I am a regular reader. Your Ivermectin posts helped to save my family.
Regarding your comment on Elvis Presley, you might be interested in knowing that when Elvis was stationed in Germany, one of his fellow soldiers was Hector Bolduc–later to become Father Bolduc. They were friends.
I never met Father Bolduc, but my understanding is that after Elvis returned from Germany, and Hector Bolduc was ordained a priest, that Elvis made a donation which resulted in Elvis Presley being remembered in the daily Mass in perpetuity. They pray for all benefactors. I do not know if Elvis had donated to the SSPX, or possibly to the Marian Fathers in Stockbridge, MA. I think it was the SSPX.
Father Bolduc was ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre and he remained a priest who prayed the Tridentine Mass.
One never knows about God’s Providence. Elvis has Masses said for his soul every day. Whodda Thunk?
In this episode we discuss standard deviations of non-standard deviance, that it’s increasing in modern society and dovetails with the topic of “generational spirits,” and how this will all be resolved (war, supernatural interventions, or both?). Despite the trajectory of the world there is always cause for counter-cultural optimism: Grace abounds in spite of the rise of evil. Even if the world is tending toward human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, and mass hysteria, it’s a prime time to become a great Saint!
Feedback: please send your questions, comments, suggestions, and happy news item to [email protected] — or you can leave voicemail feedback at (302) 648-6373. (Alternate email addresses are [email protected] and [email protected] if you are looking for something more secure.)
Supernerd Media produces the Barnhardt Podcast, hosts Ann’s website, and more; if you got some value from these efforts and would like to return some value please visit SupernerdMedia.com to find out how to send a donation via a few other methods.
The Infant Jesus of Prague handles Ann’s financial stuff. Click image for details. [If you have a recurring donation set up and need to cancel for whatever reason – don’t hesitate to do so!]
Experience the Barnhardt Podcast with a modern podcast app: visit NewPodcastApps.com to get started!
You know who else hates the Rosary? Antipope Bergoglio. He publicly mocked a group of faithful who sent him a Spiritual Bouquet of several thousand Rosaries prayed for him shortly after his usurpation of the Petrine See and occupation of the Vatican.
It’s all happening, folks! Stay confessed, and be of good cheer!
“One day, through the Rosary and the Scapular, Our Lady will save the world.”
Nicolás Gómez Dávila was a Colombian man who casually wrote down his thoughts, which were later discovered and published by admirers. His Wiki article begins thusly:
Nicolás Gómez Dávila (18 May 1913 – 17 May 1994) was a Colombian writer and thinker who is considered one of the most intransigent political theoreticians of the twentieth century. His fame began to spread only in the last few years before his death, particularly by way of German translations of his works. Gómez Dávila was one of the most radical critics of modernity whose work consists almost entirely of aphorisms which he called “escolios” (that is, “glosses” or “annotations”).
Other sources describe him as a Radical Traditionalist. Sigh. A man after our own hearts, I daresay.
For the edification of all, a few quotes:
The criterion of “progress” between two cultures or two eras consists of a greater capacity to kill.
The word “modern” no longer has an automatic prestige except among fools.
One of my personal favorites…:
Clarity of text is the sole incontrovertible sign of the maturity of an idea.
From strength to strength…
To tolerate does not mean to forget that what we tolerate does not deserve anything more.
The left claims that the guilty party in a conflict is not the one who covets another’s goods but the one who defends his own.
Hierarchies are celestial. In hell all are equal.
Modern man is a prisoner who thinks he is free because he refrains from touching the walls of his dungeon.
And finally….
The modern world demands that we approve what it should not even dare ask us to tolerate.
Elvis. Faced his Particular Judgment 45 years ago today. SO tragic. I think of Elvis and mourn when I contemplate Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. Elvis was baptized, but never had the Sacraments or the Rosary. And he lived and died like it, too. It was the dirty lie of “cheap grace” that allowed him to think that he could indulge his passions without consequence – because he was baptized and sang spirituals every night.
Our Blessed Lord says, “If you love Me, keep My Commandments.” Si diligitis me, mandata mea servate.
He gathered his back-up singers, all gospel singers, male and female, and made them stay up and sing Southern Spirituals all night after their stage shows. He had no interest in singing anything recreationally other than spirituals.
But as John 14: 15 makes crystal clear, that’s not even remotely enough.
Elvis is yet another example of a man who should have been evangelized by the Holy Catholic Church – but the “laborers were few”, as Our Lord put it. Understatement of the day, right there.
I listened to Elvis’ spiritual oeuvre non-stop growing up. One of my absolute favorites, which has SO much more immediate meaning now is “Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho”.
When do we march on the occupied Vatican? Anybody got a Ramshorn?
Joshua fit the battle of Jericho Jericho Jericho Joshua fit the battle of Jericho And the walls come tumbling down
God knows that Joshua fit the battle of Jericho Jericho Jericho Joshua fit the battle of Jericho And the walls come tumbling down
Good morning sister Mary Good morning brother John Well I wanna stop and talk with you Wanna tell you how I come along
I know you’ve heard about Joshua He was the son of Nun He never stopped his work until Until the work was done
God knows that Joshua fit the battle of Jericho Jericho Jericho Joshua fit the battle of Jericho And the walls come tumbling down
You may talk about your men of Gideon You may brag about your men of Saul There’s none like good old Joshua At the battle of Jericho
Up to the walls of Jericho He marched with spear in hand “Go blow them ram horns,” Joshua cried “Cause the battle is in my hand”
God knows that Joshua fit the battle of Jericho Jericho Jericho Joshua fit the battle of Jericho And the walls come tumbling down
You may talk about your men of Gideon You may brag about your king of Saul There none like Joshua At the battle of Jericho
They tell me, great God that Joshua’s spear Was well nigh twelve feet long And upon his hip was a double edged sword And his mouth was a gospel horn
Yet bold and brave he stood Salvation in his hand “Go blow them ram horns,” Joshua cried “Cause the devil can’t do you no harm”
Joshua fit the battle of Jericho Jericho Jericho Joshua fit the battle of Jericho And the walls come tumbling down
Up to the walls of Jericho He marched with spear in hand “Go blow them ram horns,” Joshua cried “Cause the battle is in my hand”
Then the lamb ram sheep horns began to blow The trumpets began to sound Old Joshua shouted “Glory!” And the walls came tumblin’ down
God knows that Joshua fit the battle of Jericho Jericho Jericho Joshua fit the battle of Jericho And the walls come tumbling down
I just saw your post where you referred to my recent anti-pope article. Thank you for that. Let’s hope this matter keeps gaining further traction!
With respect to your observation:
So one day I said to myself: I am going to look into it. I am going to read what people who claim Bergoglio is an anti-Pope have to say – and evaluate their arguments. Not their personality or writing style, nor their position within “society” or the Church, but the thrust of their arguments.
[He’s totally talking about me – at least a little. Yay! ]
Let me just briefly say that, actually:
1) that was kind of a generic comment (even if, sure, it pertains “a little” to you too 🙂 – because I have come across many different folks weighing in on this topic, and appreciated (& acknowledge) even some of the pointed differences, mannerisms etc. I’ve also gained in some respects from reading those not on board with the anti-pope thesis. But here’s the other thing:
2) I *like* your personality/writing style. I like your verve or tenacity or whatever the right word is. Boldness. I think there is definitely a place for that, and in fact that quality you have in spades is in too little supply, as far as I am concerned.
So I just wanted to say hi, and that I’ve benefited much from your work, and your zeal for the truth. And so I thank you for all that…and send you much encouragement going forward.
(I publish this just as a reminder of how most people think and go through life. “Pope Fwanciss is the Pope because he’s the Pope.” Also, “the vaccines are safe and effective.” Amirite? A staggering level of insight and argumentation, indeed. For most people, begging the question is their idea of logical thought, and pathological indifference is THE Cardinal Virtue. Also note how this woman is dutifully babbling the Antichurch boilerplate that the Novus Ordo is “THE Mass of the RC”. She clearly isn’t very well informed or catechized, but she’s sure up-to-date on the latest Bergoglian buzz phrases and agitprop. Lenin had a name for these poor people….-AB)
Hope you are well. I want to advise you that Francis is the true pope because he is in charge of the Barque of Peter and is the Fisher of Men. Granted, he is a terrible fisherman and will face the Lord with empty nets but that’s none of our business.
Hope you will discuss this with a local NO bishop of priest which is the mass of the RC.
Back in the day, when I was an art undergrad, my first lecturer told me I couldn’t paint, was crude in execution and was depending on style. He was right and I wish I had saved myself decades of foolishness.
“Francis: The First Antipope in Centuries? The case is airtight – and foolproof – that he is.”
Matthew Hanley is a widely-published Catholic bio-ethicist. This is big, folks. Expect more like this.
Mr. Hanley, if you read this, believe me when I tell you that every serious scholar and churchman (and there are MANY) who are looking at the abdication question all know that the issue here is Ratzinger’s substantially erroneous attempt to “fundamentally transform” the papacy into a “collegial, synodal, shared ministry”. Everyone who has read ANY of Ratzinger’s massive oeuvre, especially the pre-Papacy phase knows this is true. Further, people who know him personally know him to be a man prone to quitting. There’s no other way to put it. He ran. And yes, that is absolutely horrific, and why we have to get someone to tell him that his resignation was invalid, and pray unceasingly for him before he dies. What a fearsome thing – and what a massive heresy and act of selfish uncharity to claim that “Popes can never be in danger of hell.”
“He is an anti-pope because Benedict XVI did not validly renounce the Papal office as required by Canon Law – the most recent 1983 version of which he himself helped craft. Therefore there should never have been a conclave following his surprising February 11, 2013 announcement known as the Declaratio. This would be the case even if someone other than Bergoglio had been chosen, and even if Bergoglio hadn’t done and said all the things he’s done and said.
[…]
So one day I said to myself: I am going to look into it. I am going to read what people who claim Bergoglio is an anti-Pope have to say – and evaluate their arguments. Not their personality or writing style, nor their position within “society” or the Church, but the thrust of their arguments. [He’s totally talking about me – at least a little. Yay!😎] I wouldn’t have to commit. I could just sit with it all for a while. And so that’s what I did.
First off, I was a bit surprised to learn that immediately after Benedict XVI’s Declaratio (within days), prominent Latinists, canonists, philosophers, theologians and journalists were pointing out significant errors in the Latin text Benedict XVI had delivered. Do such errors always nullify a juridical act? Possibly not. But let’s just say it raised eyebrows even at that time.
Most significantly, though, I was struck by the simplicity and persuasiveness of the contention that, from an objective point of view, Benedict XVI’s Declaratio does not adequately constitute a valid Papal renunciation as stipulated by canon law. If the relevant canonical requirements are not satisfied in the communicated act of renunciation, no other circumstance (e.g. “everyone now accepts Bergoglio as the Pope), event (e.g. a conclave), or rationalization, whenever expounded, can validate it. At its core, it really is that simple.
[…]
Yet it is right and just for Catholics to grapple with the evidence that Bergolio is an anti-Pope. The facts and the arguments are out there, and the case is rather airtight – foolproof, in my humble estimation. This is not an arbitrary or agenda-driven personal judgment but the outcome of a sincere reading and dutiful application of the pertinent Canon law, which alone dictates the verdict.
