Category Archives: Uncategorized

By Their Fruits You Will Know Them…. Dr. Taylor Marshall, Sadly, Is Telling People Who Believe Pope Benedict To Be the One and Only Living Pope To Cease Attending the Holy Sacrifice of Calvary.

How incredibly, incredibly sad.  And chilling.  It is simply horrible to watch other people self-harm like this, much less the damage being done to souls, and to Our Lord and His Church, already under such unspeakable attack.  I think this DEFINITELY warrants a call to priests to offer the Holy and August Sacrifice of the Mass for Dr. Taylor Marshall.

Now I want you to just stop and think about this.  Do you HONESTLY believe that ANYONE telling you to STOP GOING TO MASS can possibly, possibly be of the Holy Ghost? Do you honestly believe that Jesus Christ actively wills you to break the THIRD COMMANDMENT?

Not that anyone is excommunicated, but purely to drive home the point of how wicked and uncharitable the Tweet of Dr. Marshall’s is, did you know that even people who have been formally excommunicated are still 100% bound by the Third Commandment to assist at Mass and fulfill their Sunday Obligation and all Holy Days of Obligation? If a formally excommunicated person does not hear Mass on Sunday, that is another mortal sin added to their tally. An excommunicated cannot receive Holy Communion, obviously, but he is still obliged, and Holy Mother Church earnestly desires that he COME TO MASS precisely because the Mass is the intersection of Heaven and Earth, with infinite quantities of grace available to every soul there present.

EVERYONE should go to Mass.  The only kind of Mass that one should absolutely not assist at is an INVALID Mass, which is actually then no Mass at all, but an aping of the Mass.  Even if a given Mass is illicit, which almost every Novus Ordo Mass is by definition, since the Novus Ordo was conceived in malice by enemies of God and His Holy Church (with parts of the Canon literally composed on the back of a napkin in a restaurant in the Trastevere district of Rome) if a Novus Ordo Mass is all that is available, one not only SHOULD assist at it, but MUST hear it to fulfill the Sunday and Holy Days of Obligation.

Why?  Why is EVERYONE bound to hear Mass, even if it is illicit, up to and including those who have been formally excommunicated?

BECAUSE THE MASS IS CALVARY.

Because the Mass, even an illicit Mass, so long as it is VALID, effects the warping of space and time itself such that the once-for-all event of Calvary, these almost 1989 years ago (+/-) is made ACTUALLY PRESENT upon the Altar right in front of you. You ARE there.

Why did Christ do this?  Because He loves you so much that He wants you there with Him as He dies in agony for your sins, because YOUR presence is a consolation to HIM, which is a truth that is so incomprehensible in its infinite goodness and purity of its gratuitous love that it should make us all melt with joy while simultaneously buckling us over in fear and humility.  Remember, Christ Jesus would go through His entire Passion and Death JUST FOR YOU AND YOU ALONE, and even more incomprehensibly, He would do it AS MANY TIMES AS YOU GO TO MASS IN YOUR LIFE.  Given this, does it sound right to you that it is in any way possible that God would ever, ever NOT want you to hear a VALID Mass?  Can any such whispers in your ear possibly have their origin from the Holy Ghost?  Of course not.  It is the objective of satan to try to convince people to not attend Mass.  Especially now.

Consider also who is also present at the Foot of the Cross at every Mass: The Blessed Virgin, and St. John, who as “The Disciple that Jesus Loved” is the proxy for YOU.  Jesus loves you infinitely.  YOU are the Disciple that He Loves.  Do you honestly believe that He would ever tell you to NOT come to the Foot of the Cross – ever?  No – only The Liar would dare suggest such a thing.  Do you honestly believe that Jesus Christ would ever actively will that you NOT stay close to His Mother, that you LEAVE HER SIDE, knowing that He specifically gave her to you as YOUR OWN MOTHER?

SuperNerd put it very beautifully in one of the Podcasts – I can’t remember which – that Jesus Christ is present at every VALID Mass, but at some Masses His Presence is more apparent to us in the remnant Church Militant as in Triumph, Enthroned as the King of All that He is.  At other Masses, Masses that are illicit for whatever reason, including Masses in which an Antipope is commemorated, His Presence is more apparent to the remnant Church Militant as in His Agony, Passion and Crucifixion.  Are we to think that we should only deign to hear Masses in which His Presence is more apparent as in Triumph, and that we should haughtily shun those Masses in which He seems to us to be shackled to the Pillar, or nailed to the Cross?  Or perhaps, when we assist at a Mass in which something illicit is done, we should comfort Our Lord, make prayers of reparation, take on penances voluntarily, and even pray for Him to give us the strength and virtue to do what He wants us to do in order to help make the illicit actions stop.  Remember, the most horrific Holy Sacrifice of the Mass ever celebrated WAS CALVARY ITSELF in ARSH 30.

The FIRST inquiry I made in June of ARSH 2016 was of a very, very solid and internationally respected priest. I asked him if it is appropriate and not hypocritical for me to receive Holy Communion at a Mass in which I knew that a man I was morally certain was an Antipope (“Francis”) was commemorated.  My question was about receiving Holy Communion – because it was a complete no-brainer that HEARING a Valid Mass could never be wrong.  He assured me instantly and with complete certainty that YES, you may receive without hypocrisy and certainly without sin in se.

In these dark days, the truly humble prayer is, “Lord Jesus, if I am wrong, correct me immediately, because all I desire is the Truth, because the Truth is You.  If I am right, confirm me, strengthen me, and suffer not my foot to be moved. (Psalm 120)  And never, ever let me be separated from You in the Holy Mass.”

Go to Mass, and never let anyone tell you that you have no place at the Foot of the Cross.  Pray. Pray the Second Joyful Mystery of the Rosary – the Visitation, whose fruit is an increase in FRATERNAL CHARITY, that is, love of neighbor.  Pray that the Truth be fully revealed, and pray especially that anyone and everyone who is being deceived be corrected, and humbly receive that correction.

Most people today, sadly, are just casually going along with the herd in terms of Antipope Bergoglio.  Others are terrified of speaking out against him and having their careers, donation revenues or worldly reputations reduced or ruined, or their order or community destroyed.  Others are too weak to engage the dataset, and prefer to live in an effeminate, blissful ignorance.  Only a relative few are actively malevolent.  Pray for priests and religious, and do whatever your state in life and your specific gifts allow to be of service to the Truth.  Go to confession.  Fast. Pray for sinners.  Pray for the excommunicates (public and latae sententiae), that they might receive graces while hearing Mass, even though they cannot/should not receive Holy Communion.

But most of all, for the literal love of God, DO NOT stop going to Mass. Do NOT stop going to the Foot of the Cross.

Notes on the LifeSite Piece: Subtitle, “The Last Time I Saw That Much Hedging, A Feedlot Full of Cattle and Several Million Bushels of Corn Were Involved.”

Oh, yes.  I saw the “Did Benedict Really Resign” piece over at LifeSite News.

First and foremost, let me add my voice to the many commenters who THANKED John-Henry Westen, The Jalsevacs, and Diane Montagna for doing and publishing the piece at all.  I doubt it would have made it beyond a pitch meeting one year ago.  But thanks to YOU GUYS for continuing to not only engage the dataset being presented here and elsewhere (I’d like to publicly recognize the NonVeniPacem blog, as well as “the Germans” for their continued work, sleuthing and translating), and despite the intense berating, gaslighting and censoring/banning that you all have put up with and persevered through from Trad, Inc. and elsewhere.  It was pointed out to me recently that what all of that name-calling, calumniating and gaslighting was, was simply a textbook application of Saul Alinsky’s Rule #13 from “Rules For Radicals”, the book that Alinsky dedicated to lucifer.  Rule #13 reads:

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

Make the argument about anything except the facts.  Character assassinate the messenger(s) without mercy. Get people into a position wherein they are ashamed, embarrassed and feel they have to apologize for simply daring to point out that “the king isn’t wearing any clothes.”  That’s the Alinsky way.

Just keep a laser beam focus on the Truth, folks, and don’t worry about anything else.  Be PATIENT (the 4th Sorrowful Mystery, the Carrying of the Cross) and PERSEVERE (the 5th Sorrowful Mystery, the Crucifixion and Death of Our Lord).  Don’t throw your hands up and give up, because that’s EXACTLY what the enemy wants and is banking on.  We still have tons of ammunition (believe me) and after that should it come to it? Bayonets!

The first thing about the LifeSite piece that bears mentioning is the comment thread.  The VAST majority of comments are favorable to at least the questioning of the validity of Pope Benedict’s attempted resignation, and are not buying what the quoted prelates and academics are selling.  At all.  What this does is absolutely prove that the whole “NOBODY except a few cranks question the validity of Pope Benedict’s resignation” Trad, Inc. trope is a flat-out lie.  By now, I think a significant majority of Trad Catholic pew sitters know that “Bergoglio as Pope” and the Petrine Promise of Our Lord to Peter and his successors simply cannot be reconciled, and being told to essentially “shut up” by Ganswein and Cardinal Brandmuller, or to quit rocking the boat you’re only making things worse by Prof. de Mattei just doesn’t cut it.  Not even close.

Cardinal Burke’s words inspired the title of this post.  Folks, look at this sentence.  The last time I saw anything this heavily hedged, a feedlot full of cattle and several million bushels of corn were involved:

“I believe it would be difficult to say it’s not valid.”

Wow.  That’s a double hypothetical conditional subjunctive burger with cheese, right there, folks.  That’s not just leaving the door open, that’s propping it open with a cinder block.

+Ganswein’s snooty, dismissive, gaslighty “how dare you ask me substantive questions about my own clearly documented, lengthy public remarks” speak for themselves.  “Shut up,” the sketchy Curial climber who is playing both sides, explained….

Cardinal Brandmuller?  “Enough!” Um, no, Eminence.  Just getting warmed up, because of the Truth, there is never, ever enough.

Speaking of Cardinal Brandmuller, the letter Pope Benedict wrote cited in the post immediately below this post was, in fact, to Cardinal Brandmuller.  I have received a few emails from people who are confused about what an Apostolic Blessing is.  There is a confusion between the terms Apostolic Blessing and Pontifical Blessing.

The Apostolic Blessing or papal blessing is a blessing imparted by the Pope, either directly or by delegation through others. Bishops are empowered to grant it three times a year and any priest can do so for the dying.

The Apostolic Blessing is not to be confused with an episcopal blessing, also known as a pontifical blessing, which bishops can impart at any time by their own authority.

But really the huge giveaway and red flag is the fact that Pope Benedict in his letter to Cardinal Brandmuller says “MY Apostolic Blessing”, and then signs the letter “Benedict XVI”.  MY.  Possessive.  Yes, because Pope Benedict, as the ever-growing mountain of objective evidence points to, including his own words, did NOT intend resign the Petrine Office, but only the aspect of the Petrine Ministry “for the governance of the Church”.

“The ‘always’ is also a for ever – there can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this. I do not return to private life, to a life of travel, meetings, receptions, conferences, and so on. I 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 of the Church, but in the service of prayer I remain, so to speak, in the enclosure of Saint Peter. Saint Benedict, whose name I bear as Pope, will be a great example for me in this. He showed us the way for a life which, whether active or passive, is completely given over to the work of God.”

-Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger
27 February, ARSH 2013
Papal Audience

“My step was not one of taking flight but was precisely another way of remaining faithful to my ministry.”
Pope Benedict XVI, ARSH 2017
“Last Testament”, Peter Seewald

Finally, it bears repeating that OFFICE and MINISTRY are not synonyms.  Not even casually, and CERTAINLY not in the precise realm of Canon Law.  Consider the following:

“When Pope John Paul II was in an induced coma after being shot, did he retain the Petrine Office?”
“Yes.”
“When Pope John Paul II was in an induced coma after being shot, was he able to exercise the Petrine Ministry?”
“No, of course not.  He was in a coma.”

Therefore, how could the terms OFFICE and MINISTRY be synonymous if one answer above is “yes”, and one answer above is “no”?  What SHOULD jump out at you is the fact that the OFFICE is an ontological state – a state of BEING.  The MINISTRY is an ACTION, a DOING, an ACTUALIZATION of the power of the Office.  The action (ministry) proceeds from the being (office).  These are DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.  Therefore, the two words CANNOT be synonymous.

Next up, we will see evidence that Pope Benedict XVI not only considers himself still the Pope in his newly-created “expanded, collegial synodal” paradigm, but that he considers himself the SUPERIOR, even “Uber-Pope”.  The Germans have been busy, folks….

Blessed Emperor Charles and Zita, pray for us!
St. Catherine of Siena, pray for us!
St. Vincent Ferrer, pray for us!
St. Peter, pray for us!
St. Joseph, pray for us!
Our Lady, Undoer of Knots. pray for us!

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us!

Mary Untier of Knots, Johann Georg Schmidtner, ca. ARSH 1700, St. Peter am Perlach,
Augsburg, Germany

Pope Benedict Still Gives the Papal (“Apostolic”) Blessing. Tell Me More About How His Attempted Resignation Wasn’t Intended To Be Partial. I’m All Ears.

Readers have asked me to revisit this compelling and yet overlooked piece of evidence, which might be the single most compelling in the whole set of “visible manifestations” of Pope Benedict’s conscious retention of the Petrine Office.  Pope Benedict XVI still gives the Apostolic Blessing, and folks, he does it IN WRITING, when there is absolutely ZERO situational pressure upon him to do so.

Here is the closing of the ARSH 2017 letter from Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger to an unnamed German Cardinal 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,

Yours,

Benedict XVI”

Folks, the Apostolic Blessing is the PAPAL BLESSING.

“I bless with my apostolic blessing.”

And then signed with his Papal name.

But I’m the crazy one, and the Barnhardt Thesis is nothing more than the uneducated rantings of a “dippy” “convert”.

Youbetcha.

Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger, whether he likes it or not, is the one and only living and reigning Pope, having invalidly attempted to “partially resign” the Papacy these six years ago.  The Papacy can not be bifurcated nor fundamentally transformed into a “collegial, synodal office” by anyone, including the Pope himself, because the Papacy was established by Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Himself and is thus immutable.  For a Pope to attempt such in a resignation of only the administrative/governance component of the Petrine Office, but NOT the Office in toto would render such resignation invalid per the “substantial error” clause in Canon 188, forcefully affirmed by Canon 332.2 which demands that the Roman Pontiff, if he should resign, resign the OFFICE (muneri), not merely a ministerial component or components of said Office.

I would, at this point, bless you all with my Apostolic Blessing, but I can’t, because I’M NOT THE POPE.

So, I’ll just wish you a very good evening, and assure one and all of my continued prayers.

“If you can live amid injustice without anger, you are immoral as well as unjust.”

(Please address all whining, protestations and “toxic masculinity triggering” to The Angelic Doctor, Heaven, late of New Ditch, Italy. Expect a reply in Neapolitan dialect.)

“He who is not angry when there is just cause for anger is immoral. Why? Because anger looks to the good of justice. And if you can live amid injustice without anger, you are immoral as well as unjust.”

Pro Tip: If a question comes down to either God being wrong, or you being wrong… it’s going to be you that is wrong more often than not.

And by “more often than not” I mean EVERY SINGLE TIME WITHOUT EXCEPTION.

If holding the base premise that Jorge Bergoglio is now or ever has been the Pope requires you to:

-Tear down and deny the authority of the papacy… CHECK

-Deny the dogma of the indefectibility of the Church… CHECK

-Deny Papal Infallibility, that is, Vatican I, and thus believe that Christ has broken His promise, and thus deny Christ’s Divinity… CHECK

-Go against every Saint and Church Father… CHECK

-Deny visible, objective reality… CHECK

Violate the Law of Non-contradiction… CHECK

-Play perfectly into the hands of the Freemasons, sodomites and satan himself… CHECK

Then you might consider the possibility, no matter how unthinkable and unlikely it may seem to you, that the Papacy remains intact and supernaturally protected as instituted by Christ, the Church actually is indefectible and remains so, that Vatican I was right and Papal Infallibility is real, and Christ has NOT broken, forsaken or renegged any of His promises, that the Church Fathers and Saints were NOT all mistaken, that visible, objective reality is… REAL, and that the Law of Non-contradiction has not been suspended, and thus you and your base premise are, in fact, wrong.

Just something to maybe consider.

Here is the Matthew 17:20 Initiative.  Join me.

Six Years.

NINTH STATION
Jesus falls for the third time

V/. Adoramus te, Christe, et benedicimus tibi.
R/. Quia per sanctam crucem tuam redemisti mundum.

From the Book of Lamentations 3:27-32

It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth. Let him sit alone in silence when he has laid it on him; let him put his mouth in the dust — there may yet be hope; let him give his cheek to the smiter, and be filled with insults. For the Lord will not cast off for ever, but, though He cause grief, He will have compassion, according to the abundance of His steadfast love.

MEDITATION

What can the third fall of Jesus under the Cross say to us? We have considered the fall of man in general, and the falling of many Christians away from Christ and into a godless secularism. Should we not also think of how much Christ suffers in His own Church? How often is the Holy Sacrament of his Presence abused, how often must He enter empty and evil hearts! How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that He is there! How often is His Word twisted and misused! What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words! How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to Him! How much pride, how much self-complacency! What little respect we pay to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, where He waits for us, ready to raise us up whenever we fall! All this is present in His Passion. His betrayal by His disciples, their unworthy reception of His Body and Blood, is certainly the greatest suffering endured by the Redeemer; it pierces His heart. We can only call to Him from the depths of our hearts: Kyrie eleison — Lord, save us (cf. Matthew 8: 25).

PRAYER

Lord, Your Church often seems like a boat about to sink, a boat taking in water on every side. In Your field we see more weeds than wheat. The soiled garments and face of Your Church throw us into confusion. Yet it is we ourselves who have soiled them! It is we who betray You time and time again, after all our lofty words and grand gestures. Have mercy on Your Church; within her too, Adam continues to fall. When we fall, we drag You down to earth, and Satan laughs, for he hopes that You will not be able to rise from that fall; he hopes that being dragged down in the fall of Your Church, You will remain prostrate and overpowered. But You will rise again. You stood up, You arose and You can also raise us up. Save and sanctify your Church. Save and sanctify us all.

(Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Stations of the Cross at the Colosseum of Rome, Good Friday, March 25, ARSH 2005, 25 days before his ascendancy to the See of Peter)

BOMBSHELL #TOLDYA: Open Sodomite Vatican Reporter Robert Mickens Confirms Agenda to Dissolve Petrine Office Through “Resignations”

Okay, the first thing you need to know is that the openly “out-and-proud” sodomite Robert “Bobby” Mickens is one of the most notorious sacrilegious sodomites in Rome.  He famously would be seen open-mouth-tongue kissing COLLARED PRIESTS on the bridges in the center of Rome.  Mickens was fired by the hardest left English language “c”atholic paper, The Tablet out of the U.K., after he publicly pined on Twitter for the death of Pope Benedict XVI, whom he hated (and hates) with a demonic passion because Pope Benedict XVI actually tried to fight the clerical gay “Lavender” mafia which Mickens swam (and presumably still swims) in.  Mickens is a DEPRAVED, DEMONIACAL human being.  And he is very, very well-connected with Vatican Bathhouse.

Mickens is now published by the sodomite French outfit “La Croix”, which says this on its website:

The Congregation of Augustinians of the Assumption as the sole shareholder of Bayard Presse, assure its stability, freedom and editorial independence.

Along with its diverse global coverage, La Croix International is home to exceptional contributors including Massimo Faggioli, Christa Pongratz-Lippit, Michael Sainsbury and Robert Mickens, with his signature, must-read weekly commentary Letter From Rome.

We are also excited that Mr. Mickens has joined La Croix International as English Editor, bringing his unparalleled experience [That’s one way to put it. -AB] as senior Vatican correspondent for the London Tablet and founding editor of Global Pulse Magazine.

Mickens posted THIS PIECE “The Resignation of Pope Francis” yesterday at La Croix.  Click over and read the whole thing.  Believe me, you’ll recognize what is being said.  Like, word-for-word.

Nevertheless, there have been signs since the very beginning of his pontificate that the question is not if Francis will resign, but more likely when he will actually do so. And the reason is simple. He is anxious that Benedict’s resignation does not go down in history as just another out-of-the-ordinary, once-in-every-several-hundred-years event. Instead, he wants it to become a precedent and something normal. “I keep coming back to this idea which may not please some theologians (and I am no theologian)… I think that a pope-emeritus should not be an exception,” he said in August 2014 while speaking to journalists on a return flight from South Korea.

Retirement becomes institutional, not exceptional

“My thinking is that 70 years ago bishops-emeritus were an exception; they didn’t exist. Today bishops emeritus are an institution. I think that a ‘pope emeritus’ has already become an institution,” he continued. “I believe that Pope Benedict XVI took this step which de facto instituted popes-emeriti,” Francis said. “He opened a door which is institutional, not exceptional.”

….

However, people closest to Francis have said privately that they are convinced he will step down when he believes the time is right time; that is, after he’s discerned that he’s done all he has been called to do and has implemented solid reforms that will be hard for a successor to undo. That would be a way to ensure that Benedict’s resignation does not remain a singular, one-off occurrence and truly does become institutional and not exceptional.

….

Santa Marta and the end of centralized, monarchical Church authority

The Argentine pope made the first — and what is the most significant — reform of his pontificate in the very first days following his election.

It was his decision to shun the secluded papal apartments deep inside the Apostolic Palace and make his permanent home at the Casa Santa Marta, a residence for priest-employees of the Vatican and the place where the cardinals lodge during a conclave.

The choice of address was the beginning of Francis’ slow, painstaking efforts to re-dimensionalize the scope and activities of the Roman Curia and decentralize its power. It was also part of his plan to demythologize the institution of the papacy and eliminate the lingering vestiges of the old papal court.

The pope has curtailed much of the Curia’s longstanding and disproportionate influence over local Churches and all of global Catholicism. He’s done this principally by laying the foundation (not without difficulty and opposition) for structures of synodality, first of all by strengthening and reforming the Synod of Bishops.

He has also promulgated legislation that gives (or is aimed to give) national episcopal conferences greater decision-making and doctrinal authority that has been almost exclusively reserved to the pope and his aides in the Vatican up to now.

But this long-term project, which is only meant to unleash a process that will need years to mature, is not even fully launched yet. Pope Francis still needs to further reform a number of institution and offices in the Vatican that pertain to the all-but-dead monarchical papacy.

Most of them, like the Prefecture of the Papal Household and the Apostolic Camera, were modernized by Paul VI after the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). But they require further pruning if not a definitive consignment to history.


In the Voris-Milo interview at the 16:45 timestamp, Milo brings up a point which he is, in fact, 100% correct about, namely the whole “papal resignation” paradigm being a de facto reduction of the papacy into a parliamentary system whereby any Pope could be forced out by having the people around him declare “no confidence”, or just simply saying, “we will make your life a living hell, so you might as well leave”.  EXACTLY.  Because it is the Freemasonic war against ALL MONARCHY, with the PAPACY, a Monarchy instituted by Christ Himself being the ultimate target and prize.

This is why all actual monarchies were systematically eliminated by Freemasonic putsches and wars beginning with the American Revolution, then on to France a decade later,  and finally with World War I when the foul plan was essentially wrapped up with the non-abdication “renunciation of participation in state affairs” (Sound familiar? Ring any bells? Dejavu all over again?) exile of Blessed Emperor Charles I Habsburg.  I would add that it also has a corporate figurehead “Chairman of the Board” dynamic, whereby the “board” could vote the meaningless figurehead out at any time.  SuperNerd and I discussed this in the second part of our Podcast on the Miris Vorlo interview HERE.

Folks, THIS is why the Bergoglian Antipapacy has to be PUBLICLY RECOGNIZED AND NULLIFIED NOW.  This business of sitting around doing nothing waiting for Bergoglio to die or “resign” PLAYS INTO SATAN’S HANDS EXACTLY.  Look, the “RESIGNATION” OF BERGOGLIO WAS PART OF THE PLAN FROM DAY ONE.  Bergoglio was told, I can pretty much guarantee you, by Walter Kasper and the Sankt Gallen Mafia that he would be expected to “resign”, that “resigning” was part of the agreement.  I put “resign” in quotation marks with regards to Antipope Bergoglio because he can’t resign something he never held.  Bergoglio is and always has been an Antipope.  Antipope is not an office or title, it is a CRIMINAL STATUS and nothing more.  Antipope Bergoglio can’t resign any more than Bill Cosby can resign from being a rapist.

Furthermore, the FULL TRUTH has to be acknowledged that Pope Benedict XVI’s attempted resignation was invalid and that he has remained the one and only living Pope since April 2005 because if the full truth is not acknowledged at its root, then assuming a removal or “resignation” by Antipope Bergoglio while Pope Benedict XVI is still alive, the “conclave” called would ALSO BE AN INVALID CONCLAVE, AND WOULD PRODUCE ANOTHER ANTIPOPE – an Antipope with dozens more IQ points than Bergoglio, and 15-20 years younger.  This is why Professor Josef Seifert’s statement that Antipope Bergoglio’s Abu Dhabi pronouncement of the Creed of Freemasonry “invalidating his Papacy” is, while certainly partially admirable, also VERY VERY DANGEROUS because it assigns to Bergoglio something which he has never – not for one second – possessed: The Petrine Office.  If you are operating on the false base premise that Antipope Bergoglio is the Pope, then no matter how well-intentioned you are, your false base premise is going to lead to even greater chaos and damage.  As I have said before many times, the greatest act of violence one can do to the Papacy is to call a man “Peter” who is not “Peter”.

Folks, we have to get this right, and we have to get it right NOW.  “There’s nothing we can do,” “All we can do is wait,” “This is for future generations to sort out,” and “This isn’t my problem to fix” are the impotent bleatings of pathological effeminates.

Might I suggest, “I will take it.  I will take it.  I will take the Ring to Mordor.”

Blessed Charles and Zita, pray for us.
St. Peter, pray for us.
Our Lady, Undoer of Knots, pray for us.

Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us.

Canon 188, which protects the Papacy, has a canonical bodyguard: Canon 332.2

(If nothing else, you will want to read this piece JUST for the fact that I have managed to work Johnny Paycheck into a defense of the Papacy.)

By now, if you have been reading this space, you can probably recite from memory Canon 188:

Can. 188 A resignation made out of grave fear that is inflicted unjustly or out of malice, substantial error, or simony is invalid by the law itself.

But Canon 188 has a “bodyguard” that answers a lot of questions and errors that I see floating around.  Let’s take a look at Canon 332.2 :

Can. 332§2. If it happens that the Roman Pontiff resigns his office, it is required for validity that the resignation is made freely and properly manifested but not that it is accepted by anyone.

And here is the Latin:

§ 2. Si contingat ut Romanus Pontifex muneri suo renuntiet, ad validitatem requiritur ut renuntiatio libere fiat et rite manifestetur, non vero ut a quopiam acceptetur.

There are four protections here in these few words that essentially function as a legal fortress around the papacy to protect it from any attack – including, quite amazingly but not surprisingly, from the reigning Pope himself.

Let’s go in order.  The first clause:  If it happens that the Roman Pontiff resigns his OFFICE….  Si contingat ut Romanus Pontifex MUNERI suo renuntiet….

Office.  Muneri.  We remember from all of our discussions and citations from the MOUNTAIN of papers and books written in the second half of the 20th century, centered around the German theologians such as Joseph Ratzinger, Walter Kasper, Karl Rahner and Hans Kung that these guys all positively AGONIZED over the distinction between the terms “Office” (munus) and “Ministry” or “Function” (ministerium).  The Miller dissertation, which I’m sure you have by now bought and read, because, after all, why WOULDN’T you, especially if you have any direct interest in these matters? is basically a 300 page agony over the distinction between the terms “Office and “Ministry” or “Function”, and the difference between “ius divinum” and “ius humanum”, all with an eye toward the “fundamental transformation” of the papacy from what it is as instituted by Christ Himself, a monarchical juridical office, into a “collegial, synodal ministry”.

Looking at the specific word used in Canon 332.2, “muneri”, we can learn a little about Latin grammar and specifically the concept of grammatical case.  “Muneri” is the dative singular case of “munus”, and we all know well by now that in ecclesial language, “munus” means precisely OFFICE.  So, Canon 332.2 opens with the firm statement that a Roman Pontiff must resign his OFFICE.  Not, my dears, a facet of the Petrine Ministry.  Let’s look at the text, in Latin, of Pope Benedict’s failed “resignation” speech, Non solum propter.  Remember folks, this is THE ONLY resignation text.  There is nothing other than this:

Fratres carissimi

Non solum propter tres canonizationes ad hoc Consistorium vos convocavi, sed etiam ut vobis decisionem magni momenti pro Ecclesiae vita communicem. Conscientia mea iterum atque iterum coram Deo explorata ad cognitionem certam perveni vires meas ingravescente aetate non iam aptas esse ad munus Petrinum aeque administrandum.

Bene conscius sum hoc munus secundum suam essentiam spiritualem non solum agendo et loquendo exsequi debere, sed non minus patiendo et orando. Attamen in mundo nostri temporis rapidis mutationibus subiecto et quaestionibus magni ponderis pro vita fidei perturbato ad navem Sancti Petri gubernandam et ad annuntiandum Evangelium etiam vigor quidam corporis et animae necessarius est, qui ultimis mensibus in me modo tali minuitur, ut incapacitatem meam ad ministerium mihi commissum bene administrandum agnoscere debeam. Quapropter bene conscius ponderis huius actus plena libertate declaro me ministerio Episcopi Romae, Successoris Sancti Petri, mihi per manus Cardinalium die 19 aprilis MMV commisso renuntiare ita ut a die 28 februarii MMXIII, hora 20, sedes Romae, sedes Sancti Petri vacet et Conclave ad eligendum novum Summum Pontificem ab his quibus competit convocandum esse.

Fratres carissimi, ex toto corde gratias ago vobis pro omni amore et labore, quo mecum pondus ministerii mei portastis et veniam peto pro omnibus defectibus meis. Nunc autem Sanctam Dei Ecclesiam curae Summi eius Pastoris, Domini nostri Iesu Christi confidimus sanctamque eius Matrem Mariam imploramus, ut patribus Cardinalibus in eligendo novo Summo Pontifice materna sua bonitate assistat. Quod ad me attinet etiam in futuro vita orationi dedicata Sanctae Ecclesiae Dei toto ex corde servire velim.

Ex Aedibus Vaticanis, die 10 mensis februarii MMXIII

BENEDICTUS PP. XVI

If you look at the English version posted on the Vatican website, the translation is WRONG in that it translates “munus” as “ministry”.  What we (a bilingual Italian and I) figured out is that the English version was translated not from the Latin directly, but from the Italian, which isn’t surprising at all.  The people who work for the Vatican doing translations are NOT Latinists, but rather people who speak ITALIAN plus other languages, because Italian is now the operational language of the Vatican.  So the Latin was translated into Italian, and then every other translation was done off the Italian.  So, if the Italian version translated “munus” erroneously (with or without malice aforethought), then that error would seep into every other translation.  And, what do we see?  Sure enough, the two instances of “munus” in “Non solum propter” are indeed translated into the Italian as “ministero”, not “ufficio“, which would have been the correct translation.

So, Houston, we have a problem.  After reading the Miller dissertation AND the veritable mountain of texts from the Teutonic academy, much of it EDITED BY RATZINGER HIMSELF, it is 100% impossible that Pope Benedict Ratzinger DID NOT KNOW the precision between these terms, much less the profound significance and gravity of the two terms “munus” and “ministerium”.  Furthermore, do we honestly believe that Pope Benedict did not, at any point, look at Canon Law with regards to Papal resignations, namely Canon 332.2?  Of course he did.  OF. COURSE. HE. DID.

And yet, he wrote and delivered Non solum propter with the money-line:

Quapropter bene conscius ponderis huius actus plena libertate declaro me ministerio Episcopi Romae….

Canon 332.2 specifically states that the Roman Pontiff, should he resign his OFFICE….  Canon 332.2 then goes on to say in that a Papal resignation must be PROPERLY MANIFESTED, which is pointing directly back at the opening clause.  The Pope can’t resign the Petrine “ministry”, “function”, “position”, “job”, “title” or “post”.  He has to resign the OFFICE – the whole shebang.  And he has to “do it right”, hence “properly manifested”.  This is the Papacy we are talking about, not a Johnny Paycheck song.

But there is another aspect of Canon 332.2 that shoots down a LOT of false arguments with regards to this whole mess, AND warms my heart in that it demonstrates the providential hand of God in the writing of Canon Law, and what a spectacular human resource manager God is, and how much he loves the Papacy and His Holy Church.

I am referring to the final clause, “…but not that it is accepted by anyone.”

You realize what this clause does, don’t you?  It completely protects the Papacy FROM THE MOB, and perhaps more specifically from THE COLLEGE OF CARDINALS ITSELF, and, as we have in this case, from the Pope himself should he be in Substantial Error.

This beautiful little clause takes all notions of “peaceful and universal acceptance” of Pope Benedict’s attempted resignation (and OBVIOUSLY the subsequent invalid faux-conclave of March 2013) completely out of the discussion.  The sole arbiter of the validity of a Papal resignation IS THE LAW ITSELF.  And Christ specifically stated that He binds Himself to Church Law when He said to Peter in Matthew 16:19, “And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”

Again, just stop and think about this from a practical, common-sense perspective.  Does it make any sense to you that there would be these laws written about the validity of a Papal resignation, but as long as a sufficient percentage of the College of Cardinals, or the people in general, accepted an illegal, invalid resignation, then… meh, it’s all good?  If so, that would mean that the MOB, either in the sense of the College of Cardinals, or in the sense of the people themselves could WILL a pope’s deposition and the illegal installation of another man as “pope”.  Take for example the Conclave of ARSH 1513 which elected Pope Leo X.  At that time, there were only 31 Cardinals total, of which 25 attended the conclave.  It wouldn’t have been too terribly difficult to execute a conspiracy to oust a Pope if all you needed were to get all or even most of a group that small on the same page, and that their will trumped the Law itself.  

Again, by the “popular acceptance” argument, the WILL of the mob would trump the Natural and Divine Law, and a coerced resignation would be validated by “universal and peaceful acceptance.”  Or, a pope being bought off (simony) would be hunky-dorey, as long as everyone went along with it.  And, as we are living right now and many people are arguing, a papal resignation made in SUBSTANTIAL ERROR would be totally fine and dandy, as long as everyone is cool with it including the very Pope who WAS HIMSELF IN SUBSTANTIAL ERROR, and an invalid conclave would be “sanated” and “validated” by nothing more than the will of the mob.

And remember well that when we are talking about the Papacy, we are talking about a juridical office instituted by Christ Himself, AND GIVEN UNIQUE SUPERNATURAL PROTECTION.  So, the will of the Mob can sever Jesus Christ’s supernatural connection to one man, and transfer it to another man IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW? Does that sound right to you?  No, it is madness. It is CHAOS, and CHAOS is of satan.

The only possible way a person could hold this position is if the SUPERNATURAL aspect of the Papacy were discarded (which sure seems to be the trend these days, especially in “Trad, Inc.”, make your generous donation to their tax-deductible 501(c)3 today!)  You would have to deny either the words of Christ Almighty Himself in the Holy Gospels, or deny Our Blessed Lord and Savior’s Divinity in toto.  

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  

As always, I hope this helps.  Hang in there folks. The truth, and love of the Law will set us free!

Christ Giving the Keys to St. Peter, Guido Reni, ARSH 1624.

“I don’t care what that means for Papal Infallibility. Not my problem to fix.”

Folks, this is what holding a false premise leads to.  Every time.


I don’t care what that means for papal infallibility.”

I don’t care what that means for papal infallibility.”

I DON’T CARE WHAT THAT MEANS for papal infallibility.”

Which harkens back to this:


Here is the entirety of Chapter 4 of Session 4 of Vatican 1.  It’s a short, clear and worth three minutes of your time to read.  Emphases mine.

Chapter 4.
On the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff

1. That apostolic primacy which the Roman Pontiff possesses as successor of Peter, the prince of the apostles, includes also the supreme power of teaching. This Holy See has always maintained this, the constant custom of the Church demonstrates it, and the ecumenical councils, particularly those in which East and West met in the union of faith and charity, have declared it.

2. So the fathers of the fourth Council of Constantinople, following the footsteps of their predecessors, published this solemn profession of faith: The first condition of salvation is to maintain the rule of the true faith. And since that saying of our lord Jesus Christ, You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church [55], cannot fail of its effect, the words spoken are confirmed by their consequences. For in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved unblemished, and sacred doctrine been held in honor. Since it is our earnest desire to be in no way separated from this faith and doctrine, we hope that we may deserve to remain in that one communion which the Apostolic See preaches, for in it is the whole and true strength of the Christian religion [56].

What is more, with the approval of the second Council of Lyons, the Greeks made the following profession:
“The Holy Roman Church possesses the supreme and full primacy and principality over the whole Catholic Church. She truly and humbly acknowledges that she received this from the Lord himself in blessed Peter, the prince and chief of the apostles, whose successor the Roman Pontiff is, together with the fullness of power. And since before all others she has the duty of defending the truth of the faith, so if any questions arise concerning the faith, it is by her judgment that they must be settled.” [57]

Then there is the definition of the Council of Florence:
“The Roman Pontiff is the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole Church and the father and teacher of all Christians; and to him was committed in blessed Peter, by our lord Jesus Christ, the full power of tending, ruling and governing the whole Church.” [58]

3. To satisfy this pastoral office, our predecessors strove unwearyingly that the saving teaching of Christ should be spread among all the peoples of the world; and with equal care they made sure that it should be kept pure and uncontaminated wherever it was received.

4. It was for this reason that the bishops of the whole world, sometimes individually, sometimes gathered in synods, according to the long established custom of the Churches and the pattern of ancient usage referred to this Apostolic See those dangers especially which arose in matters concerning the faith. This was to ensure that any damage suffered by the faith should be repaired in that place above all where the faith can know no failing [59].

5. The Roman pontiffs, too, as the circumstances of the time or the state of affairs suggested, sometimes by summoning ecumenical councils or consulting the opinion of the Churches scattered throughout the world, sometimes by special synods, sometimes by taking advantage of other useful means afforded by divine providence, defined as doctrines to be held those things which, by God’s help, they knew to be in keeping with Sacred Scripture and the apostolic traditions.

6. For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.

Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Savior to the prince of his disciples: I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren [60].

7. This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this See so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole Church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell.

8. But since in this very age when the salutary effectiveness of the apostolic office is most especially needed, not a few are to be found who disparage its authority, we judge it absolutely necessary to affirm solemnly the prerogative which the only-begotten Son of God was pleased to attach to the supreme pastoral office.

9. Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, to the glory of God our savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the Christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable.

So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.

Given at Rome in public session, solemnly held in the Vatican Basilica in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy, on the eighteenth day of July, in the twenty-fifth year of Our Pontificate.


I don’t care what that means for papal infallibility.”

I don’t care what that means for papal infallibility.”

I DON’T CARE WHAT THAT MEANS for papal infallibility.”


Pray for Pope Benedict XVI the one and only living Pope, and for all who have been and are being scandalized and led into error and apostasy by the Bergoglian Antipapacy.