40 Days of prayer against the Church of Darkness — Day 21

FromRome.Info Video, recorded tonight at Santa Maria Maggiore.



In the year of Our Lord 1820, God revealed to Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich that the Church of Rome would one day be attacked from within. That there would be two popes: one false and dark, who strove to found a new Religion which would be the home of every heretic and apostate: one true and aged, who would be paralyzed by inaction and silence.

To drive the Church of Darkness out of the Church of Rome, it was revealed to her that Our Lady asked the faithful to gather at Midnight in front of the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore, here at Rome, and pray with arms outstretched, in the form of the Cross, for the space of at least 3 Our Fathers.

Prayers being said Tonight at Rome

In nomine Patri et Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

Pater noster qui es in coelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum;
adveniat regnum tuum, fiat voluntas tua, sicut in coelo et in terra.
Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie,
et dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris.
et ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a malo. Amen.

Padre nostro che sei nei cieli, sia santificato il tuo nome;
venga il tuo regno; sia fatta la tua volontà, come in cielo così in terra.
Dacci oggi il nostro pane quotidiano,
e rimetti a noi i nostri debiti come noi li rimettiamo ai nostri debitori,
e non ci indurre in tentazione, ma liberaci dal male». Amen. (3 volte)

Our Father who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy Name,
Thy Kingdom come, Thy Will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven.
Give us this day our Daily Bread,
And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us,
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Amen. (3 times)

Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui Sancto,
Sicut erat in principio, et nunc et semper, et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.

NOTE: Since, Bl. Anna-Katerina Emmerich had this vision in 1820, before the invention of time zones, midnight here should be understood in solar time, which at Rome makes midnight occur at 12:22 AM, presently, and thus the hour of midnight would be 11:52 AM to 12:52 AM. Try to say your prayers in that hour.

This Novena is explained and announced here in English, and here in Italian, in each place the citations from Bl. Emmerich about these prayers are given.

See the article published yesterday at FromRome.Info, The Church of Light vs. the Church of Darkness for more about this Novena of Prayer.

PLEASE NOTE: That until From Rome Info Video Channel at Youtube gets 1000 subscribers, it will NOT be able to broadcast the Nightly Prayers Live. So let all who are devoted to Jesus Christ, Our Lady and Bl. Ann Catherine Emmerich know that they need to urge subscriptions to this channel, so that we can promote the fulfillment of Our Lady’s Request for Her Heavenly-Approved prayer solution to the present Crisis in the Church.

To put a Newspaper ad calling Catholics at Rome to this pray vigil, will cost 2000 euros. Help us spread the word by a generous contribution here below. Our Lady promised victory, let us mobilize everyone to the battle!

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

Open Persecution of the Catholic Clergy has begun in Victoria State, Australia

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

As of yesterday, any Catholic Priest hearing confessions in the State of Victoria, Australia, can be arrested on the spot. All the authorities need is to send an agent and pretend to confess the sin of pedophilia. And then wait the statutory length of time for the priest to report the sin to the local authorities, and if he does not, arrest him on the spot. (See yesterdays’ report in The Age)

But if a priest were to do as the new law requires, then he would fall foul of one of the most severe penalities in Church Law.  Because to violate the seal of confession every Cardinal, Bishop or priest, earns an immediate latae sententiae excommunication, reserved to the Apostolic See, according to canon 1381 §1. Reserve, here, means that it cannot be lifted except by direct, verbal intervention of the Roman Pontiff or his delegated subordinate.

Canon 1371 §1 reads as follows

Can. 1388 – § 1. Confessarius, qui sacramentale sigillum directe violat, in excommunicationem latae sententiae Sedi Apostolicae reservatam incurrit; qui vero indirecte tantum, pro delicti gravitate puniatur.

§ 2. Interpres aliique, de quibus in can. 983, § 2, qui secretum violant, iusta poena puniantur, non exclusa excommunicatione.

Which in English would be:

Canon 1388 – §1. The confessor, who directly violates the sacramental seal, incurrs an excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See; but who does so only indirectly, let him be punished according to the gravity of the delict.

§2.  The translator and anyone else, spoken of in canon 983 §2, who violate the secret, let them be punished with a just punishment, not excluding excommunication.

Grave violations of Religious Liberty

The law which was pushed by anti-Catholic bigots, secularists, feminists, atheists and Muslims, is intended to completely destroy the Catholic Religion. This is because the confession of sins is a central act of the Catholic Faith which is a necessity of every Catholic at least once every year. If Catholics know their priest is willing to break the seal of confession for any reason, they will not be able to practice their religion.

The law also allows open persecution of the Catholic Clergy. Any priest, who might speak out on any topic, can now be targeted by this entrapment at any time he hears confession. Let us not imagine that this law will NOT be used to attack the Clergy who speak out against abortion, sodomy, Freemasonry, etc..

Ways Priests can protect themselves

Priests can protect themselves by affirming publicly that they have no intention of abiding the by the law. This is a pastoral and moral necessity to prevent the loss of faith among the faithful of confidence in the clergy during the administration of such a sacrament.

At the same time, they can refuse absolution to anyone who actually does confess such a sin, if that person does not agree to self-report himself, and have him, upon such agreement, sign a contract authorizing the priest to report him. This would not violate the seal, because it is not a crime for the penitent to violate or authorize the violation of the secret. And his signing of the contract in the confessional would be a free act authorizing such a revelation.

Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori, doctor of the Church on moral questions, has long ago counseled priests to refuse absolution if penitents are not willing to make restitution or report themselves to authorities for such grave crimes as murder or homicide.

However, since the Church seeks first of all the forgiveness of sin, it remains that this law is nefarious in the highest manner and must be publicly denounced in the strongest terms by all the faithful.

Bishops should fight back

Any Catholic in civil authority who insists on such a law is clearly subject to canonical penalties and who solicits such a revelation of the seal from a priest, causing him to make such a revelation is ipso facto excommunicated by Canon 1329 §1 as an accomplice. Bishops should declare their intention to declare and impose such a penalty, to make it absolutely clear that they will not go down without a fight.

A Law which cuts both ways

Finally, the law has obviously come out of the mind of someone who does not have the foggiest notion of what Confession is or how it is practiced. Because perhaps 99% of the penitents who come to make confession are unknown to the priest. In confession, the identity of the penitent is not disclosed by the penitent. So against whom would a priest file a report, if he did observe the law? He could just as well tell the police the penitent looked like a member of Victorian Parliament which passed the law, than a Catholic whom he has never seen before. Is Victoria State prepared to start arresting everyone on the word of every Catholic priest?


CREDITS:  The Featured Image is a screen shot from the article in The Age, newspaper, cited here above in this editorial and is used in accord with the fair use standard for such commentary.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

Jacob Obrecht: Missa de Sancto Donatiano

Today, as we peruse the sacred repertoire of Obrecht, we feature the Tallis Scholars performance of his Missa de Santo Donatiano from Saint James’ Church, in Bruges, Belgium performed on May 10, 2018.

This is the kind of music which glorified the Catholic Religion in the generation immediately prior to the so called “Reformation”, which resulted in the second most violent and irrational attack on sacred art in Europe in its 3000 year history, next to the horrors committed by the Turks in the Balkans.

Every evening at 5. P. M., Rome time, FromRome.Info features a selection of sacred music from Catholic composers of fame in past ages, to edify our readers and help them understand how profoundly contrary to the right notion of the aesthetic the liturgical reforms of Vatican II are and have been.

Cardinal Zen, and the spirit of Lepanto?

by Christopher P. Benischek

“So if we should follow the NORMAL attitude of a Roman Catholic, that we are to obey the pope in all matters of faith, morals, liturgy, devotion, Church law, etc., instead of the new view which would have us waiting for the next issue of the Remnant or Catholic Family News in order to know what we are to believe and do as Catholics in the moment, we would cease to read the Remnant or Catholic Family News.” –Professor Peter Chojnowski, RadTradThomist blog.

New York City — Feb. 17, 2020: Over this weekend I chanced to meet and speak with two prominent intellectual priests: Fr. Gerry Murray of ‘papal posse’ fame (or infamy, depending on one’s perspective) and canon lawyer; and Fr. John Perricone. I later shared those conversations with a friend, prominent professor, and former lawyer, Fr. Anthony “M.” Here is my story (Editor: quotes are not from a recording, but as he remembers them):

On Saturday, on the occasion of the Third Annual Lepanto Youth Conference, in the shadow of St Vincent Ferrer Church just after the Pontifical High Mass offered by the venerable Joseph Cardinal Zen, at which good Fr. Murray was officially present in procession with twelve or fifteen other priests, plus NYPD honor guard, plus Knights of Malta and other orders, I asked Fr. Murray: How is it possible that a man who has spent the last seven years trying to destroy the Church could possibly be Her pope?

We had just prayed and heard the most magnificent Mass in honor of Pius V–the Pope of Lepanto. With brass enemble, organ and schola cantorum performing the Mass Ecce Sacerdos of Francisco Guerrero. Fittingly, the Gospel for that Mass is “Thou art Peter…. And the Gates of Hell shall not prevail over it…. What thou shalt bind on earth will be bound in Heaven.”

Now, we know that Bergoglio sold out the Church in China

That was the whole point and purpose of the ++Zen conference. So I asked good Fr. Murray, afterwards:

“Fr. Murray, Is not Bergoglio more like Judas than Peter?”

“Oh, well he’s still pope,” responded the good father.

“Really?” I persisted.

“Well he’s been very destructive…especially toward Catholic tradition.”

I responded: “Father, he’s done nothing but try to destroy Holy Mother Church for the past seven years!”

Tacking, I said,

“Fr. Murray, not one word of the Viganò Testimony of August 2018 has been impeached. (He nods.) The most important point of which is that Bergoglio is the head of the Homosexual Network Strangling the Church!”

“Well I don’t think he’s a homosexual.”

Holding course, I followed up: “That doesn’t matter–if he’s their head, and they put him in, and he is in essence the head of such a criminal conspiracy–think McCarrick…then how can he be pope!”

“Oh, well, he’s certainly the pope,” said Fr. Murray.

I could only exclaim, “Really!?”

Just then three Knights of Malta rode to his rescue, whisking him away to lunch. I guess they mistook me for a Turk. (Whereas I would have liked to ask them how Fra Festing–as head of a sovereign state–could possibly have yielded his resignation and the Order over to the antipope on demand, rather than declining Bergoglio’s demand and instead counter-demanding for his–Bergoglio’s–resignation on the grounds that he’s an antipope.)

I hope I conveyed the sense of the sheep to the good father–we know the voice of the true shepherd, and it is not that of Bergoglio. What Bergoglio did to the Church in China–a knife in the back–Bergoglio would do to us all.

The voice of the true shepherd is Benedict’s

On Sunday morning, I did not get very much further than conveying a little of the above conversation to good Fr. Perricone after Latin Mass in Jersey City, when he likened Bergoglio to Paul VI, and, he assured me, people said the same thing about him in 1966, that he was called a false pope if not an antipope. I said, again–“Really? In opposition to whom? Whom did they say was the true pope?!”

“Oh, we’ll have to talk, Chris.”

Yes it’s involved, Fr. I’ll look forward to that.

But it is as if the wise are blinded, and cannot see as clearly as Sr Lucia and St Catherine Emmerich and Sr. Mariana of Our Lady of Good Success. Or as the dumb sheep in the pew, who rely on hearing as St Thomas Aquinas says.

That evening as the westering sun cast its last rays on the northern Jersey hills, having returned home, I phoned Fr. M. in his mountain redoubt and told him about these conversations.

Fr. M. said, “I know Fr. Jerry, and I think he wouldn’t speak frankly with you for fear of being quoted.”

I asked, don’t people have the right to know. Or is our Faith now reduced to secret knowledge–is Catholicism now a Gnostic sect?

Fr. M. has said in the past to me (privately) that he does not think Francis is pope. And last night he eventually blurted out: “He’s a heretic! Of course he’s not the pope! I have to stop thinking about it, it’s raising my blood pressure.”

Father, may I quote you on that?

Taking the Doctor’s Advice

As indeed I have done. Three things here, nay four do I glean from the good professor’s suggestion, quoted at the beginning of this editorial:

  • Obey, support, pray and die for the pope: Benedict.
  • Oppose the antipope and false pope: Bergoglio.
  • Cease to read the (Untie the Clams/Free the Glutens!) Remnant.

Pray for all the wishy-washy or namby-pamby ‘leaders’ lay and clerical who can’t seem to get the marbles out of their mouth.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Chris Benischek is an attorney in New York. He is convinced by the language of Pope Benedict’s renunciation itself and the actions and statements of Pope Benedict thereafter that His Holiness did not intend to fully resign either the office or the ministry of the Papacy.


CREDITS: The Featured Image is a detail of a photo of the Statue of Saint Vincent Ferrer, St. Vincent’s Church, Manhattan, taken by Chris Benischek. The Video likewise is by Mr. Benischek and used here with his permission.

+ + +

Does Chris Ferrara think he is a judge on the Roman Rota?

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

In recent months, the traditional Catholic Attorney, Chris Ferrara, has come out strongly against those who judge that Bergoglio is a heretic or that Pope Benedict is the pope, basing his position that private individuals have no authority to make determinate judgements on the matter.

His arguments are vague, in my opinion, so I will simply rebut here the general errors which it appears he seems to appealing to.

First, it strikes me as completely absurd that an Attorney-at-law should demand that everyone who knows of a notorious public crime and about which crime the evidence is manifest, public and equally notorious, should shut up and stop making pronouncements about guilt or innocence.

I can understand how the defense counsel for the alleged criminal(s) could take such a position, certainly. And I can understand how a judge of the case has to take such a position, because the juridical process of adjudication requires impartiality.

But none of us are the defense counsel. And none of us are the judges.

Even Chris, I think, has not been retained as counsel for the defense by any party involved. And as far as I know he has not been appointed a judge on the Roman Rota or the Apostolic Signatura — the highest courts in the Catholic Church, which however, do not have the competence to judge cases of failed papal renunciations or papal heresy.

So where does Chris get the idea that we or he should be impartial and await judgement from such future tribunal? Does he think Bergoglio is not a heretic? If so, why not say so.

And since such matters can only be judged canonically in a Synod or Council of Bishops, Cardinals or the clergy of Rome, where does he get the idea that all who might attend such a Council or Synod have to be impartial beforehand? Or that those of us who want such a meeting to take place have to be impartial?

Does being impartial now mean being honest and just in Attorney Ferrara’s mind? Or is Chris letting his habit of mind, as a defense counsel, inhibit his exercise of the virtues of faith and justice in regard to the solution of the Church Crisis?

I agree, Chris, that we are not the final arbiters of the canonical settlement which will put the Church back in working order. But I have to ask you, why you are acting like a Judge on the Roman Rota? Are you merely parroting the arguments of some former occupant of such a position

Please explain to the rest of us then, since you have taken such a position, why you take it!

Second, I would like to publicly ask Attorney Ferrara what purpose or effectiveness does he see in lamenting the problems on a weekly basis in his published editorials, but NOT seek a canonical solution to them? And why is it that he writes article after article about the problems in the Church if he seems so adamant about telling those who want corruption removed — like Ann Barnhardt — to shut up? Simply because she does not lament to lament, she decries and demands justice be done?

He is renowned for seeking justice for Catholics in U.S. Courts. As a Catholic, Chris, do you not feel the slightest tinge of obligation as an attorney with such a reputation, to demand, call and advocate for all Catholics to have a real solution to the problem? — Yes I have seen your public comment that you think Catholics have a right to call for such a solution. BUT why is it that YOU are not calling for it?

Third, as a Catholic and a citizen journalist, I want to ask, you, Chris, a public question? Are you acting under counsel or orders from Cardinal Burke to stifle any move by Catholics to call for the intervention of the College of Bishops and, or, the College of Cardinals to investigate the problems with the Renunciation or with Bergoglio being a heretic? And if so, what reasons does he give for such counsel or order?

If you think Chris should answer these questions, you can hear him speak and perhaps get a question in at the Keep the Faith Conference on Feb. 22, in Monterey, California, USA. For more information see: https://keepthefaith.org/conferences/


CREDITS: The Featured Image is a partial screen shot of an Appeal by Attorney Ferrara for his Catholic Lawyers Association which provides free legal counsel to Catholics who are being persecuted for their religious expression in the USA. As such Attorney Ferrara has done some marvelous work defending the Faithful against injustice. Image used here in accord with fair use practice for editorial commentary.

+ + +

The Door to Sutri II is unlocking

In an article entitled, Waiting for Gregorian reforms 2.0, published by Polonia Christiana on Sept. 7, 2018 (and reprinted by ChurchMilitant.com, Prof. Grzegorz Kucharczyk lays out the historical and legal context of the current crisis of criminality in the Church which may lead to another Synod of Sutri.

The Synod of Sutri in 1046 A. D., was one of the most extraordinary canonical events in the history of the Church. It deposed 3 popes and paved the way for the election of Pope Clement II. Our knowledge of the event is confirmed by men of indisputable honestly: Bl. Pope Victor III in his annales, Saint Peter Damian who praised the proceedings and attended the coronation of Pope Clement, and Pope St. Gregory VII, who as an acolyte of Gregory VI was present at the Synod and saw his patron deposed from the papacy.

Later historians, after the Council of Constance, who wanted to defend against the implication that the Pope could be judged by a Council, have fiercely attacked the Synod of Sutri as an aberration, an uncanonical proceeding, an illegitimate act to be discarded to the history of the Seculum Obscurum of the Church, a long period in which the Papacy was ruled by despots appointed by Roman Nobility, without regard to the norms of law.

But the Synod of Sutri was a legitimate canonical proceeding accepted by all parties, save that of Pope Benedict IX, after whose death there were no supporters of his own to continue his opposition. Holy Mother Church by canonizing 2 witnesses and beatifying the third, gives the most certain refutation of this wrong headed papal maximalists, who erred out of excessive zeal in judging the precise nature of the canonical proceedings.

Three popes were deposed. But in truth no pope was deposed. Both statements are true, because both statements do not use the word, “pope”, in the same sense.  In the first, one speaks according to the appearances of their claims. In the second, one speaks according to the truth of canon law.

Popes Sylvester III and Gregory VI were never valid popes. The former usurped the office of the Papacy after an angry mob had driven Pope Benedict IX from the city. The latter, Gregory VI, had purchased the office of the papacy from Benedict IX who wanted to resign and marry, and needed the money.  Pope Benedict IX by the fall of 1046, had publicly resigned the papacy but wanted it back since his girlfriend had rejected his proposals to marriage.

So according to the norms of law, 3 pretenders to the papacy were deposed, not three popes.

The confusion about Sutri lies in the obscurity of history, since it is not known under what kind of precise wording Benedict IX resigned and sold the papacy to John Gratian, who took the name Gregory VI. And for that reason, some have said that Benedict was still the pope, assuming that the resignation and sale were one contract, and others have said that Benedict was no longer pope, assuming the two acts were separate. The sale of an ecclesiastical office and its reception by the buyer were always considered invalid legal acts from the time Saint Peter condemned Simon Magus for wanting to do such a thing (cf. Acts 8:9-24). Whence the name for such a crime: simony.

In my previous article on this, I spoke according to the first assumption, and riled the Sedevacantists. — I publicly admit that my assumption about he contract, there, might have been wrong.

But what Prof. Grzegorz Kucharczyk says in his article is true. The Synod of Sutri was the consequence of temporal power which required the resolution of a disputed papacy at Rome for its own purposes. Just so, the ongoing massive legal actions by several nations against the criminally corrupt clergy will inevitably lead back to Rome. And then the power that be will find it necessary to clean up the Vatican.

I will add my own observation, here. Namely, that the recent decision of the pro-Bergoglian government here in Italy — which enjoys now less than 15% support in the national polls — to put the most popular politician, Matteo Salvini, on trial for delaying the disembarkation of illegal immigrants in the port of Catania for 3 days, though with the consent of key members of the current government — Salvini will be charged with kidnapping! — will have its consequences. It will produce the certainty that the day the people of Italy again have a government which supports their views on immigration, that that new government will be implacably anti-Bergoglian and disposed to use their rights, under the Lateran Pact, to resolve the problem of a Vatican out of control and operating against the canons of the Church.

In this way, the doors to the Second Synod of Sutri are being unlocked: Christ the King will have His justice executed even in this world!

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]