Incredibly Sad, Blunt Words on Queen Elizabeth II

What a very sad post to write.  I delayed quite a bit – as many noticed – because one simply doesn’t “heckle at a funeral”. And this funeral plus the “official mourning period” lasted for weeks. How exactly does one go about writing about the catastrophic life-failure of an admittedly well-dressed nonagenarian woman who hasn’t even been buried yet? But now she is buried, the mourning period is over, these things can be and must be said.

There of so many examples of “canonization” of Queen Elizabeth, but here just over my transom is the reliable contra-indicator about anything Catholic, the cringe-inducing George Weigel, after his requisite and embarrassingly forced mention of his ca$h cow, his JPII biography, calls Queen Elizabeth “this devoutly Christian woman”, and then makes the completely irrational argument that Queen Elizabeth displayed heroic decorum by not catering to public opinion… BY HAVING THE FLAMING SODOMITE “SIR” ELTON JOHN SING HIS RE-LYRICED ODE TO MARILYN MONROE DURING DIANA’S FUNERAL IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY.

Yeah, total class, right there.

Weigel then concludes:

“Thank you, Your Majesty. And may the Lord in whom you placed your trust, and to whom you bore witness in your Christmas messages, give you the reward of your long labors.”

Oooooh that’s just a bit awkward. As we’re about to see, Wiegel’s concluding sentence is… terrifying when processed according to the Catholic Faith.

Two quick prefaces to this piece: First, let us pray for her soul as we do all people outside the Church, and even the unbaptized (yes, we’re going to talk about that sad but real possibility in this case later.) Second: let us leave to the side for a moment any discussion of the legitimacy of the Saxe-Coburg Gotha Mountbatten “Windsor” line as heirs to the thrones of England, Ireland and Scotland. That is a very legitimate conversation, but not the conversation we are having in this piece. The Jacobite situation is profoundly bleak anyway, as the Duke of Bavaria is a wretched, open sodomite.  For the sake of argument, the legitimacy of Queen Elizabeth and now King Charles as monarchs of Great Britain will be stipulated for the duration of this piece.

The overarching dynamic that I would like to shine a light on is the extreme, and very intentional, I think, similarity between the modern British monarchy (a Freemasonic monstrosity) and the Papacy (the explicit target and enemy of Freemasonry as its founding principle), and now especially the Bergoglian Antipapacy, through which the three century long plan to usurp and destroy the Papacy from the inside out has come to full satanic fruition.

I have, for YEARS, been frequently appalled by Anglo-Catholics and those who CLAIM to be Anglo-Catholics (I’m half Anglo genetically – I would never in a million years claim to be “English”, which would be an absurd fantasy and nothing more) and their groveling and ostentatious displays of what can only be described as a “pious devotion” towards Queen Elizabeth, AS IF SHE WERE A SAINT, and now King Charles. I would sit and listen to them and be thinking, “WHAT, EXACTLY, do these people believe vis-a-vis Jesus Christ and His Holy Catholic Church?” The answer is, “NOT MUCH”, it seems to me.

First, Queen Elizabeth, and all British monarchs since Henry VIII openly, proudly claim to be the “pope” of the Anglican schismatic sect. Queen Elizabeth was the “popess” of A SCHISMATIC MONSTROSITY founded in order to justify the adulterous sexual appetites of a syphilitic madman – Henry VIII. The titles that British monarchs hold is “Defender of the Faith” – as in THEY, and NOT the successor of Peter, are the earthly head of the church and state religion. Queen Elizabeth not only participated in this evil, she HERSELF was the “antipopess” of this sect and happily carried the title for 70 years.

Wait, wait, wait, wait. How can A Catholic be in ANY WAY on board with this? This dynamic reminds me of what I have observed with far-too-many heterosexual Anglo and Anglophile Catholics (and yes, there are a LOT of sodomite Anglo Trad Caths) with regards to SODOMY: namely, “Oh, yeah, sodomy is horrible, but it’s okay WHEN MY OH-SO-AMUSING FRIENDS DO IT. Boys will be boys, you know.”

So when a schism and a de facto antipapacy (the British Monarch is “Defender of the Faith”, remember?) is 500 years old and has a $20 billion-plus net worth, and is tied to one’s social clique or ethnic fantasies, THEN it’s totally fine? I’m sorry but that kind of hypocrisy just makes my flesh crawl. It’s pure Modernism: if you’re a Catholic and you grovel and drool over the British monarchy, you are displaying like a Las Vegas billboard that you don’t actually believe what you believe. And no, this isn’t an example of “nuance”. It’s a textbook, cut-and-dried example of Modernism. You’re Catholic, but YOU DON’T ACTUALLY BELIEVE ANY OF THAT CATHOLIC BULLSHIT. Especially, as it turns out, about the Papacy.

It is the pinnacle of irony that many Anglo and Anglophile Catholics are exactly the same people screeching that I, Dr. Mazza, and those others who are working seriously on the recognition and resolution of the Bergoglian Antipapacy are “schismatic”, when we are in full union with and stridently defending the Petrine See and its Divinely Instituted monarchical authority, while they moon over LITERAL schismatics claiming pseudo-papal authority (“Defender of the Faith”, remember?) PROJECTION, MUCH, OLD CHAP??

How these Anglos defend this blatant Modernism is a direct, shameless violation of the Law of Non-contradiction: “Oh, The Queen has no REAL authority. It’s just a courtesy title.” This exact same argument is made with totally straight faces by these people with regards to the Queen’s, and now King’s authority as “Head of State” and “Head of Nation”. So the British monarch is both HEAD of State, Commonwealth and the Anglican sect (“Defender of the Faith”, remember?) – and simultaneously ABSOLUTELY NOTHING vis-a-vis these institutions. Simultaneously a THING, and NOT A THING.

DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR???? It should. This “he is and he isn’t”, this “possessing ultimate authority and simultaneously ZERO authority” insanity is EXACTLY what the infiltrators of the Catholic Church, and now, sadly, many Trad Inc partisans, are trying to convince the world of with regards to the Papacy because they intransigently hold the false base premise that Pope Benedict validly resigned and that Jorge Bergoglio has anything to do with the Papacy – which he OBVIOUSLY does not. THIS is how the Bergoglian Antipapacy survives, lo these nine years in – a pathological and completely shameless violation of the Law of Non-Contradiction. “Pope Fwanciss is totally, definitely the Vicar of Christ to which all must submit and be in union with under penalty of schism, but simultaneously an apostate and the enemy of God and His Holy Church who must be resisted, ignored and fought in order to remain Catholic.  If you’re with him, you’re an apostate, and if you’re against him you’re a schismatic, and that’s TOTALLY fine and normal.” Peter Kwasniewski and Mike Matt, please pick up the nearest white courtesy telephone.

Queen Elizabeth II, already being called “Elizabeth the Great”, presided as monarch over the most rapid and profound societal, cultural, religious and imperial collapse in human history, it seems to me. Any historians that would like to chime in on this question, please email me. I truly can’t think of another example in history that was as severe and as rapid as what has happened in Battenburgian Britain. Consider what the both the British Empire AND the British culture were in ARSH 1952, and what they are today. When Elizabeth took the throne, it was literally true that “the sun never set” on the British Empire. They had already lost India just five years earlier in ARSH 1947, but in ARSH 1952 the U.K. had real, legitimate control of massive swaths of Africa, a huge presence in SE Asia, Hong Kong, the entirety of Oceania and the South Pacific, the Falklands, a large presence in the West Indies and the Caribbean, and, of course, nearly half of North America. Today, almost every colony and territory has declared total independence, and the so-called “Commonwealth” nations are IN NAME ONLY. The United Kingdom has ZERO authority in say, Canada. Or Australia. Or New Zealand. None. And everyone knows it. And the only thing keeping Argentina from invading and taking the Falklands is the fact that Argentina is such a broke, incompetent kakistocracy that they can’t.  But the Royal Navy today could NOT defend the Falklands, and everyone knows it.

But more importantly, as “Head of State and Head of Nation”, Queen Elizabeth signed off on the largest race-replacement scheme in human history. Today, the city of London IS LESS THAN HALF WHITE – not merely “British”, but WHITE. It was in the high 90 percentile BRITISH when she took the throne. The City of Leicester is a fully-conquered territory of the Caliphate. Non-musloids basically can’t walk the streets of Leicester without risking their lives. Many cities in the U.K. have surpassed the percentage musloid from which only hot war can reclaim the territory. Queen Elizabeth SIGNED OFF ON ALL OF THIS.

And need I remind one and all that she was all-in on the CoronaScam? Can anyone forget the sight of her – aged 94 – sitting completely alone wearing a Covid burqa AT HER OWN HUSBAND’S FUNERAL, projecting to the world the need to submit to and participate in the largest crime against humanity that has ever been perpetrated?

I want to really drive home the point to counter the Anglophiles in their bleatings of “But she doesn’t have any REAL authority…” She literally had to SIGN WITH HER SIGNATURE pieces of legislation. Think about that. If someone put some monstrous bill in front of YOU and said, “Sign off on this – it’s just ceremonial, but YOU still have to sign YOUR name to it…” would you do it? Would YOU sign off on no-fault divorce? The legalization of contraception? The legalization of sodomy? The legalization of ABORTION? The legalization of EUTHANASIA? Welp, Queen Elizabeth did. She signed her name on ALL OF IT, living in $20 billion luxury, completely participating in the “monarchy” AS THE SOVEREIGN MONARCH, “HEAD OF STATE” and “Defender of the Faith”, remember?

Queen Elizabeth also signed off as “popess” (“Defender of the Faith”, remember?) on the monstrosity of female “clergy” and “bishops”, and on sodomite unions in her allegedly Christian sect. It was so sad to see poor little Prince George and Princess Charlotte at the Queen’s funeral being introduced to the most hideous dyke wearing liturgical garb, masquerading as a Bishop, that I have ever seen.


What IS that THING on the left? Those poor children…

“Devout Christian.” “Defender of the Faith.” IN WHAT UNIVERSE? Because it sure as hell isn’t this one.

Queen Elizabeth bestowed countless honors and knighthoods on the most open, disgusting sodomites and moral monstrosities, and British culture went from what we see depicted in “All Creatures Great and Small” to the totally degenerate, revolting Brit culture we see today ON HER WATCH. So when I saw people immediately beating the drum that Queen Elizabeth “reigned over the greatest advancement in British culture in history”, I just sat there shaking my head thinking, “How is it possible to be so utterly detached from reality?” Her reign was the most catastrophic civilizational collapse perhaps in human history.

And no, she didn’t HAVE to do any of it. She could have, as we human beings being created in the image and likeness of God as rational intellects with free will universally can, CHOOSE that which we do. What would YOUR price be? If someone offered you $20 billion, would you sign off on infanticide? Would you sign off on sodomite pseudo-marriage? For anyone who is morally sane, the answer is instantaneous: OF COURSE NOT, I’D RATHER DIE. Queen Elizabeth chose to sign, and then go ride horsies and play with corgi dogs. She chose to persist in the lie of Anglicanism, and happily carried the title “defender of the faith”. She COULD have converted and literally changed the entire course of history – radically – AT ANY TIME. Can you imagine having God give you THAT level of influence and power to change the world… and just blow it off and NOT act? If she had raised her children right, they would have converted with her. She could have restored England to Christ. Pray for her soul. Her Particular Judgment must have been… one shudders to think.

For me, the failure of Queen Elizabeth to act to save Baby Alfie Evans, who was STONE-COLD MURDERED by the National Health Service, the U.K.’s Molochian cult social medicine monstrosity, was what proved to me that she was, in fact, a personally terrible person. In ARSH 2017-18, baby Alfie Evans was stricken with a brain disorder. The NHS became diabolically obsessed with not only withholding treatment, but in ACTIVELY KILLING Baby Alfie. It got to the point that Italy granted Alfie full citizenship so that he could be medivacked to Rome and be treated at the Bambino Gesu Childrens’ Hospital. The NHS demanded in court that parental rights be stripped from Alfie’s parents because they REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE NHS’ MOLOCHIAN MURDER OF ALFIE. Queen Elizabeth COULD HAVE picked up a phone at any moment and sent the finest medivac plane in the U.K. – the one that would be presumably used FOR HER in an emergency – and let Baby Alfie, a dual citizen of Italy, go to Rome and not be murdered by HER OWN NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE.

On April 23, ARSH 2018, life support was withdrawn from Baby Alfie, and despite the claims of the NHS that Alfie had no brain, but only a cranium filled with water and cerebral-spinal fluid, the little tyke breathed on his own.  The NHS, demonically enraged by Alfie’s refusal to be murdered, allowed Alfie to live for five days. In the wee hours of April 28th, they called Alfie’s parents out of the room on false pretenses, whereupon a female NHS employee went into Alfie’s room and injected poison into his I.V. He was dead in less than five minutes. Because the NHS is “god” in Battenburgian Britain, and Elizabeth was its high priestess.

This woman, Queen Elizabeth, called by sycophants with a straight face, “The World’s Grandmother”, said NOT a word, and thus by OMISSION, SILENCE and TURNING A BLIND EYE was complicit in the murder of Alfie Evans. One phone call. “Head of State and Head of Nation, and Defender of the Faith.” $20 billion net worth. Couldn’t be bothered to pick up the phone and save a little boy – one of her “subjects”. But God forbid any of her horsies or doggies were to get sick.

Now let’s talk about Queen Elizabeth’s failure as a mother. Three of her four children are civilly divorced, with one – by all accounts her favorite child, Prince Andrew – being a notorious psychopath ephebophile. Princess Anne is “remarried”. And most scandalously, Charles cohabits with another man’s wife – Mrs. Andrew Parker-Bowles, and Queen Elizabeth herself, in her final coup de grace against Holy Matrimony and Jesus Christ, declared that Mrs. Parker-Bowles would be called “Queen Consort”.  Such a “good Christian woman with a deep, abiding faith.” Who spits in God’s face. THE MIND REELS.

Can you imagine having a $20 billion fortune at your disposal, knowing that your eldest son would be heir to the throne and so-called “defender of the faith”, and completely, totally failing to instill any sort of Christian morality in him, never mind your other three children? Queen Elizabeth had a front-row seat to her Uncle, King Edward VIII, abdicating so he could marry the creepy skank Mrs. Wallis Simpson, who was ACTUALLY Mrs. Earl Spencer (she was THRICE civilly married). She saw the crisis that ensued, and the horrific stress that it put on her father – stress which probably contributed to his premature death. Edward VIII was totally forbidden from “marrying” Wallis Spencer aka Simpson because even the Anglicans knew that divorce and remarriage was a total impossibility – MUCH LESS for the so-called “defender of the faith”.

Furthermore, what many people might not know is that there was ANOTHER crisis in which Queen Elizabeth HERSELF forbade her sister, Princess Margaret, from marrying a divorced man in ARSH 1953 shortly after she ascended the throne. Princess Margaret obeyed her sister and totally broke off the relationship. This was the last time that Queen Elizabeth would defend holy matrimony in any way. She permitted Princess Margaret to civilly divorce her husband in ARSH 1978, then for Princess Anne to divorce and “remarry” in ARSH 1992, then for Prince Andrew to divorce in ARSH 1996, and, of course, for Prince Charles to divorce Diana in ARSH 1996 and fake-marry Mr. Parker-Bowles’ wife, thus resulting in the “Queen Consort” of England and “wife” of the “Anglican pope” – DEFNEDER OF THE FAITH, remember – actually being the wife of the cuckolded Andrew Parker-Bowles.

Queen Elizabeth signed off on all of this both on the micro level of her own family, AND as the “popess” of the Anglican sect. The civilization-crumbling scandal she DIRECTLY, PERSONALLY caused and officially ratified is enormous. And now, we have Prince William, next in line to the throne, and thus likewise in line to be “defender of the faith”, declaring publicly that he and his wife “would have absolutely no problem” if one or more of their children turn out to be sexually perverted or transvestites. Nevermind those poor, poor children of Prince Harry and Mrs. Trevor Engleson. Those poor kids hardly stand a chance being raised by a raging psychopath and a complete moron – ANOTHER fake, scandalous pseudo-marriage that Queen Elizabeth signed off on. But “defender of the faith”, remember?

But let’s zoom in even further on the whole “defender of the faith” thing. Don’t you think that if YOU were in Queen Elizabeth’s position, and you were told that YOU, PERSONALLY were the head – essentially the “popess” – of the Body and Bride of Christ in the British Empire, that you would sit down, think about it for about ninety seconds and realize that the very notion was laughably ridiculous? That the entire farce was set in motion by a syphilitic madman who couldn’t control his sexual appetites, and when his demand for an annulment (even Henry VIII did not DARE ask for a divorce from Catherine of Aragon – he wanted a declaration of nullity, because even insane with syphilis, Henry KNEW that divorce was a total fiction and utterly impossible) was rightly denied by the Pope, Henry then declared HIMSELF “pope” of the Church in England and granted HIMSELF an annulment. Even subsequent to this schism, Henry disposed of his subsequent “wives” when he became sexually bored with them not by divorce or even annulment, but by murdering them. THIS is Anglicanism. THIS is the office of “defender of the faith” that Queen Elizabeth cheerfully claimed for herself for SEVENTY YEARS. Tell me more about her “deep, abiding Christian faith.” While she sold her realm and subjects lock, stock and barrel, to the Freemasonic New World Order.

The entire notion is a VERY tasteless joke.

Now, on to Charles – so your eldest son is the heir to the throne and thus future “defender of the faith”. Don’t you think that Queen Elizabeth, what with her “deep, abiding Christian faith” and all, would have therefore seen to it that her son – the future “pope” of Christ’s “church in England” would, you know, be taught the Christian faith? Would actually be… CHRISTIAN? Instead, what do we see? Charles is a PUBLICLY DECLARED APOSTATE. Charles has said repeatedly over the years that when he ascended to the throne, that he would not consider himself “defender of THE faith”, but rather, “defender of faith” without the definite article. Folks, that is STONE-COLD TEXTBOOK APOSTASY. Charles has said that he will defend “faith” in whatever sense. So he is defender of faith in satan under the name “allah”, and defender of faith in demons masquerading as Hindu deities, and defender of faith in “mother earth”, and defender of faith in oneself as “god”. The notion of Charles being the head of anything relating to the Body and Bride of Christ is as laughable as Jorge Bergoglio being the actual Pope – both are open apostates.

Which brings us to something that bears mentioning – it is in fact POSSIBLE that Queen Elizabeth was never validly baptized at all. At the baptisms of high-ranking members of the British nobility, apparently the Anglicans would “spread the honor” around to various pseudo-clergymen by having THREE DIFFERENT MEN say the three phrases of Baptism. For example:

The Right Reverend Floppy Plonkington-Jones: Elizabeth, I baptize you in the name of the Father. (Pours water)

Archbishop Fruity Bouncington-Smith: And of the Son. (Pours water)

Archbishop Mashy Redd-Potatington: And of the Holy Ghost. (Pours water)

This is, of course, totally invalid. So the truth is that we really don’t know if ANY of these people were even baptized. It is POSSIBLE that Queen Elizabeth never was. Which is simultaneously sad and terrifying.

Now let’s tie all of this mess together in what I think is the major take-home point: the British Monarchy has been a giant luciferian psy-op for centuries to subtly attack and degrade the Papacy – which is, of course, the elected Monarchy established by Christ and endowed with a supernatural negative protection to – wait for it – DEFEND THE FAITH.

I’ve made the point now for years in this space that the founding objective of Freemasonry – which was founded in London in ARSH 1717 – was and is to destroy the Catholic Church by attacking and destroying the Papacy. To do this, Freemasonry has systematically attacked and destroyed all of the world’s MONARCHIES, because the destruction of the secular monarchical system was the necessary antecedent to destroying the Monarchy of monarchies – the Papacy.

“But Ann! But Ann! The British Monarchy not only still exists, but we just got through seeing a MASSIVE ceremonial pageantry with the funeral of Queen Elizabeth! How can you say that Freemasonry has destroyed the monarchical system when the United Kingdom not only still exists, but just executed perhaps the largest ceremonial event in its history?”

The answer has already been addressed above. The British Monarchy no longer exists in the sense that every Anglo and Anglophile will swear up and down that the British monarch “HAS NO REAL POWER OF GOVERNANCE,” that the British crown is a “PURELY CEREMONIAL FIGUREHEAD POSITION THAT FUNCTIONS MERELY AS A MASCOT OF UNITY. But NOBODY actually BELIEVES that the Queen/King has any REAL authority.”

Is this sounding just EVER so slightly familiar – this egregious violation of the Law of Non-contradiction? That the Sovereign of Great Britain is BOTH the Queen/King, and at the same time absolutely nothing? That the Queen/King is simultaneously “defender of the faith” and an open apostate?  That the British monarchy is both a thing worthy of a $20 billion estate and all of the “duties and responsibilities” of power and governance, and a completely hollow irrelevancy?

Yup. This is EXACTLY the tack and argumentation made by “Fwanciss is Pope” partisans.  That the Papacy is BOTH the Divinely established office of the Vicariate of Christ on earth AND the domain of a non-Catholic public apostate hellbent on destroying the Church; that the Pope is BOTH the Principle of Unity and Standard of Schism AND the enemy of Christ who must be resisted and with whom to be in unity is to be apostate; and that the Pope has BOTH universal jurisdiction and supreme authority AND no power or authority at all and anyone who says the Papacy has power and authority is a “hyper-uber-ultramontanist dingbat”.

I’m convinced that people have been conditioned to swallow these OBVIOUS violations of the Law of Non-contradiction vis-a-vis the Papacy because they’ve been doing it for DECADES with Queen Elizabeth, and now Charles. It is no coincidence that the most intransigent “FWANCISS IS DEFEINTELY POPE” Traditional Catholic partisans are either Anglos, Anglophiles, or people under the thumb of “peer pressure” of Anglos. “The Queen has NO POWER to interfere – she HAS to sign EVERY legislative act that comes across her desk – it’s purely ceremonial, and you’re an idiot incapable of nuanced thought if you don’t understand that Her Majesty, our sovereign Liege by the Grace of God, Elizabeth Regina, Head of State, Head of Nation and Defender of the Faith, is really nothing at all – and everything. But nothing. But everything. Yes, but no. No, but yes. She is, but she isn’t. She isn’t, but she is.”

By all means, pray for the repose of her soul, but let us be VERY clear: the odds that this woman, Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor Mountbatten, sailed through her Particular Judgment, given the position and the massive personal responsibility she had, are SLIM.

Also, pray for Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger, the one and only living Vicar of Christ whether he likes it or not, for the Papacy, and for Holy Mother Church, outside of which there is no salvation.

Well, that’s 4000 words. I could say more, and probably will. Again, if anyone can think of an example of a more severe degradation in civilization than the U.K. from ARSH 1952-2022, I’d be genuinely interested to know.

Bruce Jenner is a man. And furthermore I consider that islam must be destroyed.