Author Archives: Ann Barnhardt

Wherein Cardinal Burke Unwittingly Demonstrates the Mathematical Concept of Reductio Ab Absurdum

One of the top lessons, if not THE top lesson of my secular career was the fact that people in high positions, be it in business, academia, the Church, or government in this day and age are almost universally assumed to be far, far, far, FAR more competent than they actually are.  There is a presumption of merit and competence in our culture that simply does not comport to reality.  This has two terrible effects.  The first is the obvious: under-qualified people achieve ranks and positions of authority that they generally do not deserve, and thus cannot properly or sufficiently exercise.  The second is more subtle, namely that many people who do have competence remain silent, inactive, because they are not “credentialed” in this anti-meritocracy that we all live in.

One of the starkest lessons in this I learned very early on in my career as a commodity broker.  An executive in the company wanted me to make a chart for him in Microsoft Excel, a regression analysis, for a presentation he was supposed to give to a group of economists.  He asked me to make a regression chart which had the same variable on both the x and y axis.  I pointed out that this was completely ridiculous, and that the reason the R-squared value (the degree of statistical correlation) was 0.99 was because he was regressing the dataset literally against itself.  I categorically refused to produce the chart and explained that if he presented the regression as he wanted it, he would literally destroy his own reputation and be a complete laughingstock.  He insisted.  I called him out and said, “Well, you’re going to have to fire me,” knowing full well that there was absolutely no way that he would.  Now, here’s where it gets REALLY bad.  I suggested that we call a mutual friend of ours, a Ph.D. agricultural economics professor, and ask him.  So I called the professor and explained the situation, and the professor obviously agreed with me about the error of running an x-y scatter study of the same variable on both axes.  Then, I put the professor on the speakerphone.  As soon as the corporate executive spoke, the professor folded and started saying things like, “Well, I wouldn’t do it personally, but…” The submissive professor refused to tell the rich corporate executive, “No, you are wrong.”  That was a HUGE lesson in two ways.  First, the lesson that people in high positions are sometimes if not often lacking even basic competence, and second, that people will grovel and submit to people in high positions, even on matters of obvious error, simply in order to stay in the good graces of “power”.

This digression brings us to Cardinal Burke.  A lot of people have picked up on this, but I will go ahead and chime in as well.  Cardinal Burke is quoted by no less than the New York Times, satan’s cat box liner, saying this:

Burke: While the final document is less explicit in the embrace of pantheism, it does not repudiate the statements in the working document which constitute an apostasy from the Catholic faith.

The working document doesn’t have doctrinal value. But what if the pope were to put his stamp on that document? People say if you don’t accept that, you’ll be in schism — and I maintain that I would not be in schism because the document contains elements that defect from the apostolic tradition. So my point would be the document is schismatic. I’m not.

Douthat: But how can that be possible? You’re effectively implying that the pope would be leading a schism.

Burke: Yes.

Douthat: Isn’t that a deep contradiction of how Catholics think about the office of the papacy?

Burke: Of course. Exactly. It’s a total contradiction. And I pray that this wouldn’t happen. And to be honest with you, I don’t know how to address such a situation. As far as I can see, there’s no mechanism in the universal law of the church to deal with such a situation.

This is a crystal clear example of the very serious mathematical/philosophical concept of “Reductio ad absurdum”, which is defined as: a form of argument that attempts either to disprove a statement by showing it inevitably leads to a ridiculous, absurd, or impractical conclusion, or to prove one by showing that if it were not true, the result would be absurd or impossible.

Simply put, if the conclusion from a given premise results in an absurdity, namely a violation of the Law of Non-contradiction, or a mathematical absurdity such as 2=1, then the BASE PREMISE IS FALSE. Q.E.D.

In this case, the absurdity, the obvious violation of the Law of Non-contradiction, is the notion that Jorge Bergoglio could simultaneously be both the Standard of Unity – that is, the Roman Pontiff, AND its ontological opposite, the Vector of Schism; that all men must BOTH be in union with and submission to Bergoglio in order to NOT be in schism from the One True Church, while simultaneously Bergoglio demands apostasy from the One True Church in order to be in union with him. A clear Catch-22 ontological impossibility. You’re damned if you do, and you’re damned if you don’t.  Only satan plays such irrational games.

For Cardinal Burke to say what he said, fully acknowledging the LOGICAL CONTRADICTION of Jorge Bergoglio being the Pope, and for Cardinal Burke to not IMMEDIATELY acknowledge that there is a problem with that base premise, indicates one of two things.  Either Cardinal Burke is simply not intelligent enough to understand the Law of Non-contradiction, or he IS intelligent enough to understand it, but chooses to continue to embrace IRRATIONALITY in service to some worldly agenda or desire on his part.

Sorry, folks, but it is one or the other.  Period.  There is absolutely no way around it.

And circling back to the notion of people in high positions being beneficiaries of an anti-meritocracy, I suspect that Cardinal Burke, like so very many others, have dealt and continue to deal with the Bergoglian Antipapacy in the most effeminate way possible – looking away. Refusing to engage the dataset.  This is why Cardinal Burke and so many others continue to say things that betray their gross ignorance  with regards to this situation. A recent example of this would be Cardinal Burke saying that a Pope MUST exercise the active governance of the Church.  This is obviously false.  St. Peter was unable to govern the Church while he was incarcerated in the Mamertine Prison.  Did St. Peter lose the Office?  Of course not.  Pope John Paul II was unable to govern the Church while he was in a coma after being shot.  Did he lose the Office?  Of course not.  Did Pope Pius VI lose his Office when held captive by Napoleon because he was unable to govern the Church? Nope.  Did any Pope who was bedridden and ill for any period before dying lose his Office?  Of course not. The notion is simply dumb. And obviously so.

Again, they simply refuse to engage the dataset.  Avoid the problem by refusing to look at it.  Console themselves with bleatings and mewlings of, “There’s nothing we can do. All we can do is wait for Bergoglio to die….”  When in fact, this entire Antipapacy situation could be solved with ONE PRESS CONFERENCE.

It isn’t just high-ranking prelates doing this, folks.  Laypeople and low-level clerics are doing this, too.  I can’t tell you how often I ask people, “Have you read what I have written?  Have you watched my videos?”  Sometimes the answer comes back, “Yes,” to which I reply, “Well, what are your thoughts on the Miller Dissertation?”  Blank stare.  They have no clue what the Miller Dissertation even is.  Or, “How do you reconcile your position with Canon 188, or 332.2, or 359?”  Again, blank stare.  No clue what those Canons are or say.  But they swear up and down to my face that they “have read everything you have written, and find it unconvincing.”  The other common response is, “I don’t have time to watch a video…”  Of course not.  Riiiiight.  It’s only the most important issue in the universe.  There’s no way that is worth a few hours.  Of course not….  Even if you find my voice grating, you could turn on captions and read along with the sound muted, or just read the professional transcript of the Part One video.

I strongly, strongly suspect that Cardinal Burke simply hasn’t engaged the question of the validity of Pope Benedict’s attempted partial resignation because as the quote above proves, he is, for whatever reason, unwilling to deal with the problem.  I suspect that none of the Cardinals did any due diligence whatsoever with regards to Pope Benedict’s putative resignation in February of ARSH 2013 because many of them wanted Pope Benedict gone, and the rest, to their great shame, simply shrugged, went along with the crowd, and booked their plane tickets, thinking it better to just not rock the boat. 

And remember folks, to point out an objective truth is NOT to arrogate authority to yourself.  If I say, “one plus one equals two”, I am in no way claiming to be the creator and arbiter of mathematical truth. If I say that every particle attracts every other particle in the universe with a force which is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centers, I am not claiming to be the creator of the universe and the author and sustainer of the laws of physics.  I am simply acknowledging objective truth, which I have the capacity to do as a rational intellect.

Thus, pointing out the obvious canonical invalidity of Pope Benedict’s attempted partial abdication, and the glaringly obvious violation of the Law of Non-contradiction that the false premise of Bergoglio being the Pope demonstrates likewise does not mean that I am attempting to arrogate any authority to myself.  And that goes for everyone.  The authority here is Logic and Canon Law.  The former IS Our Lord Himself (John 1: 1), and the latter is backstopped by Our Lord (Matthew 18: 18).   I am merely a witness.  We all are.  So don’t fall for those weak-sauce straw man arguments.

I hope this helps.

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


In all of this, one person is being VERY conspicuously ignored…

Remember HER…? She only converted the entire South American continent all the way up into Freemasonic territory in Central North America, and thus almost instantly offsetting the loss of souls to the Lutheran-Anglican revolt in Europe in REAL TIME. Like, in just a few years. Talk about POWER.

THIS is The True Mother whom Antipope Bergoglio and his pagan-fag army are gunning to replace.

Fight, but don’t be scandalized. To be scandalized means that you either A:) lose faith due to the sins of others, or B:) are incited to copy the sins of others.

As if.


St. Juan Diego, pray for us.

Our Lady, Undoer of Knots, Virgin of Guadalupe, Mother of the Church, Mother of Priests, pray for us, pray for Pope Benedict, the Papacy and Holy Mother Church.


I get the strong sense that Dr. Marshall is… thinking seriously about these issues. I’d love to converse with him face to face. I regret not at least trying recently when I was nearby.

Here’s the thing about Pope Benedict, with some personal insights/relations.

– I cannot hate this man. In fact, given all of my activism against corruption, and my ability to walk away from and denounce people I discover to be thoroughly fraudulent and corrupt over the years, I simply cannot but love the Holy Father, Pope Ratzinger. Even after researching all of his awful academic work in the ’60s, ’70s and forward. This seems to me to be a grace. There is… something demanding my love with regards to him personally. I am certain that it is because he is Peter. It certainly isn’t because he’s German! 🙄

-I have the personal experience of realizing that you are totally surrounded by spectacular moral corruption, and the resulting feelings of (seeming) helplessness. More than once within the past decade, in fact. The second instance being far, far worse than the first. I mean, how surprising is it REALLY to realize that the financial industry is irredeemably corrupt? But when you discover that the whole Anglo-Trad Inc. Catholic Roman Intellectual scene is a big sodomite/sodophile clique…? I can only imagine what Pope Ratzinger, knowing what he knew both as head of the CDF, and then as Pope, of the financial, sodomitical, and satanic infiltration of the Church, and the UBIQUITOUSNESS of it especially, must have felt, and still feels. I can not just imagine, but mildly relate.

-++Pell is sitting in prison, convicted of crimes that he was indicted for that it is physically impossible for him to have committed. +Viganò is in hiding for fear of his life. Fr. Vaughn Treco is “excommunicated”. Fr. Paul Kalchik is still in hiding. And, not in a totally unrelated vein, Jeffrey Epstein didn’t kill himself.

-Pope Benedict was and is almost certainly threatened with “schisming the Church”. Can you even begin to imagine the pressure of being told, “Either you let us schism the Church, or we will schism the Church and falsely blame it on you personally – and everyone will believe us”?

-Pope Benedict doesn’t realize the power he possesses as Peter, the Absolute Monarch of not only the Vatican City State, but the entire physical universe, with Supernatural negative protection. He lacks faith in Our Lord’s promises to Peter and his successors, having himself (Ratzinger) been scandalized (loss of faith) by being surrounded by sickening sodomites, heretics and infiltrators for his entire adult life. Also, from being German.

-His minder/warden, Georg Ganswein, is to be trusted as far as he can be thrown by his eyebrows.

-Men under continuous coercion tend not to cry foul. Hence, COERCION.

-The pathological need to publicly HATE and DESPISE Pope Benedict, Christ’s Vicar on Earth, and by extension to hate and tear down the Petrine Office in toto (EXACTLY like the Freemasonic agenda…hmmm), as ratification of personal “daddy” and abandonment issues is transparent and pathetic to put it mildly. Aw, your baby boomer parents were divorced and sub-optimal? Get in line, toots. That excuses NOTHING. And instead of trying to make it into some sort of justification for your narcissistic train wreck life, MOVE ON and leave the Papacy out of your psychopathologies.

-If I could meet Pope Benedict and only say one sentence to him, it would be, “You are still the one and only living Pope because your resignation was canonically invalid, and I love you Holy Father Benedict, Peter, Joseph.”

If THAT makes me a stupid, crazy, ugly, schismatic, then, I throw myself upon Our Lord’s infinite mercy. My guilt is in believing Our Lord’s promises exactly as the Church has for 2000 years, and loving His Vicar, warts, substantial error, and all.

Tu es Petrus et super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam Meam.

Pray for Pope Benedict, the Papacy, and Holy Mother Church.

Another Quick Quesh….

If everything Bergoglio is doing is totally “in bounds” with regard to the Petrine Promise…


And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.

Luke 22: 31-32

“…an institute run with such knavish imbecility that if it were not the work of God it would not last a fortnight.”

-Hilaire Belloc

Maybe, just maybe, something is wrong with the base premise that Jorge Bergoglio is now or ever has been the Pope??

Here is the closing of the ARSH 2017 letter from Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger to Cardinal Brandmüller that leaked last year.

“Let us pray, as you did at the end of your letter, that the Lord comes to the rescue of His Church. I bless with my apostolic blessing,


Benedict XVI”

A simple question.

How it is possible that Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, being Perfect, Infinite Good, would put the Church Militant in a Catch-22 position of having to be in union with and submission to a “Pope” who is himself an apostate, and simultaneously demands apostasy from the One True Faith in order to be in union with him, wherein we are literally damned if we do, and damned if we don’t?

How is this not a clear violation of the Law of Non-contradiction?

How can a man be both the Standard of Unity and simultaneously the Vector of Schism – that is, ontological antipodes?

(Pssst.  Pro tip: Bergoglio’s heresy is NOT the CAUSE, it’s a CLUE that points backward to the CAUSE.  Ask yourself, “Self, something is CLEARLY wrong with the Bergoglio situation.  DID ANYTHING ODD HAPPEN IMMEDIATELY BEFORE AND LEADING UP TO BERGOGLIO’S “ELECTION??”

The answer will come hard and fast: Yes, only the oddest thing to happen in the Papacy in the 2000 year history of the Papacy – a Pope, under intense pressure and infiltration all foretold by multiple approved apparitions of the Mother of God, attempting to only PARTIALLY resign the papacy, namely the “active governance of the Church”, while “remaining, always and forever” firmly and VISIBLY within “the enclosure of St. Peter.”)

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

Antipope Bergoglio Mass at St. John Lateran: No Crucifix, No Candles.

Also, no Msgr. Guido Marini. I wonder if he has finally reached his limit.

It doesn’t invalidate, but it is exceptionally grave. And telling. From the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on altar candles:

The pure wax extracted by bees from flowers symbolizes the pure flesh of Christ received from His Virgin Mother, the wick signifies the soul of Christ, and the flame represents His divinity.


Without an Apostolic indult it is not allowable, and it constitutes a grievous offense to celebrate Mass without any light (Cong. Sac. Rit., 7 September, 1850), even for the purpose of giving Holy Viaticum, or of enabling the people to comply with their duty of assisting at Mass on Sundays and holy days (St. Lig., bk. VI, n. 394). In these, and similar cases of necessity it is the common opinion that Mass may be celebrated with tallow candles or oil lamps (ibid.). It is not permitted to begin Mass before the candles are lighted, nor are they to be extinguished until the end of Mass. If the candles go out before the Consecration, and cannot be again lighted, most authors say that Mass should be discontinued; if this happens after the Consecration, Mass should not be interrupted, although some authors say that if they can possibly be lighted again within fifteen minutes the celebrant ought to interrupt Mass for this space of time (ibid.) If only one rubrical candle can be had, Mass may be celebrated even ex devotione (ibid).

Mass at St. John Lateran with Pope Benedict XVI. Standard arrangement of the Mensa, for comparison.

Full video:

The Single Best Mass Aid I Have Ever Seen.

Remember folks, this only matches up with the Traditional Mass, because at least half a dozen of these items simply do not exist – were intentionally deleted – from the Novus Ordo.

Even if you don’t understand a word of Latin, THIS MASS AID will put you in the top 1% of living humans assisting at Mass on any given day. Sad, but undeniably true.

I just can’t get over the GOODNESS of God. How He makes everything so VISIBLE.

Consider printing this out and pasting/taping it into the front or back cover of your Hand Missal.

The “ ‘At Boy Ain’t Right” Chronicles…

I can’t even say, “caption this” because it’s just way, way, WAY too easy. And I’m literally sitting at an Asian buffet as I type this, and I’m not one-hundred on how to spell “smorgasbord”.

This is the Aux of Boston, Robert Reed. As in the father on the Brady Bunch who died of AIDS. Yeah. Like that, except different. Except kinda similar too….

All I can say is, Where are the PARENTS??

Run away, lads. Run away from the bad, bad man….

Oh, by the way, the Antipope denied the bodily Resurrection of Christ. Did you hear? Yeah, I know, I’m shocked too…. SHOCKED.

FULL CROSSPOST: Ratzinger: “The Petrine ministry…while preserving its substance as a divine institution, can find expressions in various ways according to the different circumstances of time and place.”

(This is a crosspost-in-full of Mr. Mark Docherty’s piece at his blog, NonVeniPacem.  Mr. Docherty has moderated comments at his blog if anyone would like to chime in, or insult Mr. Docherty’s looks or intelligence, or just calumniate him in general.  Also, the fine rhetorical art of the “Nuh-UH! Shut up, stupid!” is always valued and appreciated.  I wonder if Mr. Docherty ever thought that he would spend his middle-age collecting mind-numbing works of mid-20th century Teutonic “theology” and stepping to the front to defend the Papacy?  Ah, the Divine Providence.  So unfathomable, so unsearchable, and yet always perfect.  Thanks to Mr. Docherty for full crossposting permission. Fast and pray for Pope Benedict, the Papacy, and Holy Mother Church. -AB)

Surely by now, everyone reading this space has purchased their copy of (now archbishop) J. Michael Miller’s The Shepherd and the Rock: Origins, Development and Mission of the Papacy.  This book was published in 1995 by Our Sunday Visitor, and is an expansion on +Miller’s 1979 doctoral thesis, which the Gregorianum published in 1980 under the title, The Divine Right of the Papacy in Recent Ecumenical Theology.
Screenshot 2019-06-15 at 08.06.32
Chapter 16 of this book is titled: “Facing the Future: 21 Theses on the Papal Ministry”
What might the future hold, in terms of the form and function of the Papal Ministry? Turn to page 357:

Thesis 14: In order to fulfill its specific mission, the Petrine ministry has assumed many different forms in the past and will continue to do so in the future

Because the people of God are on a pilgrimage, the pope must have the freedom to respond to new challenges, thereby revealing new facets of the Petrine ministry. We must be on guard, therefore, lest we too quickly identify contingent forms with what is dogmatically essential to the papal office. (Do you see here how the ministry is obviously distinct from the office?)
Miller immediately goes on to support this thesis with a quote from Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the CDF at the time:
“The Petrine ministry…while preserving its substance as a divine institution, can find expressions in various ways according to the different circumstances of time and place.” -Cardinal Ratzinger (as Prefect of the CDF), Communionis Notio, 28 May 1992, P.18
From the Latin: “quodque, salva substantia divina institutione definita, diversimode pro varietate locorum et temporum se manifestare potest”
I looked up the source, and indeed it is an official document of the CDF, signed by Ratzinger:
The topic at hand, obviously, is the possibility of changing the structure of the papacy, to meet the varying needs of the Church and its members, while maintaining the essential nature of the office. This was Ratzinger’s dream, to somehow overcome the Petrine stumbling block for the sake of unity. And if changing the structure of the Petrine ministry was necessary, he was open to it.
Back to the Miller book, page 358:
Ratzinger admits that “without a doubt there have been misguided developments in both theology and practice where the primacy is concerned.” A particular way of exercising the primacy might well have been the pope’s duty for the Church’s welfare at one time, without its being so in the future. In the words of Hermann Pottmeyer, “the present juridical and organizational form of the office of Peter is neither the best imaginable nor the only possible realization.”
Now let’s take a look at Cardinal Ratzinger’s 1997 book-length interview with Peter Seewald, Salt of the Earth:

Seewald: “Do you think that the papacy will remain as it is?”

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

Cardinal Ratzinger, Salt of the Earth, Peter Seewald book-length interview, 1997, page 257

“I neither can nor want to imagine.” Oh man, how unknowingly prophetic is that? Then again, if you self-fulfill your own prophesy, is that cheating?

“Forms of exercise can change, they will certainly change”

He’s not exactly on the fence about it, is he?

Now let’s move to the following year, and another document written by Cardinal Ratzinger in his official role as Prefect of the CDF, The Primacy of the Successor of Peter in the Mystery of the Church, 18 November 1998:

At this moment in the Church’s life, the question of the primacy of Peter and of his Successors has exceptional importance as well as ecumenical significance. John Paul II has frequently spoken of this, particularly in the Encyclical Ut unum sint, in which he extended an invitation especially to pastors and theologians to “find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation”…

“The pilgrim Church, in its sacraments and institutions, which belong to this age, carries the mark of this world which is passing”.44 For this reason too, the immutable nature of the primacy of Peter’s Successor has historically been expressed in different forms of exercise appropriate to the situation of a pilgrim Church in this changing world…The Holy Spirit helps the Church to recognize this necessity, and the Roman Pontiff, by listening to the Spirit’s voice in the Churches, looks for the answer and offers it when and how he considers it appropriate.

Consequently, the nucleus of the doctrine of faith concerning the competencies of the primacy cannot be determined by looking for the least number of functions exercised historically. Therefore, the fact that a particular task has been carried out by the primacy in a certain era does not mean by itself that this task should necessarily be reserved always to the Roman Pontiff… (ahem, you mean like delegating the Governance role without relinquishing the Office, per Canon 131.1?)

In any case, it is essential to state that discerning whether the possible ways of exercising the Petrine ministry correspond to its nature is a discernment to be made in Ecclesia, i.e., with the assistance of the Holy Spirit and in fraternal dialogue between the Roman Pontiff and the other Bishops, according to the Church’s concrete needs. But, at the same time, it is clear that only the Pope (or the Pope with an Ecumenical Council) has, as the Successor of Peter, the authority and the competence to say the last word on the ways to exercise his pastoral ministry in the universal Church.

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger,Prefect, CDF, Primacy of the Successor of Peter in the Mystery of the Church (published in L’Osservatore Romano, Weekly Edition in English, 18 November 1998, page 5-6) HERE

But wait! There’s more:

Screenshot 2019-11-06 at 15.20.20

It’s 2008 and Ratzinger is now Pope Benedict XVI. This collection of essays, in various forms, goes back to 1987. The 2008 edition was translated by our new friend, Archbishop Miller. Turn straight to page 38 to read Benedict waxing poetic about the idea of not one, not two, but THREE members in an expanded Petrine ministry. He literally uses the term “papal troika.”

Screenshot 2019-11-06 at 10.45.21

Talk about shifting the Overton Window. How about having a book published after you’ve become pope, introducing the radical idea of a papal troika as being plausible, and then pulling back to the slightly less radical idea of a diarchy, making the latter seem positively moderate by comparison.

But remember, there is absolutely zero evidence that Pope Benedict ever once, even for a moment, considered the idea of altering the structure of the papacy, you stupid layperson.

4.4 Earthquake east of Rome

4.4 east of Rome.

Remember, the Pachamama dragon demon is invoked specifically to CAUSE earthquakes. Demons are real, folks.

I have long suspected that Rome should expect some sort of seismic or geological catastrophe. It is both prophesied, and, frankly, with all of the sodomitical sacrilege that has desecrated pretty much every church in Rome by now (the Sodomitical infiltration is beyond description) plus the open idolatry and public desecration of St. Peter’s (not to mention the fact that clerics, prelates, and Vatican Museum Tour Guides are using it as a bathhouse), it seems obtuse to think that this is just going to go on unfettered. And we all know that no one in the Church hierarchy is going to do ANYTHING about any of this.