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 https://secretummeummihi.blogspot.com:


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.



The Ford Foundation / REPAM manifesto for destroying the Catholic Church

Here it is. It is in Spanish, but it can be easily algorithmically translated.

This document from ARSH 2017 demands, repeatedly, as “non-negotiable”, the total “de-centralization” of the Church. It cites, glowingly, Antipope Bergoglio’s reference to himself as “Bishop of Rome”.

So… exactly what Freemasonry has been gunning for for 300 years, echoed in the German theological writings of the past 60 years on the Papacy as we have seen in our research on the invalidity of Pope Benedict’s attempted partial resignation. Decentralization, demythologization, synodality. Denial of the Petrine Primacy. Full-on attack on the Papacy itself, and thus upon Holy Mother Church, which is built upon the rock of Peter by Christ.

Funny how those agendas match exactly.

On page 41 of the document is this demand:

Queremos el fin de la Iglesia colonial, que impone celebraciones, ministerios y ministros desenraizados de nuestra realidad.

We want the end of the colonial Church, which imposes celebrations, ministries and ministers unrooted in our reality.

Followed by the demand that the Ford Foundation / REPAM agenda be universal:

Los criterios para escoger a los presbíteros no están adaptados para la Amazonía. En vez de dejar a las comunidades sin Eucaristía, necesitamos cambiar los criterios para los ministros autorizados para celebrar la Eucaristía. Ahora es el momento de encaminar un ministerio presbiterial para la Amazonía, y desde la Amazonía para el mundo.

The criteria for choosing priests are not adapted for the Amazon. Instead of leaving communities without the Eucharist, we need to change the criteria for ministers authorized to celebrate the Eucharist. Now is the time to lead a presbyterial ministry for the Amazon, and from the Amazon to the world.

STICKY POST: Ann’s New Book of Collected Apologetical Essays Now Available for Purchase!

(I’ll leave this post “sticky” at the top of the blog for the week.  Be sure to scroll down for new posts!)


This is, by far, the most requested thing for me to do in the last several years: release a paperback book of my “greatest hits” collected apologetical essays suitable for distribution to folks looking to convert or revert to the One True Faith.  No Antipapacy stuff here, folks.  That will be a separate volume.  This volume includes such all-time favorites as:

“Here Rests in Honored Glory….”
“The Science of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption….”
“Overshadowing Shoulders….”
“Do Aborted Babies Go To Heaven…?”
“Why Priests Can Only Ever Be Men….”
“Hog Grease and Septic Tanks….”
” ’78 Chryslers, Firehawks and Prayer….”

plus ten more.



Barnhardt Podcast #097: Not Made Possible By the Ford Foundation

[Direct link to the MP3 file]

Mild language alert!

In this episode we celebrate the Communion of the Saints, expressed so beautifully by the traditional Roman liturgy in honoring the Saints in heaven and the Holy Souls in Purgatory, all of whom truly are “our friends we haven’t met yet!” We also put out the call for Masses and prayers for the conversion of Kanye West and his family who look like they are actively searching for the Truth. And, of course, we discussed more about the Amazon Sin-Nod, the disposal and recovery of the Pachamama idols, the prospect of married priests and the ontological impossibility of female deacons, and wondered who might become the first (illicit and invalid) female Cardinal in the Bergoglio regime. Remember: where sin abounds, Grace abounds all the more (even if it’s hard to spot at first).

Links, reading, and YouTube:

Feedback: please send your questions, comments, and suggestions to [email protected]
The Barnhardt Podcast is produced by SuperNerd Media; if you found this episode to be of value you can share some value to back to SuperNerd at the SuperNerd Media website. You can also follow SuperNerd as “Roman McClaine” on Twitter.

The Infant Jesus of Prague handles Ann’s financial stuff. Click image for details.

Listen on Google Play Music

UPDATED: Yep, that’s the Bowl Fondler, doing a shamanic incantation on Bishop Krautler and Cardinal Hollerich

Over the transom-

Dear Ann,

I watched the Jesuit shaman video, and it was exactly as you said. The bishops looked quite cheerful, and didn’t mind at all. Or care.

What struck me, in addition, was how pathetic that little priest/shaman was. Smiling and rattling his rattle desperately, trying to get the attention of the two daddy figures. “Yes, they want me to be a shaman, so I’ll be a shaman, and now will they love me?” ….No.

It was absolutely pathetic from a human point of view, and diabolic from a spiritual one.

So the new generation is going to try to find God through drugs, again, and there’s not much point in telling them we tried it, and it didn’t work half a century ago. Which is just, since our generation was the first since the Renaissance to reject the generations before us, and refuse to listen to them. So in turn, we are silenced by the deafness of the young.

As always, thank you for everything you are doing. And I noticed that even Fr. Z allowed a “Benedict is the real pope” comment on his blog.


TOTALLY NOT SHOCKED: “Shamanistic Experience” is code for “Being Stoned Out of My Mind”. Subtitle: The New Amazon Rite is going to be literally LIT, y’all!

Over the transom:


You have written before about your suspicions regarding the motives of those pushing CBD (marijuana). One of the many things that set off my alarm bells regarding the Jesuit Fernando Lopez was the photo of him drinking from a bowl, and his comments about a shamanistic religious experience. To my knowledge, shamanistic ceremonies always involve the use of drugs, such as ayahuasca. Oh, look, another black bowl: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayahuasca

I have been around long enough now to see cycles repeat. None of this is new, but people always think that they and their generation are the first to rediscover some “ancient wisdom.” I think it must appeal to our spiritual and intellectual pride. One big difference is modern technology, which spreads all of this like wildfire.

It is pretty evident that they are building a globalist anti-church with broad cultural appeal and something for everyone. The ayahuasca angle is important because I have noticed a resurgence of its use and advocacy for it in secular and new age circles. Two examples are Mike Cernovich and Alyse Parker (Raw Alignment). Both of these people have very large followings on social media, and wield a lot of influence. In other words, this false spirituality is going to appeal to many people, and in the spirit of “inclusiveness,” eternal truths will be watered down and reinterpreted to be repackaged for the anti-church.

Alyse Parker is also one among a number of influencers who tout the benefits of psilocybin (hallucinogenic mushrooms). All of this is incredibly dangerous.

May God bless you,

That ain’t Earl Grey, folks.