Plandemic was U.S. Department of Defense Psyop — As FromRome told you 5 years ago

 What amazes so much, is that so many of those who read FromRome today, still think that though FromRome told the truth back then, when everyone else said FromRome was wrong, and was proven right six years later, that FromRome today, might be wrong, when the same persons who said FromRome was wrong 6 years ago, still say FromRome is wrong today.

It is bad for grifters and psyops to lie to the public, but it only harms you if you keep believing them. They are proven habitual liars.

But FromRome is now a proven habitual truth teller.

Help the Catholics of Lebanon, persecuted by the IDF!

Read how the members of the Sovereign Catholic Military Order of Saint Louis IX, Crusader King, have organized a fund raiser to help the Catholics of Lebanon, whose entire town was blown off the map by the Israeli “defense” Force. — Your charitable contribution will be distributed by the Basilian Sisters, who lost their own convent in the same town, of Yaroun. — Please be generous! and click the image above for more information — or scan the direct QR code to go immediately to the same page.

Please also share the above Meme, on social media, and in emails, to spread the appeal to as many as possible!

Deus Vult now returns to Holy Mother Church!

With the publication of the papal Bull, Maiorem hac dilectionem, the Holy Father, Hildebrand, the Pope elect, has raised to the dignity of a Sovereign Military Order, the Ordo Militaris Catholicus, placing it under the heavenly patronage of Saint Louis IX, the Crusader King, and juridically under his immediate authority, and granting it the unheard of merit of enjoying all the privileges of the ancient Templars and modern Maltesers, along with a PLENARY INDULGENCE to all Catholics who donate, support, invest, contribute, join, or volunteer in the Order, on each day they do this!

The Bull is currently available in Latin, English and French. — Click the above image to read the Bull.

Click the below image to read Br. Bugnolo’s August 2026 Circular Letter to the members of Ordo Militaris Catholicus explaining this wondrous development and how to join it.

Donate to the new Order

You can make a donation to the new Order in 134+ currencies or Crypto, using any one of 125+ apps, through the STRIPE portal at their official Page for Alms by clicking their Grand Seal, here below:

Vatican Criminal Complaint now includes Invalid 2025 Conclave Evidence

Presentation & Historical Background

French Translation

The evidence that the Conclave of 2025 was invalid and improperly conducted is now part of an official criminal complaint at the Vatican, thanks to the efforts of the Italian Journalist Andrea Cionci, author of The Ratzinger Code, and a long time collaborator in investigations into the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI with Br. Alexis Bugnolo, editor and founder of FromRome.Info, whose Index to the Renunciation of Pope Benedict XVI is one of the most complete listing of articles on this topic since 2018, mined extensively by Cionci himself.

Click the above image to read the LifeSite Article

UPDATE: John Henry Westen  posted a video about the matter, the evening after the publication of the above article:

Back in March of 2024, making use of the new Vatican statutes which required a hearing of all criminal complaints, Cionci had filed a complete dossier on the invalidity of the renunciation of Pope Benedict XVI, calling for an investigation with the Vatican Criminal prosecutor, as reported by FromRome.Info, here, in April of that year, as soon as the news of this broke.

The complaint received its first hearing, when in the Spring of 2025, Cionci was summoned by the Vatican prosecutor to give testimony about the matter. Days later, Cionci’s blog at Il Libero was entirely erased from the web, without his consent and without warning or explanation, as FromRome.info reported here.  FromRome preserves to this day many English translations of Cionci’s articles, which are found no where else on the web.

Andrea Cionci’s criminal complaint regarding the invalid abdication of Pope Benedict XVI received a second hearing on August 3rd of this year.  At this second hearing, Cionci added the information presented by the Italian Magistrate Angelo Giorgianni about the invalidity of the Conclave of 2025, the major portion of which simply reiterated in a simplified manner the argument first moved by Br. Alexis Bugnolo in June of 2025, in his complete Canonical Analysis, which you can read here.

FromRome.info, therefore, wishes to laud Andrea Cionci once again for doing what little can be done through the Vatican judicial process, which, however, appears to have little or no authority to bring a resolution to the case. This is because the prosecutor and the judges at the Vatican have all been  appointed by the very men who came to power through the illegal and invalid conclaves of 2013 and 2025.

Indeed, the erasure of Cionci’s blog, which could only have been achieved through collaboration at the highest levels of Italian Freemasonry, bodes ill about any substantive action.

However, the above news about Cionci’s second hearing does explain why in recent days, it has come to light that Cardinal Parolin himself is seeking to gather information on all the investigators named in Cionci’s briefs and to identify their location of residence and contact information. 

Is this simply for the sake of information, or is Parolin preparing another Masonic trick on the few Catholics who want transparency and honesty and legality to prevail in the Church at the highest levels?

For the record, finally, Life Site News, which knows well that FromRome.info and its editor have played a crucial role in making known in the Italian Press and to the Italian public the canonical realities of the Declaratio of Pope Benedict XVI and the invalidity of the Conclaves of 2025 and 2013, has once again omitted any mention of our journal and the work of our editor, which is factually and arguably the most prominent and important in these controversies.  Whereas, FromRome.Info has never failed to cite and take note, as well as make know to its readers, the work of John Henry Westen on many important issues.

To his credit, Andrea Cionci has called for, in recent days, a restoration of the Canonical Order in the Church, in which he denounces every group supporting lawlessness in the Church. He does not mention Hildebrand or FromRome.Info, because both have advocated a restoration of the canonical order from the start:

In addition, FromRome.info affirms that the statements made by Andrea Cionci in the Apologia published in the below video, just days ago, about our editor Br. Bugnolo, are true in regard to Brother being the only one who told him that the Renunciation was canonically invalid; but not in regard to his assertion that Br. Bugnolo had “gone completely off the rails”, after the death of Pope Benedict XVI,   For if he studies the Bull of Nicholas II, In Nomine Domini, now available in Italian translation HERE, he will find that the teaching of that Roman Pontiff completely confirms the opinions and actions of Br. Bugnolo about Papal Elections, after the death of Pope Benedict XVI: an opinion which the Canonist Canale, accredited as a lawyer at the Roman Rota, cited as one of the leading ones in the history of ecclesiastical jurisprudence on the matter.  For, in this controversy, the “rails” of the matter must certainly be Papal Law and the tradition of ecclesiastical jurisprudence. And Br. Bugnolo, concerning himself not with the controversy for controversy sake, but to solve the real canonical problem, which touches upon the essence of the Faithful’s communion with Christ, our King, through a legitimate Vicar-Pope, has acted in a way, in which, those who have not contemplated this urgency as he has, do not yet understand.

This is why Leo XIV was elected by 66 and 66 to violate 33

The Freemasons glorify the 33% of angels who rejected God and were cast out of Heaven by Saint Michael the Archangel. The same Freemasons style themselves as the allies of this fallen 33, by claiming to be the 33% of mankind who serve Satan. And to make this known to fellow initiates they do things by 66’s and 33’s.  This is how they secretly telegraph their identity and works to one another.

Now, everything becomes clearer, that when 66 and 66 Cardinals voted with Prevost to make 133, in violation of Universi Dominici Gregis, n. 33, they were sending a message to the world: a message which fools would not recognize was being sent, but which FromRome.Info told you from the beginning. That the College of Cardinals was completely in the hands of Freemasonry.

The appointment of a Rothschild Banker was the first warning sign (see here for all our reports about Rothschilds), and this is the second.

What is the Church to do when Satanists capture the Vatican?

By the grace of God 967 years ago, 77 Catholic Bishops, 4 Catholic Popes, 4 Catholic Saints and 2 Catholic Blesseds all signed and confirmed the bull of Pope Nicholas II, In Nomine Domini, which says in paragraph 3, how Catholics at Rome can guarantee a Catholic pope validly elected, after any heretic or satanist is foisted on the Catholic world by Cardinals as the pope.  And Catholics last year, supported by the readers of FromRome.info did just that!

The Masonic antipope is Leo.

The Catholic true Pope is Hildebrand.  See his official website, HERE.

Catholic journalists who tell you differently must be presumed to be either fools, Freemasons, or blackmailed.

The Holy Father’s first Motu Proprio: Our Lady of Paradise, to end droughts

This morning, Rome time, the Holy Father published his first Motu Proprio, entitled, “Vicarii Christi”, authorizing the public veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary under the title, “Our Lady of Paradise”, in public processions to obtain the grace and mercy of the end of droughts.  This title of Our Lady, “Domina Nostra de Paradiso”, in Latin, indicates Her supreme authority over the entire creation, in virtue of this, that She was willed from all Eternity to be the faithful Mother of the Eternal Son. Thus, just as She merited beyond all creatures by Her perfect sinlessness and humility in doing such chores for the Christ Child, like wringing out his clothing, so that they would dry faster, so now, exalted above all the Cherubim and Seraphim, She exercises the Maternal mission of mercy, whereby She is able to wring out the celestial raiment of Her Divine Son, which are the Heavens themselves, to obtain grace and mercy for Her adopted children on Earth: and this, not because they deserve it, but because they ask with faith and simplicity, trusting in Her intercession.

This great grace of the ending of droughts is entrusted to Our Lady of Paradise under the 7 conditions explained in the Motu Proprio:

  1. That a public procession be held in the public streets of any given city or town.
  2. That the procession invoke Our Lady’s intercession under Her new title, “Our Lady of Paradise”.
  3. That the procession be held to obtain the end of a drought.
  4. That a statue of the Blessed Virgin, of any kind, be transported or carried during the procession.
  5. That the procession be led by any valid member of the Clergy, in major or minor orders, whether he holds faculties in the place or not.
  6. That the clergy exhort those who attend, Faithful or not, to repent of their sins
  7. And to turn back to the one True Faith, the Catholic Religion, in communion with Pope Hildebrand.

The motu proprio authorizes processions of this kind without the necessity of having recourse to the local pastor or Bishop. Authorization from the local civilian authorities is required only where local laws for such are in place. The Laity can organize these processions, but at least one member of the clergy must be present to take charge and lead the public prayers and supplications.

This new devotion to Our Lady is a grace for those with the simplicity of little Children, so that as a sign to all the nations, all might know Who is the true God — Jesus Christ — and who is the Corredemptrix of all grace, the Blessed Virgin.

Leading Zionists Influencers invited to Vatican last year

The text of this tweet, dated August 12, 2026 reads: “Rabbi Shmuley and Miriam Adelson are at the Vatican, meeting with its Secretary of State. How does a dildo-selling man get personal access to every world leader?

FromRome.Info reported last year,  that the antipope Robert Prevost Riggitano Martinez’s absolute female ancestor is a Jew, here, in our same report where we published evidence that he was recruited by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency in the mid 70’s.

This tweet, above cited, does not date the visit, but the Rabbi’s own YouTube channel shows him at the Vatican a year ago, according to YouTube:

It is extremely worthy of being noted that these individuals involved in gross immorality and ardent supporters of genocide of non-Jews, including the invasion of Christian Lebanon, are given such meetings, while Catholics who have urged transparency and justice in public affairs at the Vatican are publicly vilified (Here), harassed by the police (Grex Vocum), libeled by the official Newspaper of the Italian Bishops’ Conference, have their websites erased (Andrea Cionci), and refused even responses to their correspondence (Here).  Connect the dots folks. The Vatican is in the hands of Christ’s enemies, not men of the true God, but agents of the US Department of Defense’s Doctrinal Warfare program, launched on June 29, 1953.

Update: This same Rabbi Shmuley is wont to lap dance on children’s laps. Why is the Vatican courting a pedophile? And if Leo is your Pope, you will have terrible time explaining that before the Judgement seat of Christ, when He asks you, “Why did you prefer an illegally elected, pedophile protecting, promoting, praising man as My Vicar on Earth, instead of the legally elected man who wanted to institute a death sentence for such persons and follow the laws of My Vicars on Earth?”

UPDATE: Kathryn Koch, former Goldman Sachs executive, and World Economic Forum attendee, was appointed to the “Dicastery for promoting Human Development” on August 18th.   The W.E.F. was founded by Klaus Schwab, the now disgraced former president, whose father was a Nazi Businessman and whose natural mother is alleged to be a member of the Rothschild dynasty (something all genealogical sites appear to confirm, since they do not name Klaus as a son of Erika Eppercht, his father’s wife).  For Koch’s appointment see this article below:

A Meditation for Catholics at Rome: August 10, 2026 A. D..

Translated from the original Italian at ChiesaRomana.info

From the perspective of eternity, the choice between supporting Leo XIV or Hildebrand—and vice versa—must be weighed against the most authoritative testimony of history and the Communion of Saints: indeed, there is not a single Pope, Saint, or Blessed of the Church who supports Leo XIV—who was elected in violation of four rules set forth in Pope John Paul II’s Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis.

In contrast, regarding Hildebrand—elected in perfect conformity with the provisions of Pope Nicholas II’s Bull In Nomine Domini, as prescribed for the extraordinary circumstance in which the Roman Church must oppose the dishonest and illegitimate election of an antipope (such as Prevost’s undoubtedly is)—the Church of Rome boasts the testimony and signatures of 77 bishops, 4 popes, 4 saints, and 2 blesseds.

The choice is clear: Christ calls us to choose the Communion of Saints and to strive to be numbered among them. Consequently, we cannot tolerate or endorse Robert Prevost’s claim to be our Bishop and Pontiff, for such a choice leads not to Heaven but to Hell—the most terrible fate of all: excommunication from the Communion of Saints.

Here are the names of the 77 bishops, 4 popes, 4 saints, and 2 blesseds who signed Nicholas II’s Bull at the Lateran Council of April 1059, taken from the critical edition of this Papal Bull, published in Detlev Jasper’s, Das Papstwahldekret von 1059, (Thorbecke, 1986):

I, Nicholas, Bishop of the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, have signed this Decree promulgated by Us, as written above.

I, Bonifacio, by the grace of God, (Cardinal) Bishop of Albano, have undersigned (this).
I, Humbert (de Moyenmoutier, Cardinal Bishop) of the holy Church of Santa Rufina, have undersigned (this).
I, (St.) Pietro (Damiano), (Cardinal Bishop) of the Church of Ostia, have undersigned (this).
I, Pietro, (Cardinal) Bishop of the Church of Tusculum, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni (II, Cardinal) Bishop of the Church of Porto, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni, Cardinal (Priest) of the Title of Saint Mark, have undersigned (this).
I, Leone, Cardinal (Priest) of the Title of Saint (Lawrence in) Damaso, have undersigned (this).
I, Vivo, Cardinal (Priest) of the Title of Santa Maria in Trastevere, have undersigned (this).
I, (Bl.) Desiderio, Cardinal (Priest) of Santa Cecilia (and Abbot of Monte Cassino), have undersigned (this).1
Mancius, (Cardinal) Deacon,
Crescenzio, (Cardinal) Deacon,
Amanzio, (Cardinal) Deacon, have undersigned (this).

(Saint) (Hildebrand, the monk and subdeacon and all the other (clergy) of the Roman Church undersigned this).2

I, Guido (de Velate), Archbishop (of Milan), have undersigned (this).
I, Dominico (IV Marango), Patriarch of Grado, have undersigned (this).
I, Hugues, Bishop of Besançon, have undersigned (this).
I, HIldebrand, Bishop of Capua, have undersigned (this).
I, Ouldarico, Archbishop of Benevento, have undersigned (this).
I, (St.) Alfano, Archbishop of Salerno, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni, Bishop of Sabina, have undersigned (this).3
I, Giovanni, Bishop of Tivoli, have undersigned (this).
I, Rolando, Bishop of Sutri, have undersigned (this).
I, Gerhard, Bishop and Abbot of Saint Paul’s (outside the Walls), have undersigned (this).
I, Leone, Bishop of Gaeta, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni (IV), Bishop  of Terracina, have undersigned (this).
I, Pandolfo, Bishop of Avezzano, have undersigned (this).
I, Attone (Berardi dei Marsi), Bishop of Chieti, have undersigned (this).
I, Domenico O. S. B, Bishop of Sulmonna-Valva (and Abbot of San Clemente di Casauria), have undersigned (this).
I, Palombo O. S. B., Bishop of Sora, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni (II), Bishop of Penne, have undersigned (this).
I, Pietro (I), Bishop of CivitĂ  Castellana, have undersigned (this).
I, Ludovico, Bishp of Nocera, have undersigned (this).
I, Ermanno, Bishop of CivitĂ  del Castello, have undersigned (this).
I, Enrico, Bishop of Spoleto, have undersigned (this).
I, (Bl.) Mainardo, Bishop of Urbino, have undersigned (this).
I, Goffredo, Bishop of Perugia, have undersigned (this).
I, Aganon, Bishop of Autun (France), have undersigned (this).
I, Uldarico, Bishop of Fermo, have undersigned (this).
(I, Bernardo II, Bishop of Ascoli Piceno, have undersigned this).
(I, Ugo I, Bishop of Camerino, have undersigned this)
I, Guglielmo, Bishpo of Numana, have undersigned (this).
I, Trasmondo, Bishop of Fiesole, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni, Bishop of Sovana, have undersigned (this).
I, Arnaldo dei Offredi, Bishop of Arezzo, have undersigned (this).4
I, Marino, Bishop of Fondi, have undersigned (this).
I, Adalberto, Bishop of Narni, have undersigned (this).
I, Bernardo, Bishop of Sant’Agata dei Goti, have undersigned (this).
I, Teuzone, Bishop of Orvieto, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni, Bishop of Chiusi, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni, Bishop of Siena, have undersigned (this).
I, Guido, Bishop of Volterra, have undersigned (this).
(I, Pietro, Bishop of Volturara Appula, have undersigned this).
I, Benedetto, Bishop of Sessa Aurunca, have undersigned (this).
I,  Azzo (degli Atti), Bishop of Foligno, have undersigned (this).
I, Pietro (II), Bishop of Teramo, have undersigned (this).
I, Gerardo, Bishop of Rusellae, have undersigned (this).
I, Anselmo (I), Bishop of Lucca, have undersigned (this).5
I, Pietro (I), Bishop of Pesaro, have undersigned (this).
I, Andolfo, Bishop of Montefeltro, have undersigned (this).
I, (St.) Rodolfo, (O. S. B. Cam.,) Bishop of Gubbio, have undersigned (this).
I, Teodosio, Bishop of Senigallia, have undersigned (this).
I, Arduino, Bishop of Todi, have undersigned (this).
I, Arduino, Bishop of Fano, have undersigned (this).
I, Arnolfo (I), Bishop of Cosenza, have undersigned (this).
I, Stefano (the Norman), Bishop of Troia, have undersigned (this).
I, Benigno (Benedetto), Bishop of Fossombrone, have undersigned (this).
I, Ugo (I), Bishop of Cagli, have undersigned (this).
I, Gerardo, Bishop of Rieti, have undersigned (this).
I, Gisilberto, Bishop of Tuscania, have undersigned (this).
I, Agino, Bishop of Assisi, have undersigned (this).
I, Ingone, Bishop of Bagnoregio, have undersigned (this).
I, Tegrimo, Bishop of Massa Marittima, have undersigned (this).
I, Oberto (Pevere), Bishop of Genoa, have undersigned (this).
I, Adeodato, Bishop of Montecorvino, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni, Bishop of Trevi, have undersigned (this).
I, Giovanni (IV), Bishop of Alatri, have undersigned (this).
I, Placido, Bishop of Veroli, have undersigned (this).
I, Erasmo, Bishop of Segni, have undersigned (this).
I, Arichis, Bishop of Alife, have undersigned (this).
I, Cuniberto, Bishop of Torino, have undersigned (this).
I, Opizo, Bishop of Bobbio, have undersigned (this).
I, Benzone, Bishop of Alba, have undersigned (this).
I, Ottone, Bishop of Novara, have undersigned (this).
I, Enrico, Bishop of Ivrea, have undersigned (this).
I, Guglielmo, Bishop of Asti, have undersigned (this).

—————–

FOONOTES

Source of Latin Text: Das Papstwahldekret von 1059. Echte Fassung, in: Jasper, Detlef. Das Pastwahldekret von 1059: Überlieferung und Textgestalt. Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1986, pp. 98-119. — The readings within () have been taken occasionally from the Imperial version.

1  The future, Pope Victor III.
2  The future, Pope Gregory VII.  His signature was recorded in the Imperial version of this Bull, compiled some 30 years afterwards, with the dignity of “subdeacon” rather than “archdeacon” to slight his reputation, for having contested the Emperor’s claim to have authority to invest Bishops.
2  This Giovanni, Bishop of Sabina, was formerly a Cardinal, but having usurpsed the Papacy under Pope Benedict IX, as anti-Pope Sylvester III, he was deposed at the First Council of Sutri in 1046, in the presence of the German King Henry III. That he is not listed among the Cardinals, in the above list, seems to indicate that he was striped of the dignity of the Cardinalate, but allowed to keep his functions as Bishop.
3  This identification is based on reading “Rosphredus … Attestensis” as misreading of the signature for (A)r(naldus) Ospredus .. Arietensis”, confirming this with the lists for the Bishops of Arezzo by this name, who attended this Council, but whose name is not otherwise found in the above lists.
4  The future, Pope Alexander II.

Bree A. Dail, U.S. Military Contractor in Attack Chat against Kirk Investigation

One of the long standing approaches of FromRome.Info has been to identify and watch what “Catholic” journalists and influencers do year after year, to point out consistences or inconsistencies in their behavior. One such person, that FromRome has noticed in the past is Mrs or Miss Bree A. Dail, a part time journalist who works for a U.S. Military Constractor, who handles information processing for the U.S. Navy in the Mediterranean, and who works at Rome, as  Br. Bugnolo happened to discover, when he by chance spotted her on the streets near the Termini Train Station, one day, shuttling someone there for a ride.

In the past, Bree made a name for herself by defending the unfounded assertion that Pope Benedict XVI had abdicated and that Bergoglio was the true pope. She defended this narrative until his death, even going so far as to insist that Pope Francis was not dying, when he was, as was reported here in these pages on Feb. 18, 2025: a report which aged well, since Pope Francis died just two months later.

Recently, however, Bree has surfaced again, as one of the principal persons involved in a private chat where those, attacking the public investigation of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, plan their attacks.  This group contains notorious disinformation agents with proven Zionist credentials.

Here is the video which documents her participation. Please take note that this video contains extremely foul language in some parts, after the moments documenting Bree A. Dail’s participation.

Alternatively, if you cannot see videos on X, you can see Bree’s name in the cover photo of this video of the same Attack Chat group, as a participant:

This “Protecting Mrs. Erika Kirk etc” Chat is discussed by Catholic convert, Candace Owens, here, in last nights pod cast, where she explicitly calls Bree A. Dail, “a fake Catholic” and a “loser”. — Bree A Dail, it should be noted, is known as a cradle Catholic: but if you know otherwise, please comment below.

FromRome.Info publishes this note simply to complete our reports about who Bree A. Dail is and does. It should come as no surprise that individuals spreading disinformation about Pope Benedict XVI, in favor of his enemies, are the same persons spreading disinformation about the Mossad directed assassination of Charlie Kirk, who was about to convert to the Catholic Faith, and lead the U.S.A. as its next president against the Rothschild-Skull and Bones control of the world.

Bree A. Dail is a graduate of Christendom College, which was founded by 2 CIA Agents and 2 Skull and Bonesmen. Other notable influencers are alumni of this same school, like Michael Matt, Editor of The Remnant, who is also a Police Academy alumni, according to his own admission. If anyone knows if he works as a policeman, please comment below.

That Trad Inc. is controlled by a group which actively and knowingly, with planned meetings, manipulates the narratives which Catholics read online was exposed by FromRome in his report here, on February 5, 2020, just a week before Vatican security sicked the Italian State Police, at their Station near the Vatican, upon Br. Bugnolo and the many other Catholics who had come to the Piazza of St. Peter’s at Rome, to remember Pope Benedict XVI’s Declaration’s anniversary that year.  This chronology argues strongly that Trad Inc. has worked and works closely with the Freemasons who control the Vatican or their handlers.

UPDATE: The names and identities of Bree A. Dail’s collaborators were listed here:

 

The Growing Apostasy from Jesus Christ & How to Stop it.

Reading the Signs of our Times

The most apocalyptic reality in the Catholic Church today is the undeniable apostasy from Jesus Christ. Not only have the men who present themselves to us as our Popes and Bishops convinced in the importance of rejecting moral liability for their behavior, but a day does not go by when they egregiously deny Divinely Revealed Truths, without the slightest remorse of conscience.

And this is occurring not only among Bishops who claim to be progressives or liberals or who run after fame or fortune in this world, but also among those who present themselves as bastions of orthodoxy or traditionalism.

Taking Counsel with Saint John the Evangelist

Saint John the Apostle foretold in his Book of Revelations, the last book of the New Testament, that in the end, Satan, the Dragon, would deceive the clergy and strike them from their heavenly mission: depicting this in the twelfth chapter, verse three, just after the Great Sign of the Woman, Clothed with the Sun: a sign which came to pass, in part, at Fatima, on October 13, 1917 A. D..

As all the Saints and Fathers of the Church who have spoken on the matter, it is certain that Saint John the Apostle actually did see these visions, contained in the Book of Revelations, but that their true meaning is both a prophecy of the future history of the Church and of the world, though the images tell of this symbolically. Thus, it is both true to say that the Apostle actually saw these things, as he depicts them, and that they are NOT to be interpreted as the things he saw, but as signs of future events and persons, theologically described in Biblical language. 

Those who say the contrary are simply wrong and should not be listened to, especially since this Book of the Bible, being of such an unusual style of literature, yet entirely divinely inspired, cannot be understood rightly in any other way.

As we know, the Woman clothed with the Sun, is a symbol for the Immaculate Virgin Mother of Jesus Christ, as a person, and also for Holy Mother Church, as the institution mystically symbolized as Christ’s Bride.  Inasmuch as She is with child and gives birth, it tells of the Birth of Jesus Christ from the Woman foretold to Adam and Eve, as they were cast out of the Garden of Eden, and how She would triumph over all the wiles of Satan.  But inasmuch as the Woman with Child is a symbol of Holy Mother Church, the child also symbolizes all Faithful Catholics, whom both the Blessed Virgin Mary, given to them as their Heavenly Mother on Calvary, as Saint John alone records it, and Holy Mother Church, Christ’s Bride, nourish them through prayers and Sacraments and the communion of graces in this world, to prepare them to pass from this life to the world to come, in Heaven.

The Biblical Teaching on the Apostasy

But as regards the Apostasy foretold, that is spoken of in verses 3 and the following. Let’s take a brief tour through the text, to notice things, of which nearly no one speaks, and which shed light on what the Apostasy consists in, and how to stop it.

In verse three, Saint John speaks of another sign. And since he wrote in the Greek, let’s at least take one moment in our lives to read his actual words:

The above it taken from BibleHub’ Greek Interlinear text, which follows the Vatican Manuscript tradition of the New Testament. In Black is each word in Greek that the Apostle wrote. Above it, at the top, is the index for each greek word, in Blue numbers, and then below that the transliteration of the Greek word into Latin Letters, in blue. Below the Greek Word (in black) is Charles Van der Pool’s English translation of the Greek word, in context, in RED, and below that is the Syntax of the Greek word, indicating whether it is a Conjugation, Adjective, Noun, Verb, Preposition, etc. in Blue, with the identification of the case, number, tense or person of the word.

Here is the Douay-Rheims translation in English, of the same text, from Saint Jerome’s Latin translation of it, as found in the Clementine Vulgate:

And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns: and on his heads ..

Here, one must first note that this second sign, follows the Great Sign of the Woman with Child. Thus, it is placed in the context of subordination to Them both. This means, that the Apostasy foretold is not about the victory of the Dragon over the Church, but the victory of the Church over the Dragon, and that this victory will consist in the Faithful remaining true and faithful to Jesus Christ, the Child, and His Mother, the Immaculate Virgin, as well as remaining in juridical communion with Holy Mother Church, for that is what being held in the arms of the Church means.

Second, the word “sign”, is Saint John’s way of speaking of a miraculous event which is also simultaneously a message pointing to a truth, so by using this word he is inviting his readers to strive to understand the meaning of what he is describing in images, not the images themselves as images.

Third, he writes, “in heaven”, using the Greek singular. Most translations get this wrong, and write, “in the heavens or in the sky.  In the Greek of the Our Father, Christ says, “Our Father who art in the Heavens”, using the plural. In English, the translation uses the singular. And the reason for this needs to be explained for modern readers.

In Greek, “heavens” refers to the highest place of being, where the Divine is found. and “heaven” to the material firmament.  But in English, it is the other way around, since the word, Heavens, refers to the material places in the universe above the surface of the Earth, and the word, Heaven, refers to the place where God is with His Angels and Saints.

So, Saint John by using this word in the singular is indicating that this second sign will be visible to the men and woman of that future age, with their own eyes. But it is not going to be a sign “in the sky”, that is an astronomical event, because, as was said, this is “another sign”, like the first one. So just as Our Lady did not give birth to the Lord Jesus in the Sky, so the Dragon is not in the sky. To read it in any other way is simply stupid and ignores the words the Apostle uses to introduce the image.

Here, most translations, next also get it wrong, when they render the passage:  Behold, a great red dragon.  Because the Greek word, here, translated as “red”, means “fiery red”, that is the red of the fire, which flickers from yellow to red as the flames dance.  This word, then, “red”, in the Greek clearly indicates that the Dragon represents the One who was damned to Hell from the beginning, cast down from Heaven, like a flaming comet, and burning in his damnation. Those who want that “red” means “Marxism” or “Communism” are trying to make the text say a lot less than it says, though it cannot be disputed that these ideologies are hellish and damnable, being cooked up by Sabbateans and Apostate Jews.

The Dragon, which all the Fathers identify as Satan, the Deceiver and Father of Lies, is then said to have 7 heads and 10 diadems, by Saint John the Apostle.  Once again, though this is what he really did see, this is not intended to be understood as an anatomical description, but symbolically, as 7 principle spirits or motives, and 10 principle rulers or leaders or powers.

But the Apostasy is indicated in verse 4, according to the Fathers of the Church:

And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth:

Here, again, this is what the Apostle saw, either with his own eyes or in a mystical vision, mediated by Angels, as normally occurs in such graces of illumination. But what is seen is not to be understood physically but theologically.  For those who know how alligators and crocodiles hunt, it is worth noting how they do it: for the do not run at their prey like a lion and chase after it. No, they lie in wait in a pool or river, where the prey is want to think itself safe and be distracted, and then getting closer and closer after a long time, jumps up and with its tail hit the prey from behind and drives it into its mouth.

This is why one can say with confidence that most translations misunderstand the text by rending it with the verbs, “drew”, “drags”, “hauls”, since that is not how a large serpent hunts. He, rather, sweeps and smacks and pushes, an action from behind the object being moved.

Thus, the Fathers of the Church say that the Apostle is teaching that the Apostasy will occur through a trick, a surprise, a deceit, and by something moving those to apostasy from a side unseen.

The Stars, in the sign, here, represent most of all the Clergy of the Catholic Church, and those whose vocation is to shine like the sun in the Kingdom of God the Father, that is, those called to holiness, by whose teaching, those of us who walk in more earthly vocations and occupations, are encouraged to look heaven-ward. And Saint John the Apostle says “a third part”, because as anyone who watches the heavens regularly knows, on any night with a clear sky, one can see while standing on the Earth, with the human eye, no more than a third of the stars visible from Earth, at any one time. This “third part”, then, is often misunderstood by many, who claim that the Apostasy regards a third of the faithful in the age in which it will take place. But that is incorrect, as the correct context shows, as an astronomical metaphor, that it means ALL or nearly ALL the brightest lights of that age, that is all the leading clergy and religious of the Church in that Age.*

What does all this mean for us today, in August of 2026 A. D.?

As reported last week, Sister Lucia Santos, who was one of the three children, at Fatima, who saw the historic manifestation of Apocalypse 12:1, when the Woman Clothed with the Sun appeared to them in the Sun, during the Miracle of October 13, 1917, was given a Secret to be revealed to the world, 43 years later, which would foretell the Apostasy to come, in the Church. But this secret was kept hidden, contrary to the will of God, by corrupt and failing clergy — some of the stars of heaven.

Decades later, the most important part was also kept hidden. And it was Pope Benedict XVI himself, who repented of this, and declared years later, as pope, that this secret regarded future events.

Now this deceit which has surprised the entire Catholic Hierarchy, is something of which FromRome has spoken of for 12 years, as the leading Electronic Journal covering all the news and speculation about this: as it began when those around Pope Benedict XVI lied to all the Cardinals about what his Declaratio of February 11, 2013 signified: for they said it was an abdication, when it in fact was only a resignation, a decision to go into retirement, while remaining the one true Pope. (See the Index to the Renunciation of Pope Benedict XVI for more on this).

By this lie, which caught the College of Cardinals off guard — because they were excessively eager to get rid of Pope Benedict XVI for a variety of corrupt reasons and motivations — they convened in a conclave and elected an antipope — a man truly of darkness, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who was so wacked, that in the final years of his life he has to be given strong psychotropic medicines to keep him from going into frequent violent abusive rages, filled with verbal profanities and blasphemies.

 Now, as we have seen from the clear teaching of Pope Nicholas II, every antipope is an Antichrist, because he leads the Faithful away from Christ’s true Vicar, and thus away from Christ.  And while not all antipopes from the past were heretical, Bergoglio, Pope Francis, was manifestly so to such a degree that all the Faithful could see it with their own eyes.

The resulting chaos in the Church since 2013 can rightfully and correctly be seen as fulfilling all the conditions of Revelations 12:4, as it has occurred after the Great Sign of Revelations 12:3, signified at Fatima in 1917, and regards the disorientation and fall of nearly all the Bishops and Clergy of the Church, the stars of the Church’s heavens, by means of a diabolic trick and fraud.

How to put an end to the Apostasy?

This being the case, the solution is clear: to not follow these falling stars into apostasy, heresy and immorality, to which all they are daily striving more and more deeply, we, Christ’s Faithful, must reject the antipopes, Francis and Leo, and turn to Christ’s true Vicar, legitimately elected, a gift which He has given the Church, in the wilderness of Sovana on the Feast of Christ the King last year.  On the Feast of Christ the King, to indicate that under Hildebrand we can remain in the Kingdom of Christ, the heavens, and not be dragged down to the earth of sin, which is the schism the Cardinals perpetrated by two invalid Conclaves, each based on the same one lie, that Benedict XVI abdicated.

The collusion of so many Catholic journalists and influencers, then, can be seen for what it truly is: the diabolic effect and sin of these men and woman, who strive to follow falling stars, rather than remain in the truth and justice and right faith of those very much lesser bright clergy and religious, who told us that the Conclaves were invalid, and that Bergoglio and Prevost are heretics, antipopes and uncanonically elected.

Moreover, as can be seen from the Agenda for his Pontificate, only Hildebrand is proposing the true and effective solutions to all the crises in the Church.  And only Hildebrand, with his authority as Roman Pontiff, can and is willing to put them officially into effect. This is why Conservatives, Traditionalists, and Sedevacantists, who love disobedience and grifting, and who do not want to follow all of Christ’s teaching and laws are rejecting Hildebrand, as they do not want Faith, oversight, or transparency, and refuse to come into the Light since they know their deeds are shameful.

We are not grateful enough and we are not taking this Battle as serious at it is

The way to stop the Apostasy then is to stand with and declare for Hildebrand. Those of us who know of his election and have read his Apostolic Letters (cf. SedesApostolica.Info) are among the very, very, very, very, very few Catholic in the world who know of him and of this great grace the Child Jesus has given us. Like the Virgin and Child, Hildebrand has now taken refuge in the wilderness of anonymity, as the Dragon goes seeking him to devour him. Like the virgin earth, now it is our duty to destroy the lies of the Dragon and his followers, spewed upon the earth (Rev. 12:15) to wash Hildebrand into doom, by opening our mouths (Rev. 12:16), and speaking the truth!

If we realize how Apocalyptic our times really are and the tremendous grace we have been given, personally, which all other nations and groups have not been given, then it should dawn on us, that is, we should recognize, that if God has given us such a rare light and in such a rare degree of brightness to see these truths, we have a tremendously and proportional duty to join in in this battle and help the true Holy Father, Hildebrand.

For when the Church comes to know that he is the true Pope, the Faithful world wide will be freed from the diabolic trickery and lie and stop following the falling stars into doom. Then the Apostasy will come to and end, for the Elect, and Holy Mother Church will have the victory, and the faithful who have resisted, merit their crown in the Kingdom of the God the Father.

—————-

* The Fathers of the Church also read this same passage in regard to the Fall of the angels at the beginning of time,  accommodating the passage to explain that. But that is obviously not the context. So while we can say that the “third part” is part of an astronomical metaphor, it is more properly said in regard to the number of leaders who will apostatize and not to the number of angels at the beginning of time who fell. How many actually fell has not be revealed directly in Scripture.

+ + +

Please support the Holy Father, Hildebrand, as much as you can, by visiting his website and sharing its information, AND making generous donations to his needs and apostolic works, through THIS LINK.  Clergy of all ranks and Religious can do their part by contacting his Secretariate and pledging their service.

Pope Nicholas II’s “war-time” provision to save the Papacy

+ + +

Italiano

There are many writers who are not in touch with reality, and this is especially true in the Catholic Church, since admitting the truth is a habit of spirit which rarely survives the human instinct of wanting to receive human respect.  But if we are to save our souls in an age in which there is a mass world-wide apostasy, founded in mendacity, the only ones who will survive this test, are those willing to take the realities of Papal Law and Church History as the first principles of prudence and action.  Such is the sane proposal in the above article. May God grant that many more writers follow in this path! — Click the above image to read that article on Substack.

Contrariwise, the Church today is beplagued by what Pope Benedict XVI rightly diagnosed as a massive failure in faith of the Sacred Hierarchy, where the four major camps of sinners: the modernists heretics, the conservative freemasons, the traditionalists and the sedevacantists all agree in holding the worst possible heresy: namely, that, he is the true Pope, not him who was first to be validly elected, but him whom “We” say is the pope, since it is not the words of Christ or the laws of Popes which determine the legal right to the papacy, but consensus of private opinion of those on our “team”, “club” or Lodge.

Indeed, pay attention how many Bishops and Priests cannot even admit in public, that a true Roman Pontiff has to be legally elected, or that the laws of Saint Pius X, of Pius XII or of John Paul II, would all agree that Robert Prevost’s election was canonically invalid, for one of 5 reasons, or more:

  1. That the “Cardinal” who convoked the conclave as Dean, was invalidly appointed by an antipope, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, and not by a validly elected Pope.
  2. That at least many of the “Cardinals” who voted in the conclave, were never appointed by a validly elected Roman Pontiff.
  3. That, as the Catholic Faith requires, none of the Cardinals voting rejected the heretical documents of Fiducia Supplicans and Amoris Laetitia, as heretical; thus showing that they themselves no longer hold the Catholic Faith. On which account according to both the Code of Canon Law of 1917 and 1983, they should never have been summoned to participate in a Conclave to elect a pope.*
  4. That the law of John Paul II allows only for 120 validly appointed, Cardinal electors to vote; and if, this be violated, even by a claim of having a dispensation to do the contrary, the election is null and void, all the same, as per the sanction in n. 76 of that law.
  5. That, the number of Cardinals who participated in the Conclave of 2025 violated, therefore, every papal law since Pius X, and thus the election was just as invalid as the election of the antipope Benedict X, in 1058, who was elected in an assembly without the presence of the Archdeacon Hildebrand of Sovana, as Pope Stephen IX had precepted and decreed.

This consolidation of each of the factions of Bishops and Clergy in the Catholic Church, in the same one sin, right now shows that they are manifestly no longer spiritually in communion with Christ the King, even if canonically they are not publicly censured:  for they have wittingly or unwittingly united themselves to the Church of the Antichrist, by embracing a spirit of lawlessness, which is the spirit of the Apostate to come (cf. Saint Paul the Apostle, Second Letter to the Thessalonians, Chapter 2).

And this is pure insanity,  especially since Pope Nicholas II gave the Church the most valid, effective and all purpose fail safe escape route, though enabling the election of a true Pope, validly and legally, in the most easy way possible. A thing which the Catholics of Rome did last year, with the entire active, written and/or tacit consent of all the Clergy and Religious of the Dioceses of Rome and the 7 Suburbican Dioceses.

There are, still, however, Catholic Bishops and Priests and Deacons and even Hermits, who reject these errors and heresies. It remains for them, now to speak out, as well as for us who are laity, to seek them out.

* While it is true that the papal laws for Conclaves since the time of St. Pius X do allow Cardinals who have not been publicly denounced as heretics to participate in the voting, it is not true that they have to be convoked to conclave, since both the Codes of 1917 and 1983 forbid those automatically excommunicated, even in secret, on account of sins such as apostasy or heresy, from exercising any office or duty in the Church, such as voting for a pope.  For this reason, the Cardinal convoking the Conclave has to be validly appointed and a Catholic, or no valid Conclave can occur.

Pd. Lucio Ferrari: The Dispensation claimed by the Cardinals in Conclave is a total fraud

In the last days of April, 2025, the entire College of Cardinals, gathered together in general meetings, in preparation for the Conclave of May of that year, perpetrated a total fraud upon the law and the whole body of the Faithful of the Catholic Church, by claiming to have a dispensation from the rule of Pope John Paul II, promulgated in his Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis of 1996, for Papal Elections, which limited the maximum number of Cardinals voting in any session to 120.

This fraud which invalidated the Conclave was first denounced publicly on the pages of FromRome.info, in the article, “A Canonical Analysis why the Conclave had no valid result”, on June 25 of that year: a denunciation sent to every Priest, Bishop and Cardinal of the Church at Rome, who had a public email address, though the website ChiesaRomana.Info.

After 13 months, NO scholar, canonist or writer in the Church has refuted that analysis with legal arguments. And the reason for this is that scholars of jurisprudence understand well that the claim of such a dispensation is a complete dishonest lie and mendacity.

This can be shown from the handbook on ecclesiastical jurisprudence published by Padre Lucio Ferraris, in 1858 A. D., in his section on “Dispensatio”, where he lays out the fundamental principals of what a dispensation is on pp. 183 and 184 of that celebrated reference:

Which in  English would be, according to Br. Bugnolo:

(1. A dispensastion is a common relaxation of a law (juris) made with cognition of a cause by him who has the right (ius) to dispense.  It is in this common, with the Gloss in c. Requiritis 5. caus. 1. q. 7, at the words, “Ut plerisque”, and in the ch. “Ut constitueretur”, 5, dist. 50, at the words, “Detrahentium”; Abbas in the ch. “Fraternitatis”, on Schisms. Fagnan. in the ch. “Nimis”, 18, on the sons of Priests, n. 4. Angel. Tab. and Armill. at the word, “Dispensatio”.
(2. A dispensation can be considered under various measures.  First, a dispensation is something owed, or something permitted, or something prohibited.
(3. A dispensation …

Continuing in English …

… is something owed, where either utility, and/or necessity of the Church, and/or the prerogative of merits occurs, as is gathered from the cited ch. Ut Constitueretur 25, dist. 50, and ch. Exposuistis 23, on Prebends.  A permitted dispensation, which is also named an arbitrary (dispensation), is, where in the law (in iure) there is a prohibition, the moderation of which is left to the judgement of the superior, as is had in the ch. Si quis presbyter, dist. 50, and/or even, when something is permitted, so that the worse be avoided; c. 2, on spouses.  A dispensation is prohibited where it can scarcely be done without a manifest dissipation of the law (iuris).

How the Cardinals lied to the world

First, the Cardinals manifestly lied to the world, when they claimed to have a dispensation from Pope Francis, since they produced NO document or testimony of persons, as to the grant of a dispensation at any given time or place, nor in regard to any specific rule of the Papal Law on elections.

But they were manifestly dishonest, since in n. 4 of that law, the use of all dispensations is expressly declared illicit (legally prohibited)and such use is expressly declared null and void, with these words (English translation by Br. Bugnolo):

4. With the Apostolic See vacant, it is not licit that the laws promulgated by the Roman Pontiffs, be in any way corrected and/or changed, nor that anything whatsoever be taken away from or added to them and/or dispensed from concerning their parts, most of all those, which pertain to the ordering of the business of electing the Roman Pontiff. If anything would happen to be done and/or attempted against this prescription, We, by Our Supreme Authority declare it null and irritus.

See the Canonical Analysis above for details.

Thus, as can be seen from Padre Lucio Ferraris, just as there is no question of the existence of a dispensation when the law itself forbids it, so there is no question the Cardinals could use their fake dispensation during a Conclave, since the use of all dispensation is prohibited.

Thus, the Cardinals suffer the penalties of Excommunication and Suspension a divinis

And Pope John Paul II expressly invokes his Supreme Authority to declare this. Thus, no Cardinal, not even all the Cardinals, even if they had a written dispensation from Pope Francis, could use such a dispensation, so long as the law of John Paul II remains un-amended, as it does.

This means that the Cardinals by faking a valid conclave have entered into objective formal schism from Christ Jesus and are ipso facto excommunicated latae sententiae, by canon 1364, that is, without the need for anyone to declare it. They are also suspended a divinis from all ecclesiastical functions in virtue of the censure in canon 1331. That means that all their masses are illegal and a mortal sin for them to perform. It also means that it would be a moral sin for Catholics to attend religious services with these men or to recognize any legal act by them as valid.

This crime and sin of the Cardinals, therefore, has made them in law and in the sight of God, nothing more than a criminal organized mafia. And since the Faithful should conform themselves to God, they should consider the Cardinals just this, and nothing more.

Council of Rome, 1060 (1059) A. D., Canon 1 condemns the theory of Universal Acceptance

And the Conclaves of 2013 and 2025

Catholic Doctrine

A monstrous lie and masonic falsehood has been promoted in recent decades under the name of the theory of universal acceptance, which is nothing other than a dogma of Hell and a concoction of the inferno. This diabolic lie holds that a man is to be regarded as the legitimate Roman Pontiff, if the whole Church accepts him as such, solely on the basis of the popular agreement of all parties.

This doctrine contradicts all known Catholic authors, who with authors like John of Saint Thomas, only advance the theory that when there has been a lawful and valid election of a Roman Pontiff, the universal acceptance of the Church follows as a consequence of the fact that the Church cannot be deceived.  But these authors do not say that this universal belief follows immediately or is a legal proof or motive to hold that a man is the true pope.

In fact, as all Catholics know, and as all honest men admit, during the Great Western Schism, caused by those greedy and sinful Cardinals who rejected the valid and legitimate election of Bartolomeo Prignano, the Archbishop of Bari (Italy), as Pope Urban VI, on April 6, 1378 A. D., and during the next 35 years, no true pope and no antipope was accepted by all.  These Cardinals separated themselves and elected the antipope and heretic Count Robert of Geneva (a widower), as Clement VII on September 20, 1378. This latter fled to Naples and then to France, where at Avignon he established his own papacy. 

For the next 39 years, all of western Christendom was divided, with some holding with Pope Urban VI, the Italian, and others deceived by the lies of these errant Cardinals, holding with Clement VII and his successors, sitting at Avignon (France).

Today, there is universal acceptance that all the popes who sat in Rome during these years were the true Popes. But the Vatican has never declared this: it is only the universal teaching of all theologians in communion with the Apostolic see during the last 500 years.

So it is sheer madness and deceit that some authors hold, today, that the Catholic authors of the past who spoke of universal acceptance, used it as a determination of which pope is the true pope, immediately upon his election or even during his lifetime.

The Council of Rome, 1060 A. D.

The teaching of Pope Nicholas II with the Council of Rome, in the second year of his pontificate, rebuts this diabolic modern perversion, in its first canon.*

This council was held in the year following the publication of In Nomine Domine, which altered the manner of the election, in normal circumstances, of the Pope, and assigned the choice of the candidate to the Cardinal Bishops alone. Before that, it was upto the whole body of the Faithful who attended the election, to suggest and chose the candidate, as St. Peter had arranged before his death, according to the norms of civil law, in the Eternal City of Rome, for all publicly elected candidates.

So let us quote Canon I of the Council of Rome, held in 1060, from Tomassetti’s, Bullarum Diplomatum et Privilegiorum, tome I, p. 660, first column, published in 1857 A. D., which reads thus:

Which in English, according to Br. Bugnolo, would be:

First, indeed, with God as (our) inspector, it has been established, that the election of the Roman Pontiff is in the power of the Cardinal Bishops: thus, that, if anyone is enthroned upon the Apostolic See without their prior agreement and canonical election, and then, the consent of the following orders of religious, clerics and lay people, he is not to be held to be pope and/or the apostolic (successor of Saint Peter), but (rather) as an apostate.

This canon, which recapitulates the new rule for elections mentioned in the Bull, In Nomine Domini, does so with a logical character, by listing all the necessary requirements for a pope’s claim as pope: that he be canonically elected, by the officially designated electors, and enthroned. But if he is not, then he is an antipope and apostate, since he has usurped the office and pretends to be what he is not, contrary to the will of Christ, who confirms papal laws in Heaven, which deal with the elections of His Vicars on earth.

Not, that here, “canonically elected”, is taken in the general sense of “lawfully elected”, since the rule for papal elections at the time of the Council of Rome in 1060, was the Bull of Nicholas II published in the previous year, and not a canon decreed in a council or established in any Code of Canon Law.

But as this canon of the Council of 1060 A. D., is an ecclesiastical decree, it has to be read in harmony with Nicholas II’s, Bull, “In Nomine Domine”, which does affirm the same things — without stating “canonically elected” — for elections which are held according to the norms of law.  Because after an election which is not held regularly, or under force or simony or other such dishonesty, Nicholas II in the Council held at Rome in 1059, taught that all the Faithful regain the right to elect a true pope, and this anywhere, even outside the city, and even with only a few voting.e

In addition, the words of this Canon, “canonically elected”, serve as the official interpretation of n. 3 of In Nomine Domini, which, since it uses other words, could be undermined by anyone claiming that they refer to elections which are corrupted by simony or endangered by physical violence, and not pure lawlessness, as happened in recent conclaves.

So the theory that if a man be universally accepted, EVEN IF HIS ELECTION IS ILLEGAL, he is the true pope, is thus shown to be contrary to Catholic doctrine and heretical.

Thus, again, Br. Bugnolo has been proved right against the claims of Salza and Siscoe (click to read past articles refuting these two serial liars) and many other authors, who possessed by the spirit of mendacity, would excuse their heretical and schismatic adhesion to the recent two antipopes, so as to excuse any duty to adhere to Popes Benedict XVI and Hildebrand.

Because clearly there is no legal defect in either of their elections, but there is in the Conclaves of 2013 and 2025, since in the former, Pope Benedict XVI had never abdicated his office, only retired from ministry, after the example of Pope Benedict VIII a thousand years before, as Pope Benedict XVI expressly stated (cf. Andrea Cionci’s, The Ratzinger Code available in English, French and Italian); and in the latter, in May of 2025, 133 cardinals voted at the same time, violating the law of John Paul II, in no less than 4 paragraphs (see more here).

On which account, it can be said rightly that the teaching of Canon 1 of the Council of Rome in 1060, nullifies the election of Pope Francis in 2013 and of Pope Leo XIV in 2025. — A good argument to use with all your friends! For, of course, to anyone with an honest mind, if they but read n. 76 of Pope John Paul II’s, Apostolic Constitution, Universi dominici gregis, for papal elections, he will see that it establishes the same rule: if the laws are not followed, the one elected is not the pope.

—————————–

* Mansi, writing a century after Tommasetti, reckons that there was only one Roman Council, and that it took place in the year 1059, and thus lists the canons of this 1060 council as issued on the second day of the same council, in which the bull, In Nomine Domini, was promulgated: cf. Mansi, Concil. XIX, p. 897, and especially, Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Tome CXLIII,  p. 1351, VIII.

The Third Secret of Fatima: All the Facts around the cover up

This is the most complete, fact-filled recounting of the historical facts and testimonies regarding this controversy. Since the Pope Elect, Hildebrand, the only validly elected Roman Pontiff alive today, has vowed to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart, as the first act of his papacy, after his consecration, this video presents important information to explain why this is so important for the salvation of the world.

And who has put pressure on the Vatican to cover this up? Who has installed antipopes at the Vatican to cover this up? Who has funded and planned Vatican II to cover this up? The same ones who organized and funded the Bolshevik Revolution and genocide of 40 million Christians in Russia:

Pope Nicholas II was elected by only one voter! says Medieval Chronicle

A Historical Note

Version française

As has been reported, discussed and commented on, last year, Pope Nicholas II was elected in 1058 A. D., after the unlawful usurpation of the Apostolic See by John Mincius, Bishop of Velletri,  who was elected by the whole body of Clergy and Faithful at Rome, after the death of Pope Stephen IX, but against the precept of that Pope, which required the election to be held only after Saint Hildebrand, his Archdeacon, returned from the court of Matilda, the Regent of Germany, at Goslar, in Thuringia.

Pope Nicholas II, according to the sources, was elected at Siena in May of 1058, and then his election was held a second time in December of the same year, after Hildebrand had returned from a second trip to Germany, to secure the consent of Matilda to his election.

How many persons participated in the election of Pope Nicholas II is not clear. Br. Bugnolo last year, following a modern English historian, reported that at the first election there was Hildebrand, and Cardinals Hugo of Candida Selva — the famous Burgundian Cardinal who placed the bull of excommunication up on the high altar of Hagia Sofia in 1054, against the Patriarch of Constantinople — and Peter Damian, Cardinal Bishop of Ostia, the author of the famous work, Liber Gomorrhianus, against the sin of sodomy among clergy and monks.

But the Chronicle of the Monastery of Monte Cassino, written by Leo of Ostia and Peter the Deacon, two monks of that famous Benedictine center of holiness and learning, affirm that in December there was only one elector of Pope Nicholas II who cast a vote.  Here is the proof, with the Latin of the Chronicle and Br. Bugnolo’s translation in English, of Book III, chapter 12, p. 724, from the Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Tome 173, printed in 1853 A. D..:

Which in English, would be:

12. [Chapter 13]  But to return backwards a little (to what I reported before), when after the passing of Pope Stephen of pious memory, the above said Hildebrand, having returned from the Empress, discovered the Church (of Rome) invaded by the worst of men against the interdict of the same Apostolic (Pope), he remained at Florence; and agreeing on this matter by his own letters with the better of the Romans, and receiving their consent to all which he wanted, then with the support of Duke Godfried (Margrave of Tuscany and Imperial Vicar), he elected Bishop Gerard of Florence as the Roman Pope, and together with him and the Duke came to Rome, then, in the month of January (of 1059 A. D.); where the aforesaid Elect was enthroned in the Apostolic See by the Roman Clergy and People, and took the Name of Nicholas. Who then excommunicating the above-said invader with all his supporters, received him thereafter into communion at the intervention of certain of his (supporters), and established him at the Church of Saint Mary Major, as it is called by the Romans, to remain there deprived of the office of priest.

A Legal Question

How could Saint Hildebrand, all alone, elect a pope? 

The answer lies in the legal concept of delegation (cf. CIC 1983, canon 138-142), whereby everyone with authority can delegate another to represent himself in the doing of a legal act, which otherwise would require his physical presence to accomplish. Thus just as a soldier off at war can validly and legally marry his wife, who remains at home, via a man legally designated to act in his name and on his behalf, so anyone in an Ecclesiastical election, where this manner of voting is not prohibited, can designate another to vote for him, specifying or not specifying a specific candidate.

Thus, when Peter the Deacon says in the Chronicle of Monte Cassino, that the Saint “received the consent” of many Romans of good repute, he is saying juridically that the Saintly Archdeacon was empowered with the delegation to act on their behalf.

Note, also that Hildebrand was not a priest, nor a bishop, nor even a Cardinal, at that time. But he was a resident of Rome, being a Benedictine Monk of the Monastery of Saint Paul outside the walls.

So, yes, the Chronicle affirms that there was only physically present one elector, Saint Hildebrand. But juridically, since he was acting with their consent, all who consented were present and voting.

In Ecclesiastical jurisprudence as in natural law, consent is of two kinds: explicit and implicit; that is, expressed by word or sign or spoken word, and silence in the face of something done by another party, to which the one remaining silent has the right to speak in favor or against, but chooses not to speak at all.

WHAT ABOUT THE ELECTION OF Pope HILDEBRAND, then?

So, for example, in the election of Pope Hildebrand, last year on November 23, 2025, the fact that more than 5000 clergy and religious of the Dioceses of Rome and the 7 Suburbican Dioceses, all of whom had a right to participate in an election according to the Bull of Nicholas II, In Nomine Domini, after the uncanonical election of the heretic Robert Prevost, could participate in person, or by explicit or tacit consent — that is by communicating to Br. Bugnolo who was to convoke the election, approval or disapproval, or delegating him or anyone else to vote in their name — made the very fact that ChiesaRomana.info sent them notification of all the matters pertaining to the election and solicited their participation over 7 months, an action which constituted a request for consent from all parties: their silence being juridically equivalent to tacit consent to all details of which they were informed: the manner of the election, the legal right to participate,  the motives for the election, and the conditions of it.

As can be seen from ChiesaRomana.Info, the form to vote by delegation was published in October, for all of these clergy and religious to compile. And as seen from the Rogitum (See SedesApostolica.Info for this), some Faithful did participate by delegation.

However, since NONE of the other clergy or religious forbade the Election take place nor did any precept Br. Bugnolo not to convoke or assemble the electors, the election of Hildebrand not only fulfilled all the conditions of Nicholas II’s teaching, but went beyond those which made Nicholas II’s own election legitimate, since it can be sanely presumed that Saint Hildebrand during the 7 months from May to December of 1058, did NOT write to 5000 clergy and religious or send out 30,000 letters, as Br. Bugnolo and those assisting him did.

CONCLUSION

These things, above, having been said, to utterly refute the absurd attacks, based on complete fabrications, that if only a few attended the election, it would not be valid. An objection which is not Catholic at all, since, as can be seen from the above Chronicle, Peter the Deacon, makes no objection and instills no doubt that the election of Nicholas II, by only one person, was juridically invalid.

So, as it stands, either a Catholic must deny all the popes since 1058 A. D., or he must accept that Hildebrand is the Pope, if he is to follow Papal Law. But if he wants to join the Church of the Antichrist, which disrespects Jesus Christ and ignores His words to Saint Peter and His Successors, ignoring the laws of John Paul II and Nicholas II, he can do whatever he wills, like Eve did. It is your choice!

The Popes of Rome who died in Exile

This is a brief summary suitable for children, but it contains several errors: chiefly that Sylvester was never a pope, he was a usurper, and he did not die in exile, but in a monastery prison, for the sin of pretending to be pope when he was not, having been elected in an uncanonical  manner.

Which is the real Jesus?

Behind each claimant to the papacy, today, there is each a different Jesus Christ.

Behind Prevost (Leo XIV), there is the Jesus who gave us a Church which could be infiltrated by sodomites, heretics, globalists and freemasons, in such wise, as we’d have to accept them as Pope even in illegally conducted elections, and thus allow them to steal from us, for ever, the Church of salvation, which Christ purchased with His precious Blood, because obedience is the sum of His religion and human respect and human tradition is the means of salvation, just as this Jesus teaches.

Behind Hildebrand, there is the Jesus who gave us a Church which could be infiltrated by sodomites, heretics, globalists and Freemasons,  but NOT in such wise, as we’d have to accept them as Pope even in illegally conducted elections, because He so wants His little adopted brothers and sisters in Christ to arrive in His Father’s Mansions in Heaven, that He would juridically enable the Faithful at Rome to be able, EVEN WITH JUST A FEW FAITHFUL REMAINING, to elect His Vicar on Earth, as Pope Nicholas II, in “In Nomine Domini” n. 3 says, even if all the elites in the Church at Rome and priests believed only in the Jesus of Prevost: the salvation of the poor in spirit remaining the invincible juridical motivation of everything this Jesus did and said and suffered as King and Savior.

CHOSE YOUR POPE,
AND YOU HAVE CHOSEN YOUR JESUS.

It’s entirely and only an decision of eternal importance.

 

The Lord of Hosts has spoken, Hildebrand is His Vicar on Earth

Two historical events, each of which is undeniable and each of which is significant have occurred in recent days, proving that Hildebrand is the Vicar of Christ on Earth.

The first is that at the moment of Consecration of the Most Blessed Sacrament, by the Bishops of the Society of Saint Pius X, on July 1, 2026, the Lord sent clouds over the place and it began to pour rain, preventing for a long time the distribution of communion to the Faithful, present. In fact, only after the recitation of the Most Holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin, were the laity able to receive.

The second is that Robert Prevost, who claims to be Leo XIV, while visiting Lampedusa, had his zucchetto removed from his head, by the Lord who sent a wind which took that authentic symbol of His Vicar on Earth, away from him who has no legal claim to wear it.

And:

These two events can only be explained by this: that someone else is the true vicar of Christ, and that the SSPX could have obtained papal mandate from him, to have Christ’s blessing, but failed to act honestly (Cf. the Agenda for Hildebrand’s Pontificate, here).

We will see more of this until Hildebrand is enthroned as Roman Pontiff, since the Holy Ghost will not remain silent nor let His people be deceived.

WHO IS HILDEBRAND, THE POPE ELECT?

It has been more than 6 months since the Catholics of Rome used their right, granted to them by Saint Peter the Apostle, according to the teaching of Pope Nicholas II, to elect Hildebrand, during the sedevacante which resulted from the failed, illegal election of Robert Prevost in May of last year. (For more about that see Hilebrands “Urbi et Orbi” for Christmas and the FAQ file which contains replies to all the most major questions, including who Hildebrand is, and basic facts about him).

Since that time, no one on earth has brought any canonical argument against the validity of his election. All they can do is hurl insults and innuendos against him or the former editor of FromRome.Info.

This is because, without a doubt, some of those who are attacking are paid or blackmailed agents of foreign intelligence agencies, who realize how great an existential threat to the New World Order is the possibility of a truly Catholic and legally valid Roman Pontiff, whom they did not select and who is not a brother in the Lodge as they are.

For that reason, they NEED as an absolute necessity to know who Hildebrand is, that is, to know his nationality and civil name and present location, because they actually do intend to murder him, first by public calumny and finally but shooting him dead or poisoning him.

Mindful, that our war here is not only against the principalities and powers in the heavens, as Saint Paul teaches, but also against their evil spawn, the Freemasons of our age, Br. Bugnolo advised the pope elect to not reveal publicly his identity, since that is the easiest and safest way to he can be protected without the expense of thousands of dollars in security services, body guards, and the rent of a secure isolated compound. This security measure will last until he is consecrated a Bishop. Thus, it is only a temporary measure for very practical reasons.

There are many trolls on social media, who would have you think that it is crazier to accept a Roman Pontiff whose civil name you do not know, than it is to reveal his name now.  But these individuals are psychotic, that is, divorced from the reality in which we live: wherein a criminal gang of sodomites and heretics, hand selected and chosen by U.S. intelligence agencies and with the connivance of many other nations, has seized total control not only of the Vatican but of nearly every other Catholic diocese and institution, by putting into power men who are spies, intelligence agents, or blackmailed persons, so as to totally control a false narrative, that everything is O.K. in the Church, or that the only solution is destroying Her from within through heresy and schisms.

As Catholics we already know that there have been many Popes in the history of the Catholic Church, whose civil names and biographies we know nothing or very little, as to who they were before their election, not to mention afterwards. All we know are their regnal names, and even some of these are in dispute (e. g. Pope Fabian, in some sources is called “Pope Flavian”).  No Catholic in their right mind has ever said, that since he does not know who these popes were, that he does not accept them as true Popes.  Rather, the entire Church has held that he is the true pope, who is the first man validly elected, regardless of who he was in life or what his name is.

An example of this is Pope John II.

Every Catholic accepts him as the true pope.  We know from history that he was not called, “John”, but “Ioannes”, since the Catholics of Rome in those days spoke Latin. We know from historical studies, that he reigned from the year of our Lord January 2, 533 to May 8, 535 A. D.. But John was not his name in life. He was the first to change his name and take a regnal name.

The vast majority of Roman Pontiffs since have done the same. Only in more recent centuries do we know the name of these men, before they were elected, with absolute certainty.

FromRome.Info won’t tell you the “real” name of Pope John II, though we know it. And in this we do not sin, because it is a lesson in history and common sense, as well as humility, that we have presented his case.

Finally, it is obvious that to the Bishops who will consecrate Hildebrand, he will make his name and identity known, and that to all Bishops who seriously inquire about him, they can request a meeting with him, via his Secretary of State, at SedesApostolica.Info.  This security measure is in effect only for non-Bishops and Bishops who, as the persons above, want to know who he is, but refuse to accept him, because they reject all papal law as the principle of determining who is the true pope or not; finding that not having a pope, and/or, not having a Catholic pope who wants to clean up the Church, is better to their liking.

The stakes here are life and death. Anyone with common sense and a little knowledge of what is going on in the world right now, understands this. For those who want to be in juridical, hierarchical and spiritual communion with Jesus Christ, it is enough to know the true popes reignal name, Hildebrand. For, as scripture says, in Psalm 69, verses 30 to 36, according to the Latin of the Clementine Vulgate:

Laudabo nomen Dei cum cantico ; et magnificabo eum in laude ; et placebit Deo super vitulum novellum, cornua producentem et ungulas. Videant pauperes, et lætentur ; quærite Deum, et vivet anima vestra, quoniam exaudivit pauperes Dominus, et vinctos suos non despexit. Laudent illum cæli et terra ; mare, et omnia reptilia in eis. Quoniam Deus salvam faciet Sion, et ædificabuntur civitates Juda, et inhabitabunt ibi, et hæreditate acquirent eam. Et semen servorum ejus possidebit eam ; et qui diligunt nomen ejus habitabunt in ea.

Which in English, we render thus:

I will praise the Name of God with a canticle; and I will magnify Him in praise; and it shall please God more than a new calf, sprouting horns and hooves.  Let the poor see and be glad! Seek God, and let your soul live! since the Lord has heard the poor, and has not despised His prisoners.  Let the Heavens and Earth praise Him! the sea, and all the moving things in them.  Since the Lord shall save Zion, and they shall build the cities of Judah, and shall dwel in them, and they shall acquire her as an inheritance.  And the seed of His servants shall possess her; and those who have chosen to love His Name shall dwell in her.

These things were said prophetically of the Catholic Faithful of future ages who accept Jesus Christ and submit to His rule in the Church, under His true and legitimate vicars on earth.

Finally, though it is needless to say for clergy who understand Church law and have a conscience, that for those priests and deacons who need faculties, and who accept Hildebrand as the pope elect, they can contact his Secretary of State and make an application for this purpose. Presently, the Holy Father is especially asking for the help of clergy, Bishops and Priests, to serve the Faithful at Rome, so that they may have all the Sacraments of Christ in communion with Him.

News and Commentary on the Catholic Church