Category Archives: Uncategorized


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 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.

Here is their plan to eliminate the Mass

They ALWAYS pre-announce their plans. Always.

Here is the algorithmic translation of an article from just this past June by the arch-heretic ex-priest Leonardo Boff, who was thrown out of the Franciscans, was sanctioned and denounced by Pope Benedict, who Boff now refers to as a “religious terrorist”, and whom Antipope Bergoglio just loves to bits, and whose reputation Antipope Bergoglio is seeking to “rehabilitate”.

Boff and his concubine.

Here is a recent article by Boff entitled “The Auspicious Meeting of Pachamama and Gaia”.

THIS article below by Boff is the satanic endgame to eliminate the Mass.

Remember folks, every word of this screed is totally false, including the words “and” and “the”. But this is the Freemasonic-Bergoglian-satanic agenda.

By: Leonardo Boff | Text in Spanish and Portuguese]

On 06/18/19, thinking of the Panamazonic Synod of October, we wrote about Pope Francis’ desire to order married, especially indigenous, priests to distant places in the Amazon. He will be an indigenous-style priest, surely, different from the traditional one.

In the places without the assistance of priests, there are coordinators of ecclesial grassroots communities that are already presiding over the Lord’s Supper celebrations. They are not ordained but no one will say that Christ is not there present in the Word, in the community and in his celebration. The issue is not only Catholic intraeclesial, it is also ecumenical. The Churches that came out of the Reformation celebrate in their communities the Lord’s Supper with unordered pastors. What is the value of these celebrations? Is Christ really present there under the species of bread and wine?

We will try to respond in both cases positively, based on a vast historical-theological documentation that cannot be adduced here, but found in the book Ecclesiogenesis: the reinvention of the Church , Editor Record 2008, p165-188.

The basic affirmation, defined by the Second Vatican Council, is: “The celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice is the center and summit of the whole life of the Christian community” ( Christus Dominus , n. 30). The faithful desire the Eucharist. Can they be denied for not having an ordained minister in their midst? Community coordinators do everything an ordained priest does, why can’t they consecrate? It would be normal for them to be ordained, but they are not because they are not celibate.

The rigorous investigation on the subject concluded that there have been two phases: in the first millennium of Christianity the basic law was “ who presides over the community, also presides over the Eucharist: it could be a bishop, a presbyter, a prophet, a doctor, a confessor and a simple coordinator ». It was unthinkable that a community would remain without a Eucharist because of the lack of a bishop or a priest. Then the community coordinator entered, as is the case in our communities. The link was the coordinator of the community and the celebration of the Eucharist.

In the second millennium there was a change. The disputes between the Imperium and the Priesthood displaced the issue of community in favor of the issue of sacred power. The Popes claimed sacred power over imperial power. This sacred power comes through the sacrament of Holy Orders. The link is now who has the sacred power and who does not have it. Only those who are ordained have the power to consecrate. The layman is excluded even as coordinator. Now what there is is the lay and priestly order.

With reference to the Eucharistic celebrations of the non-Roman-Catholic Christian Churches, we start from the fact that the Lord’s Supper is celebrated in them by the ministers accepted by the respective communities. The validity of this celebration does not come from the sacrament of the Order, via the imposition of the hands made by the bishop on the faithful layman, who then becomes a priest with the power to consecrate. For evangelicals, the power to celebrate derives from faith and fidelity to the apostolic doctrine about the presence of the Lord in the celebration of the Holy Supper. The same could be said of the celebrations in the basic ecclesial communities: the apostolic faith in the real presence of Christ in the bread and wine blessed by the coordinator or by a group of coordinators, would confer the power to consecrate. Christ would be present there.

Another pole of understanding is based on the value of baptism taken in its entirety. It is common doctrine that baptism is the gateway to all sacraments and would contain all others seminally. Through baptism, all the faithful participate in the only truly valid priesthood that is that of Christ. The sacrament of Holy Orders is not the sacrament of the bishop or priest. It is the sacrament of the Church as a community of the faithful. If someone is ordained in the sacrament of Holy Orders, it is for the service of the community, for their coordination and spiritual animation. There is no face to face: on the one hand the faithful, common priest, without any sacramental power and on the other the ordained priest with all powers. What exists is a community, all of it priestly and prophetic, that specifies the functions without one diminishing the others, one of consecrating and coordinating, another of interpreting the sacred texts, of taking responsibility for the songs, of visiting the sick, etc.

It is also a common doctrine that, after the priesthood of Christ, there cannot be any other priesthood in its own right. That is why it is Christ who consecrates. The priest does not consecrate. He has the power to represent , to make invisible Christ visible in the community. He does not replace Christ.

In a well organized community there is a priest or a pastor with this function. But when the community is lacking and without fault, the coordinator can assume this function of representing Christ. This situation is quite frequent today, hence the importance of recognizing the validity of the celebrations of pastors and lay coordinators.


Pachamama Dragon Demon Plant Gets Cover and Centerfold of Vatican’s Official Newspaper

Over the transom from the folks at the South American trad blog


Greetings in the Sacred Hearts. Regarding “the bowl”,  we would like to say that in the entrance procession “the bowl” had a pre-eminent place, in fact it led the entrance procession.
But secondly, on the weekly spanish version of L’Osservatore Romano, November 1, 2019, reporting on the Mass were only two photos, a big one on the cover…

… and a second one of the “offertory” on page 5.
Right!, both of them containing “the bowl”. Anyone sending an encrypted message to someone through the L’Osservatore Romano pages, kind of “mission accomplished”, no?
Thanks, and May God bless You.