My letter to a Catholic Bishop requesting a Catholic ReAction to The Vatican Ritual

Your Excellency,

I write you because I know you in the past have shown yourself to be Catholic and to speak the truth, which few do these days.

I also write you because you have indicated that you know what transpired in the Vatican Gardens on Friday, October 4, 2019, when many Catholic Bishops and Clergy and religious attended a Pachamama ritual of adoration.

Something about myself: I hold a B. A. in Cultural Anthropology from the University of Florida (Class of 1986), where I studied the cultures of the native peoples of the Americas intensely. I graduated with honors and was nominated to Phi Beta Kappa. I am familiar with the rituals of the pagans of Latin America from academic study. I have read the Theologia Moralis of Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori in Latin. I am the translator of St Bonaventure’s Scholastic Treatise on the One and Triune God, published by The Franciscan Archive in 2014.

In regard to what happened, I have never seen such an outcry on social media about Bergoglio’s scandals like this one. The Laity are right, this was a pagan ceremony.

Bergoglio invited, participated, approved and attended. He was not just a witness.

  1. There was employed an idol of Pachamama, the Andean Earth Mother Goddess.
  2. The Idol received the veneration of latria, when all those in the circle bowed down to it.
  3. Bergoglio showed respect for the ceremony by inclining his head on occasion.

When one recalls that during the Decian persecution Bishops were considered apostates, with loss of all office and right to communion, for merely procuring a document which said they had sacrificed to Mars, even though they had not, this goes way beyond that.

A lot of laity, myself included, think that the Faith needs to be protected by the Bishops by a formal act.

I am only a brother. But if I were a Bishop, I would think like this:

I am a successor to the Apostles, whom Our Lord rebuked when He said, “When I return, will I find Faith on earth?”

By “faith”, Our Lord always mean, faith in Himself, the true God.

As a Bishop it is my duty to prevent public scandal which arises from the sins of the faithful. This duty is more incumbent upon me, when the sin is by a fellow Bishop. Because if the Bishops remain silent when another publicly sins, the faithful and general public conclude that no Bishop has the Faith, and that the Catholic Church is merely a farce.

To avert such a scandal and to put things in true light, I therefore must make a public statement.

Canon 1364 already declares excommunication latae sententiae. Therefore, I do not need jurisdiction or office to publicly declare that this man, Bergoglio, has incurred excommunication for formal and material participation in the ritual of adoration of a false God, on sacred soil, participated in by priests and religious consecrated to Christ, into which ceremony there was mixed in, by the perpetrator, Bergoglio, the Our Father.

The Public Scandal is notorious. The actions are undeniable. The sin and crime are committed by the person not the office he holds. Therefore action can be taken by anyone who has grave moral responsibility, whether he holds jurisdiction of office or has a grave duty as a successor of the Apostles.

Apostasy by means of a pagan ritual of this kind is not a canonical crime which requires a trial or court to declare. Because apostasy of this kid is principally in the external act, consent to which is presumed. Unlike the canonical crime of heresy, which exists formally not only out of public expression but manifestation of pertinacity of the mind, the pertinacity must be investigated because the state of the mind, which is hidden, must be made manifest. Therefore in a public act of false worship, no investigation need be made. The Divine Faith requires that we do not attend such ceremonies and as soon as we detect that we are present at one, we must get up and leave. Moreover, we cannot invite priestesses or priests of pagan religions to our homes or properties to perform an act of false worship of an idol. Nor can we receive, as Bergoglio did, the idol as a gift after the pagan ritual. Therefore, the consent to the act is indisputable. This is a clear case of a canonical crime running contrary to the entire obligations of the Faith (Thou shalt not have strange gods before Me), against Hope (There is no other Name by which men are to be saved) and against Charity (Thou shalt love Me with all thy heart, and mind and soul).

Therefore, Bergoglio has incurred the excommunication in the canonical sense..

Therefore, I as a successor to the Apostles have the right and duty to publicly declare it.

Having read the book by Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, and knowing that the failure to speak out for Bishops and priests is a mortal sin and the chief reason for their damnation, considering my state of life in the Church as a Bishop, I must act if I do not wish to be damned and share in giving scandal about this horror.

Therefore, I will declare that Bergoglio has incurred latae sententiae excommunication for his formal and material participation and cooperation in an act of false latria rendered to the idol of Pachamama in the Vatican Gardens.


These would be my thoughts, if I were a bishop.

I humbly petition, in virtue of Canon 212, that you think similarly and take action to stem the grave scandal and put to end once and for all the pretense of this man to be called a member of the Catholic Church.

Sincerely in Saint Francis,


Br. Alexis Bugnolo

With Globalist Censorship growing daily, No one will ever know about the above article, if you do not share it.

22 thoughts on “My letter to a Catholic Bishop requesting a Catholic ReAction to The Vatican Ritual”

  1. Agreed Br Alexis. Amen. I declare also that “declare that Bergoglio has incurred latae sententiae excommunication for his formal and material participation and cooperation in an act of false latria rendered to the idol of Pachamama in the Vatican Gardens.” Thank you for informing us of our rights and duties.

  2. The Birth of the Antichrist

    “Rome will lose faith” … – The Blessed Virgin prophesied this in La Salette in 1846, but then, already at the time of Bl. Pius IX, the church’s freemasonry feverishly worked to ridicule Her messages and make a madwoman with Melanie Calvat.They have done their job: the Saletinian Fathers claim to this day that this is a false prophecy, although the course of events in the Vatican shows their authenticity.
    … “and become the seat of the Antichrist”. It happened: the false prophet Jorge the Apostate, participating, on October 4th, in a pagan ritual, tenderly embraced a figurine of a pregnant „false Hebrew nun”, who on the lawn in the Vatican Gardens gave birth to an incarnate Satan: this wooden boy without a pampers on a blanket. We will soon find out his identity: …

    1. You are right to suppose that the image of the pregnant Pachamama and the little boy could be images of the mother of the AntiChrist and the Antichrist. We know from the fathers of the Church the Antichrist will be born of a nun of hebrew race and of a father who is a Bishop (Bergoglio? maybe?).

  3. Pope Francis has done some questionable actions as our pontiff. I want to believe thebest about his behavior, but it is getting more and more difficult. I wish St. Peter would come down from heaven and straighten our church out. But our Lord may have to step in.

  4. I am not proposing an answer, but asking a sincere question in a process of trying to think correctly about the last 60 years of Catholic history: How is this different than John Paul II’s event at Assisi?

  5. Okay. But he permitted the Dalai Lama to place a buddhist statue over the tabernacle of St. Peter Church in Assisi, so I’ve read. Is it not true? If so–not as bad as presiding over idol worship, right? But still–how is that not also a betrayal of our Lord?

  6. Apostasy is defined not only as the renunciation of the faith, by a verbal expression, but also as any act which is essentially and totally contrary to the duty of the Faith.

    Brother, the above is copied from your last blog post. Under this definition could John Paul II’s pow-wow at Assisi have constituted an act which is essentially and totally contrary to the duty of the Faith? (like errin, the thought came to my mind about that event of october thirty three years ago)…

    1. To invite men to pray is not per se an act contrary to the Faith. To omit inviting them to pray according to the true faith is not a sin of apostasy but of negligence and contrary to charity. Thus it is not the same species of sin as presiding over the adoration of an idol.

      1. Traditionalist followers of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre distributed flyers denouncing John Paul as an apostate for allegedly putting Catholicism on the same level as other religions. Two years later, when Lefebvre went into schism, he said he was acting to protect Catholicism from the “spirit of Vatican II and the spirit of Assisi.” ~from Crux

        Do you think that this objection of the members of SSPX has any merit?

        note to brother: not sure if i bungled something earlier by replying to the wordpress bell or if my comment failed in moderation. (if it’s the latter, my apologies)…

      2. While I think Pope John Paul by his excessive trust and delegation of the affair sinned in his duties as a Shepherd, I do not think that that amounts to the sin of Apostasy. The scandal was very grave, and I personally do not know if he repented of it or removed it by a public statement. I do think, that if I had done such a thing and said nothing, that I could not in honesty expect anything other than eternal damnation from Our Lord in the hour of my death.

      3. I do think, that if I had done such a thing and said nothing, that I could not in honesty expect anything other than eternal damnation from Our Lord in the hour of my death.



  8. Brother Alexis, do you want to get Catholic bishops to act? After all, the long 6 years of the “pontificate” Jorge the Apostate showed that there are no real pastors-bishops in the Roman Catholic Church. There are only effeminate yes-men here. If they were, they would have long ago treated the apostates of the Vatican in the same way as these brave Greek Catholic bishops from Lviv::

  9. Time for Pope Benedict 16th. to declare a SCHISM in the church. We have Luther stamps and statues in the Vatican. Bergoglios & Parolin and their sodomite Henchman mc Carrick sellout of AB Zen and Faithful Catholics in Red China.,…… Please get this charlatan Jesuit ad hd.. of Jesuits who cannot figure out Satan exists let alone stop Pagan rituals in the Vatican no Less.
    Now this apostasy out of a alleged Pope no Less.

  10. Pedro Gabriel’s critique at The Splendor of the Church blog, which links here, is a long diatriabe attempting to convince Catholics that bowing down to a statue of a nude women of the exact same shape and form as Pachamama is not idolatry if one assumes, presumes or calls it a statue of Our Lady of the Amazon. Needless to Say, Pedro admits being from Portugal but does not seem to know the least thing about Amazonian culture or Santaria. His article is interesting to show the lengths some people will go to deny reality, simply to uphold Bergoglio. He does not like the fact that I have a B. A. in cultural Anthropology with extensive studies of the Natives of Latin America, that irks his pet theories. Sorry to rain on his parade of presumption, but reality is not what you think, it is what is out there. And no Catholic bows down in adoration of any statue of a nude women. It’s a blasphemy to say such a thing. It is also a blasphemy to say that such a statute could be of the Virgin Mary. Has this man no sense of shame or pudor? — His arguments turn upon the central thesis of Modernissm, that words and things have no necessary relationship. So if one says an idol is an image of Our Lady, it is an image of Our Lady. If one says that a man is a woman, then he or she is a woman. — You get the idea where that comes from…

Comments are closed.