK IF YOU READ NO OTHER IN THIS PIECE.

Covid-19 is immediately shown to be a potentially-severe deep chest cold for the frail elderly and people with co-morbidities (with OBESITY being number one), exactly like every other flu and chest cold since time immemorial.

The survival rate for Covid-19 is shown to be exactly the same as any chest cold: 99.97%

The CDC, WHO and all other entities in the post-Christian west quietly combined all influenzas, colds and bacterial pneumonias into the SAME CATEGORY, “PIC”, thus REBRANDING influenza, bacterial pneumonia and all seasonal colds as “PANDEMIC COVID”.  This is why influenza was statistically ERADICATED from the surface of the Earth in April ARSH 2020. All influenza deaths since April ARSH 2020 have been fraudulently re-branded “Covid” – GLOBALLY!

Within weeks – WEEKS-  governments and Pharmaceutical Companies announced that a “vaccine” would be available within months, and that THE ONLY POSSIBLE WAY OUT of total, permanent lockdown and economic death was THE HOLY VACCINE. Relentless propaganda FLOODING about the utter necessity of every person being “vaccinated” began IMMEDIATELY.

The Gates Foundation is heavily involved in funding both NGOs and Pharma companies pushing these same “vaccines”.  The Gates Foundation’s raison d’être is HUMAN POPULATION REDUCTION.

All “Covid Vaccines” are given global “emergency use authorization TOTALLY ILLEGALLY because  there are numerous safe, well-known drugs, especially Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine,  that have a massive success rate in both preventing AND treating “Covid/PIC”.  These drugs have been MALICIOUSLY AND INTENTIONALLY withheld from the public and even LYINGLY VILIFIED in order to maintain the public lie that THE HOLY VACCINE is the one and only way out.

Deaths, strokes, paralyses, miscarriages, bizarre uterine sloughing – including among women who are years post-menopausal, are reported in DROVES, orders of magnitude beyond any parameters triggering a total cessation of HUMAN TRIALS of any drug or vaccine.  ALL side-effects are waved off as either “not related” or “acceptable”.

Countless people who have been “vaccinated” continue to “test positive” and even become ill from “Covid”.  Fauci and the rest of the coven continue to preach that Coviet submission muzzles MUST be worn and that all “social distancing” and lockdown MUST be continued even by the “vaccinated”.  Real vaccines (i.e. smallpox, polio…) impart sterilizing immunity – the recipient can neither acquire nor spread (hence sterilizing) the virus in question.  Therefore this is OBVIOUSLY not a “vaccine”.

Massive direct coercion begins to rain down upon those who refuse to take the totally experimental and CLEARLY WILDLY DANGEROUS injections. Travel bans, exclusion from any public activity or space, and even REFUSAL OF THE SACRAMENTS are just some of the coercive measures already unfolding in just the very earliest days of the DeathJab.  CLEARLY the ability to buy and sell and hold any form of currency or debt instrument are QUICKLY going to be tied to “proof of vaccination”. Custody of minor children will also be tied to “vaccination”.

Coercing any human being into MEDICAL EXPERIMENTATION is against:
1) The Nuremberg Code
2) UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (Article 6)
3) UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 7)
4) UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 3)

It is GLARINGLY, PATENTLY OBVIOUS that the DeathJab is NEFARIOUS, has NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY VIRUS OR PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERN, and is ALMOST METAPHYSICALLY CERTAIN to be at minimum THE vector for economic totalitarianism, and is beyond that almost certainly either a sterilant, and/or a toxic prelude to the release of another engineered virus which will incite fatality via cytokine storm when interfaced with the mRNA antibody tag, intended to result in an unprecedented genocide.

What possible, possible sense does it make to think the Bill and Melinda Gates and their coven of oligarchs suddenly want to PREVENT EVERY HUMAN BEING FROM DYING – even the super-geriatric with multiple comorbidities, when their entire agenda revolves around the rapid reduction of the human population from 7.7 billion to under one billion??



If taking the DeathJab AT ALL is a sin against prudence, which we clearly see that it is, WHAT DOES IT MATTER IN THE IMMEDIATE SENSE WHETHER IT CONTAINS DEAD BABIES?

We have already logically established that NO MORALLY SANE PERSON can participate in this highly-probable genocide and OBVIOUS totalitarian maneuver.  The question ends there.  No additional tangents are even germane to the question.  The vaccine could be made out of smoked salmon dip, peanut butter, or dead babies and it is STILL a SIN AGAINST PRUDENCE to take it in the first place.

How can a parent of minor children, or ANYONE think they can play worse-than-Russian  roulette… in order to WHAT? Keep a job? Be able to fly? Be able to eat inside at The Cheesecake Factory?  You can’t justify it in any sane, rational way.  It’s a massive, obvious sin against PRUDENCE.


As always, my God, my God, I hope and pray that this helps.

An EIGHT year old homeschooler sends an injectable Ivermectin oral dosage chart.

X axis is cc’s/mL. (Remember, one milliliter is one cubic centimeter – same thing)

Y axis is body weight in pounds (yay Imperial units!)

It’s a simple linear function. Plot two ordered pairs and connect with a straight edge, through the origin at (0,0).

In our case, the ordered pair (1, 110) is given on the label. We extrapolate (2, 220).

Easy-peasy, lemon squeezy.