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




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″]

Pentin marshals straw men to the fight

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Last summer, the HQ of Veri Catholici informed me that Edward Pentin began a long conversation with their Twitter Account lambasting me for my defense of the invalidity of the Renunciation of Pope Benedict, according to the norm of law. Veri Catholici chided Pentin in that exhange, which I think was published on twitter, that he had written nothing about the controversy. He was indignant. But now he has spoken.

In an article today at his personal blog, entitled, Debate Intensifies Over Benedict XVI’s Resignation and Role as Pope Emeritus, Pentin marshals straw man after straw man to the fight. — I am referring to the arguments he cites, not the individuals he interviews.

I consider it a duty to the truth and Holy Mother Church to set out what is wrong and right in Pentin’s article, which is so misleading even if it has conceded much. It is also a poor piece of journalism because he never interviews someone with a contrary opinion, though he seems to quote one scholar. Finally, his report is extremely insulting to the Holy Father, Pope Benedict, in that it accuses him of being ignorant, stubborn, unaware, attached and super-scrupulous. — Goodness! Who does Pentin think he is to trash the Holy Father, the Vicar of Christ? a man who is a highly esteemed academic, with such insults: insults delivered by reporting the views of those who insult the Pope, but not the views of those who respect him? It is insufferable insolence.

Misrepresenting the Historical Context

Pentin opens his piece by mispresenting the historical context of the debate, as if it has popped out of the blue in consequence of the Book Flap on Priestly Celibacy. The doubts as to the invalidity of the act arose the very days after it was published, from numerous scholars of Latin and canon law and philosophy at Rome and abroad.  I have detailed only a few of these in the preface to my Scholastic Question, where I carefully examined, from November, 2018 to February of 2019 all the arguments for an against: Flavian Blanchon and Luciano Canfora know of whom I speak, so does Prof. Enrico Radaelli. Surely, also Edward Pentin, the renowned Vaticanista knows of them too.

Pentin invents the creation of the office of Pope Emeritus

Next, Pentin asserts as a given that the office of Pope Emeritus was created by Pope Benedict XVI.  This is a complete misrepresentation. There is no act of Pope Benedict XVI whatsoever by which he created an office called, Pope Emeritus: neither before or after Feb. 2013. It is simply a title which he uses to describe himself. To call it an office and say it was created show a very sloppy terminology, if not complete ignorance of juridical procedures in canon law. Seeing that Pentin in his article has interviewed numerous scholars and canonists, how can he get that wrong?

Pentin then insults the intelligence of Pope Benedict XVI

Next, Pentin implies that Pope Benedict did not know what he was doing, because he did not consult with experts, out of a disdain for the College of Cardinals.  I do not doubt he disdained them, but with good reason. Because if they cannot admit the canonical problem of renouncing ministerium rather than munus, after 7 years, then they are clearly incompetent, as he implied in his Declaratio of Feb. 11, 2013.

But to say that Pope Benedict did not know what he is doing, is simply a gratuitous slur. As a theologian he had discussed for several decades the distinction between the petrine ministerium and the petrine munus. He uses both terms in his Declaratio. Therefore it is contrary to fact to say or imply he did not know what he was doing.

Pentin then admits what all Vaticanista denied

I have questioned several Vaticanista and Mons. Arrieta, about the renunciation. None admit to knowing anything about the problems in the renunciation as of Feb. of 2013. But Pentin does, writing:

Other senior Vatican sources have said that between Benedict’s announcement of his resignation on Feb. 11, 2013, and his departure from the apostolic palace three weeks later, a number of cardinals pressed Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, then Vatican Secretary of State, to clarify the canonical status of an abdicated pope as they saw it could be “potentially problematic,” but “nothing was done.”

It would be for the good of the Church to know the names of these Cardinals. And they should come forward and explain their concerns. Hat tip to Pentin for admitting and reporting this.

Pentin then attempts to subjectivize the Controversy

Pentin then begins a discourse, in pure Marxist diversionary style, which speaks of the controversy as if it is a problem in Benedict XVI’s mind, with his intention, his understanding, his sense of office, etc.. At the end of which, he dismissed his straw man by saying the Church is not concerned with the interior states of a resigned popes mind.

This totally ignores the objective reality of the papal act of Feb. 11, 2013, which I have shown elsewhere is an administrative act, not a juridical act, because there is no such juridical act in the Code of Canon Law, in the section on juridical acts, canons 125 ff..

The objective reality of a papal act are the words it uses and the signification those words have. The effect of the act follows. But Pentin ignores this, as do all who want Bergoglio to be the Pope, because it is there that the problem is found, and it is there the evidence is manifest.

Pentin then drops a crumb and moves on

Pentin then writes:

But more importantly, questions hinge on comments Benedict and others have made over whether he has fully abdicated the ministerium (active ministry) of the Successor of Peter but not the papal munus (office) — a bifurcation which canonists and theologians say is impossible.

But he never opens the argument, he just moves on to what Pope Benedict said about his renunciation after the fact. This is simply dishonest reporting. Because as he knows well, it is in that where the entire controversy has its source and being.

Pentin then raises the straw man of Inner Responsibility

I have to say that those who refuse to look at ministerium and munus in the Declaratio are really creative in thinking of some other problem to raise so as to shift the conversation. Inner responsibility. What balderdash! Who has ever spoken of this neologism? Its absurd. Pentin is attempting to say Benedict is acting like the pope, after the Resignation because he is super-scrupulously faithful to the previous office he held.

This is simply a snide insult.

Pentin then hides the core controversy

In the section on Inner Responsibility, Pentin inappropriately cuts and pastes in the discussion on the canonical validity. He writes:

Noting that Benedict has preferred to leave his status “unregulated,” De Caro argues that the title “Pope Emeritus” is, in itself, of concern as it “involves a sort of split between the primatial office of the Pope and that of the Bishop of Rome” — a division which, because those aspects of the papacy are “united in the one person of the Roman Pontiff,” presents “inevitable legal-theological implications.”

De Caro is not the first to question the Pope Emeritus title: Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, also expressed reservations, saying in 2017 it “theologically creates more problems than solving them.”

But whereas Archbishop Fisichella recognizes the validity of the resignation, De Caro goes a step further, asking whether a pope could legitimately create ex nihilo (out of nothing) such an unprecedented figure as a Pope Emeritus. He believes this “would not be possible” because it would “touch on divine law” given that the institution of the papacy is “of direct divine creation.”

To imply the papal office is by its very nature divisible, and that it us up to “human willingness to choose which faculties to renounce and which to maintain, is in blatant violation of divine law,” De Caro writes in an essay of “brief reflections” on the “emeritus papacy.” He concludes, therefore, that the Benedict’s resignation is invalid as it is “contrary to divine law itself.”

De Caro is an honest man. And he is correct. But Barnhardt said it 4 years ago, and Pentin fails to quote her, though he does quote several other laymen who have no credentials to speak about the controversy. I hope he is not a chauvanist.

But he does quote Mark Docherty of Non Veni in Pacem. And I will tip my hat to Pentin for that.

Pentin then drops the bomb

Here I will thank Pentin for writing these words, which Mons. Bux would not even admit to me:

He added that canonist friends of his are “firmly convinced” of the invalidity of the resignation based on the traditional canonical axiom, “doubtful resignation, no resignation” — a reference to St. Robert Bellarmine’s assertion that “a doubtful Pope is no Pope” if a “papal election is doubtful for any reason.”

Here, Pentin let the cat out of the bag. The truth is, that all serious canonists hold that the Declaratio has not the proper form to effect an act conformable to the requirements of Canon 332 § 2. And that therefore Benedict XVI is still the pope, because the presumption in any doubtful resignation is that the Pope is still the pope. The principle here is the cessation of power or right is not to be presumed.

I sense in reporting this that Pentin is struggling to be objective, in a piece which is not fair or balanced. Its not worth praise, but I do thank him for saying it, because so many weak souls will take confidence that if Pentin can report it, they can say it.

Pentin then quotes Salza

What can I say here, you quote a layman  who holds no degree in canon law against a host of canonists know by Mons. Bux, to show that they are wrong. How hard do you want me to laugh at such pathetic journalism.

Pentin then quotes a lie about the Declaratio

Citing an anonymous source — liars hide themselves of course — he presents the argument that the Renunciation is only invalid if Benedict knows how to distinguish munus from ministerium and did so in the act. His priest source says he did not. But anyone reading the Latin of the Declaratio sees that he did. He used munus 2 times and ministerium 3 times. Against a fact, no argument is valid. Another straw man.

Pentin then misrepresents Cardinal Brandmueller’s study

In 2016, Cardinal Brandmueller wrote a study on whether a Pope can renounce. In that study however, the Cardinal never read the first clause in Canon 332 §2. So that study has no value whatsoever in this controversy, since it is there that Pope John Paul II required a renunciation of munus, not ministerium.

If the Cardinal, therefore, thinks the renunciation is valid, it probably has to do with the fact that he never considered the problem. But the Cardinal I think knows his study does not address the problem, because I wrote to him to discuss it and his secretary made polite excuses to refuse me for 7 weeks. I am still waiting.

Pentin then rehashes the red herring of the non sacramentality of the Papal Office

There is absolutely no evidence to think that Pope Benedict XVI thinks the Papal office is a sacrament. The entire explanation in his behavior since Feb. 2013 lies in the fact, obvious in his Declaratio, that he renounces the ministerium, not the munus. As canon 1331 §2, n. 4 shows, the dignitas, officium and munus are on the same plane, but the ministerium is not. Thus if you retain the munus, which is the theological and canonical cause of the officium and the dignitas, then you obviously have the right to continue to call yourself pope and keep the papal honors. That is because you are still THE POPE.

The idea that Pope Benedict thinks of the papal office as a sacrament is a pure invention of those who want him gone for good. It is is a journalistic waste of time to discuss it. As far as I know this idea is a pure invention of Dr. de Mattei, who does not know the least thing about Canon Law because everytime he quotes it, he gets it wrong.

Pentin then follows the golden goose of rectifying the Pope Emeritus title

The title pope emeritus reveals that Benedict claims still the papal dignity, which cannot be without the munus. He did not renounce the munus. So Bergoglian apologists like Pentin have to push the narrative of solving the problem of the Emeritus thing. To hide the evidence. But that is not going to fool anyone. Bergoglio has no more authority to fix the problem than a drunk sleeping under the porticoes of the Sala Stampa on the Via Conciliazione! But Pentin reports this, which is at most a side issue.

Pentin ends with a shell game

His final section is entitled, Putting the Question to Benedict. But nothing in that section is about putting the question to Benedict. If Pentin did do that, he would find that things are not as he has attempted to present them in his hachet job on the truth.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

Cipriano de Rore: Ave Regina caelorum

As we continue our journey through the Sacred Polyphony of the 16th century, we come to Cipriano de Rore’s, Ave Regina caelorum, the Marian Antiphon for the Christmas Season from Dec. 24 to Feb. 2.

FromRome.Info features at 5 P.M. daily, Rome time, a selection of sacred music for the edification of our readers, so that they can better grasp how contrary to the very nature of Catholic liturgy were the so called “reforms” of Vatican II.


Skojec does not know that God is Goodness Itself?

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Some laymen on the internet know their faith well, others, well, judge for yourself:

Screenshot_2020-03-07 Skojec does not know that God is Goodness Itself

Anyone who has studied the basic 101 course in Theology at any Catholic University should know the answer to Maddox’s Brother’s Question.

It’s not a mystery. It has been taught by Jesus Christ and explained by the Fathers and the Doctors of the Church — if you care to read them!

First, there is the teaching of Jesus Christ our God, Himself: No one is good but God alone.(Mark 10:18)

Second of His servant Moses, speaking of God, after He had created mankind, who wrote: And God saw that all He had made and it was very good. (Genesis 1:31)

Then there is the faithful Apostle of Christ, Saint Paul who explains:  For every creation of God is good, and nothing that is received with thanksgiving should be rejected (1 Timothy 4:4)

And we are warned in Scripture about judging God’s ways of doing things: He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the hearts of men, yet they cannot fathom the work God has done from beginning to end. (Ecclesiates 3:11)

And God speaking, again, through his prophet Ezechiel declares explicitly: Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? (Chapter 18:23)

So, then, if God does not desire the death of sinners, He desires even less their annihilation. Why? Because God is Goodness Itself and He has made every creature good according to what it is, so even when man fails God ultimately and eternally, nevertheless, there is goodness still in his existence and being, even if there is none left in his will as a moral habit.  Therefore, God cannot destroy souls. But since justice is good, He can punish them eternally, while keeping them in existence. Keeping them in existence confirms that He is good. Punishing them eternally testifies that they have chosen to be unjust, and that God being Just punishes that injustice.

To claim that no one knows the answer to Maddox’s Brother’s question denies Sacred Scripture itself as the source of knowledge, Christ as the Master, the Prophets as inspired and infallible teachers.

What more can I say? But Steve, if you learned your opinion in this matter at Steubenville, I would ask them for my money back!

If they did not teach your opinion, I would humbly suggest you shut down One Peter Five until you go back and read the whole Bible from the beginning and check to see if you believe all that it teaches. Because, it does no one any good to market religion, if you have no idea what religion is about.

But as far as reason is considered, reason can see that existence is better than non-existence, and that therefore the good agent must prefer existence to non existence. On which account, given that God is a good agent, He must prefer punishment to annihilation. The rational argument is even quicker to arrive at than the theological.

And if your reason cannot see that, well….


CREDITS: The Featured Image is of God the Father, by Cima de Conegliano (Source and credits here)

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

Lifesite News takes a swipe at Archbishop Lenga

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The error of Laicism is a particular nasty error. It leads laymen to think they know better than even members of the Sacred Hierarchy who are faithful to the Church. The error of secular politiking is even worse, it seeks to put down any Catholic who stands for all the principles of the Faith without compromise, just as Our Lady asked at Akita.

It is therefore very sad and shameful that LifeSite News should publish, yesterday, an article entitled, The Case of Archbishop Lenga: a Muzzle for a careless confessor?

Screenshot_2020-02-25 Abp Lenga, ks Jochemczyk - to jest niszczenie Kościoła - YouTube
Archbishop Lenga on w Realu24 TV in Poland, in a recent interview

FromRome.Info has covered the heroic witness and faith of Archbishop Lenga in several previous articles:

  1. Archbishop Lenga fires back: which describes how he is not going to observe unjust prescriptions against him which are motivated by the absence of faith.
  2. Archbishiop Lenga: Benedict XVI is the Pope and Bergoglio is an anti-christ
  3. Polish Bishops’ Conference attacks Archbishop Lenga for defending Celibacy
  4. Archbishop Lenga: It is difficult to believe that Benedict resigned freely
  5. Archbishop Lenga: The intention of Freemasons is being implemented in the Church

What is shameful about Lifesite’s article (which is merely an English translation of a German article published at Katholiches) is that it calls the Archbishop careless and imprudent for speaking the truth!  That is the critique of a politician, not of a Catholic! The insult is reserved for the end of the article, where it says:

“Bergoglio did not affirm the faith and does not pass it on to others. He leads the world astray. … He proclaims untruths and sins, not the tradition that has existed for 2000 years. … He proclaims the truth of this world, which is exactly the truth of the devil.”

Thus Archbishop Lenga was quoted from the Polish interview by the progressive British weekly newspaper The Tablet on Monday, February 24.

With such words, Archbishop Lenga offered an open flank, because he questioned the communion with Peter. The flank was immediately attacked, although the Polish bishops themselves, through their resistance to Amoris Laetitia, do not have an unclouded relationship with the current incumbent in Rome. They are careful, however, not to voice direct criticism of Pope Francis. Archbishop Lenga, also a Pole, who also lives in Poland, therefore became a “persona non grata” himself, as he criticized it in his 2015 statement.

LifeSite News it must be remembered is funded by a Canadian Political Action Committee and is co-founded by a self declared atheist, who rejected the Faith because of its restrictions on morality when he was a young man, but who after converted back to the Faith. I personally would have questions of the extent of that conversion after such a shameless attack on the Archbishop.

To say that he questioned communion with Peter is not only false but a theological error. He has clearly stated that he is in communion with Pope Benedict. And unless you are insane, it would be a blasphemy to call Bergoglio “Peter”. Certainly, Lifesite News which criticizes Bergoglio on a daily basis, nearly, would also be questioning Peter, by that standard, no? But I guess Lifesite Editors think that laymen can do what Archbishops cannot.

I personally think that the swipe against the Archbishop is due to this: that the Archbishop said the truth which LifeSite refuses to say, because LifeSite is controlled media. The words of the Archbishop break through the lies of the controlled narrative with force and authority and zeal. That had to be attacked.


CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screen shot of the page cited in this editorial and is used here in accord with the fair use standard for editorial commentary. The Image of the Archbishop is a screen shot from the YouTube video in which he appears, and is used under like standards.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

Refusing the Sacraments during an epidemic is nothing compared to…

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Here at FromRome.Info I do not cover the pedophile crisis in particular, because its better covered elsewhere and because I want FromRome.Info to be a place where you do not have to look into sewers. That is not because I do not think it is a major problem, nay, I think pedophile priests should receive capital punishment for their crimes.

But to all this consternation and shock among the Catholic Faithful that Bishop after Bishop, Diocese after Diocese is denying communion on the tongue or shutting Churches and ending public celebrations of the sacraments, I ask you to remember what is going on on the Church.

Refusing the Sacraments during an epidemic is nothing compared to pedophilia. If you want to see how endemic the moral collapse of the entire hierarchy is, just read this article by ProPublica entitled, Dozens of Catholic Priests Credibly Accused of Abuse Found Working Abroad, Some with the Church’s Blessing.

The article has one error, that I can see: its not with the Church’s Blessing, its with the blessing of the Lavender Mafia.

This kind of abyss of conscience is a sign of their apostasy and atheism and pure Modernism. They are fakers, tricksters and swindlers. And that is why they love Bergoglio. And that is why all frauds in media, even Catholic Media, like Trad inc., love Bergoglio. They are tricksters and deeply admire him for what he is able to get away with on a daily basis.

Consider what kind of perverse mentality is involved in allowing these monsters to go overseas and continue to rape children:

  • Denial of the objective immorality of pedophilia
  • Denial of the objective duty of the priesthood to honestly serve God
  • Denial of the objective natural duty to keep promises
  • Denial of the objective natural sense to protect children
  • Denial of the objective natural sense that human sexuality is for procreation
  • Denial of the objective natural sense of pudor or disgust at perversion
  • Denial of the objective coherence of civil law with Divine and Moral Law
  • Denial of the Divine and Moral Law
  • Denial of the Dignity of the Priesthood
  • Denial of the Catholic Faith

No man arrives by chance at such an abyss of conscience. It has to be learned and taught. And if Bishops are practicing it everywhere, then the clergy is endemically corrupt. That is why they do not bat an eyelash at denying the Sacraments or the baths at Lourdes, they do not even believe in such things!

So do not let them make you think that YOU can give them the Corona Virus. Remember it is they who can give you AIDS!

This is why I strongly have advised the faithful for more than 20 years to NOT go to Mass with someone who is obviously a heretic, modernist or a member of the Lavender clique. Its not only a matter of your soul’s salvation, its also a matter of public health safety.

Where did all these monsters and their enablers come from? The answer is easy: any Bishop who would go along with Vatican II has the precise absence of moral conscience which is required to tolerate such men in the priesthood. This is because Vatican II implicitly affirms that the Catholic Faith is a game and that adapting that game to the times is perfectly licit and withing their power.


CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screen shot of the ProPublica article cited above, and is used here in accord with fair use standards for editorial commentary and as a free advertisement of their article.

PLEASE NOTE: In this article I compare the denial of sacraments to the collaboration in allowing pedophiles to continue to operate near children. These are two different sins and of two different orders of morality. However, as they both partake of the sin of treachery in the execution of the Divine Ministry, the second is worse, because it breaks a promise made after the fact of a crime proven. But the first, obviously, is worse because it is directed to more souls and involved the Most Blessed Sacrament, God Himself. So by this comparison, which I make, I do not intend to ignore this fact, but only speak under a limited respect of treachery as a break of a promise made.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

Stand your ground, on Communion on the Tongue!

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The problem is not communion on the tongue. The problem is that priests and whoever else who distribute communion — and only priests should do so, this is of Apostolic Tradition which no one, not even a pope can abolish — are poorly trained. If the minister of the Sacrament does not know how to place the Host in the mouth and avoid contact of his fingers with saliva, then he should not be distributing the Host!

Why ban communion on the tongue when a 10 minute training session can sure the mechanical problem which can cause saliva to end up on the fingers of the minister?

So I say, STAND YOUR GROUND and insist on Communion on the Tongue!

Insist that the ministers are trained!

Your financial support keeps your local parish or chapel open, you have the RIGHT to insist!

FromRome.Info is receiving reports from different parts of the world. Laity who are kneeling and receiving on the tongue are still being given the Sacrament. Most priest are not so cruel to refuse. If you go last in line, they have even less reason to object.

False and heretical arguments need to be refuted

Here are some of the arguments being used, which are false.

You can catch Corona Virus at Communion.  — If that were true, you could catch HIV at communion. But there has been no reported case IN THE ENTIRE WORLD where that happened.

God for the faith of those who receive on the tongue would not protect them from the virus. — This is simply blasphemy. God is the author of life. All disease — ALL disease — is a punishment for sin. God will NOT punish you for acting out of faith. But if you are in the state of mortal sin, He might. Receive worthily and take confidence in the Lord.

Saint Cyril of Jerusalem said we should receive in the hands, using one as the throne and another as its support. — This text has been long ago discredited by scholars. It was added to an authentic writing of the Saint by Nestorian Heretics, who did not consider Our Lord’s Body and Blood united to the Divinity.

Our Lord said at the Last Supper, Take and Eat, therefore we should not fear to use our hands to communicate. — Our Lord only invited clergy to the Last Supper, so this argument is a devious trick. As a matter of fact, the clergy stand right next to each other when con-celebrating, and have not stopped that during the Corona Virus. Why not? Because the scare is exaggerated and they know it.

Those who attend Mass are susceptible to the Corona Virus due to close proximity. — If the authorities really believed that they would stop all planes from carrying passengers and all trains from carrying passengers and all ships from carrying passengers .They have not. Therefore, it is pure anti-Catholic and anti religious bigotry to single out Catholics.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

The Heresy of Pantheism at the root of Modernism & the present Church crisis

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Pantheism is the false belief that everything is God, or more precisely, that God is incarnate in everything.

As an error, it is an absurdity. It arises in the East in the Indus Valley in the ages before Christ and it is the core principle of Hinduism.

But it is also the consequential philosophical position of German nominalism.

Nominalism is an error introduced into Europe in the high middle ages by the Arabic philosopher Averroes. It spread rapidly at the University of Paris and thence to all of Europe, especially to the faculty of Tubingen. It was popular among secular logicians who, following Peter Abelard, thought they could carve out a place in Catholic society where they were not obliged by the faith to live moral lives.

Nominalism was condemned by both Saint Thomas of Aquinas, whose feast is celebrated today, at Aquinas and Priverno, Italy, and by Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio.

Nominalism ends up in pantheism, because nominalists deny that any particular word names anything particular or idea in a definitive way. For the nominalist, another word can just as easily name what is named.

Infecting Germany for centuries before the rise of Modernism, Nominalism became the favorite position of Modernists, who believe that there is not God and thus that religious sentiments are the true reality behind all religions. All religions are equal and are willed by religious sentiment. Modernists still speak of God, but they mean religious sentiment when they say God.

As one permanent Deacon explained to me, here in Italy, most of the clergy do not think there is anything named by the word, God. For them, God is a word.

You can see, therefore, the difficulty a Modernist will have when confronting the fact that Pope Benedict XVI renounced the ministerium and the Code of Canon Law says a pope must renounce the munus, if he wants to un-pope himself.

To them words have no fixed meaning, so whatever word you want to use, out of religious sentiment, is just as good and just as approved by God — which for them is the code word for religious sentiment.

You can see that the Bishops are modernists in that they are responding to the Corona Virus as if God is not in the Eucharist and that the waters of Lourdes have no miraculous connection to the God of all Healing and Grace.

This is why they wont even give you a response or audience when you ask to speak about the Renunciation. Questions and problems of this kind never enter into their heads.

This is why, just as the Lord punished the Jews of old for apostasy, with plague, so now the Lord sends the Corona Virus to punish the wicked clergy for their atheism.

For just as God incarnated once, and can incarnate not again, so every specific word has a specific meaning. This is the error also behind the subsistit in, in the “Dogmatic Constitution on the Church”, passed at Vatican II, on Sept. 17, 1964.

The Church of Christ susbsists as the Catholic Church, She doe snot subsist in the Catholic Church. The latter means She can subsist in several Churches. That is false. It is denied by the Incarnation of the Son of God. But it is affirmed by pantheism and modernism.

That is why all those who insist that Bergoglio is the pope are not Trad Inc. or traditional Catholics, they are Modernist Inc. and modernists, even if they say the Old Mass with all the rubrical perfection that has ever or could ever be achieved, in all possible universes.


CREDITS:  The Featured Image is a screen shot of the search results of Google Image search for pantheism, and is used here in accord with fair use standards for editorial commentary. While the results have many interesting graphics, many of them are from occult sources and contain various errors or unseemly images, which are not recommended.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]


A Commentary on the prophecies of Bl. Emmerich – Part II

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

This series will have four installments, one for each paragraph of the prophecies given to Bl. Emmerich in 1820 regarding the crisis of the two popes

Though I have previously commented on Bl. Emmerich’s prophecies here in 2014 and here in 2015, this series regards the prophecies she received in 1820 & 1822 in regard to the two popes, as cited here.

In this second installment, I will comment on the prophecies Bl. Emmerich received on the Feast of Saint Clare of Assisi, 200 years ago:

August 10, 1822: “I see the Holy Father in great anguish. He lives in a palace other than before and he admits only a limited number of friends near him. I fear that the Holy Father will suffer many more trials before he dies. I see that the false Church of Darkness is making progress, and I see the dreadful influence that it has on people. The Holy Father and the Church are verily in so great a distress that one must implore God day and night.“

“Last night I was taken to Rome where the Holy Father, immersed in his sorrows, is still hiding to elude dangerous demands (made upon him). He is very weak, and exhausted by sorrows, cares, and prayers. He can now trust but few people. This is mainly why he is hiding. But he still has with him an aged priest who has much simplicity and godliness. He is his friend, and because of his simplicity they did not think it would be worth removing him. But this man receives many graces from God. He sees and notices a great many things which he faithfully reports to the Holy Father. It was required of me to inform him, while he was praying, of the traitors, and evil-doers who were to be found among the high-ranking servants living close to him, so that he might be made aware of it.“

Let’s unpack this prophecy and consider what it may mean. No one can give certain interpretations of such thins however, except by the gift of God.

I see the Holy Father in great anguish. He lives in a palace other than before and he admits only a limited number of friends near him. — This obviously and accurately refers to Pope Benedict at the Monastery of Mater Ecclesiae. The number of persons who ask to meet with him and never get a response is uncountable. This has given rise to intense speculation that he either does not receive his mail, or is being isolated without his realization, or is imprisoned. Only those who talk about things of no importance or book which he was writing get entrance. Cardinals and Bishops are generally refused.

I see that the false Church of Darkness is making progress, and I see the dreadful influence that it has on people. — This is an accurate and succinct prophetic description of the last 7 years. How many Catholics have gone over to the dark side. The number is frightening.

The Holy Father and the Church are verily in so great a distress that one must implore God day and night. — This is indubitable. But only true Catholics are doing it. The rest want the revolution because it serves their dominant vices.

Last night I was taken to Rome where the Holy Father, immersed in his sorrows, is still hiding to elude dangerous demands (made upon him). He is very weak, and exhausted by sorrows, cares, and prayers. He can now trust but few people. This is mainly why he is hiding. — Here Bl. Anna Catherina explains the motives for the Pope acting as he does. I do not think anyone has refuted this.  The recent treachery of Ganswein his personal secretary for more than 30 years is the worst of them all.

But he still has with him an aged priest who has much simplicity and godliness. He is his friend, and because of his simplicity they did not think it would be worth removing him. But this man receives many graces from God. He sees and notices a great many things which he faithfully reports to the Holy Father. — This priest has not been positively identified. Many thought it was Ganswein, but that obviously is now proven to be incorrect. It could be his own brother, but his brother does not live with him. To my knowledge, no priest lives with him.

It was required of me to inform him, while he was praying, of the traitors, and evil-doers who were to be found among the high-ranking servants living close to him, so that he might be made aware of it.“ — Here it seems that Bl. Emmerich is prophetically indicating that she will appear or inspire this priest friend of Pope Benedict. Let us pray that this be and that this priest friend heeds the warnings received!

The situation in which we are living would be considered fantastic and surreal fiction only 8 years ago. No wonder the prophecies of Bl. Emmerich were ignored for 200 years. But what we can gather from this brief passage, is that the Blessed has a special role of mediation in our times, and that we should pay attention to that, pray to her and ask God for special graces to help resolve this crisis. Let us be humble as Bl. Anna Caterina was, so that we might receive them, because God resists the proud, but to the humble He gives graces!

Emmerich Appeal

Finally, for the sake of Bl. Emmerich, I would like to invite all of Rome to the Midnight Prayers at the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore. But I cannot do it without running an add in a local paper, which will cost $2750 USD. If there are any of you who are true disciples of and devoted to Bl. Ann Catherine Emmerich, please consider that this is the hour in which you need to act.

One reader from the UK has just offered $280 USD, and asks me to publicly challenge 9 others to donate the other 9 tenths of this cost. So here goes:

[simple-payment id=”10053″]

Many thanks to one Donor in Florida, another in New York, another in Northern California, another in Alabama, another in Pennsylvania, another in Nevada, and another in Germany, who have followed through with pledging each 1/10th of the expenses. We need 2 more such zealous souls!

These prayers were begun on the initiative of Veri Catholici, the international association pledged to fight the St. Gallen Mafia (twitter account is @VeriCatholici), 40 days ago. In the meantime, though this Novena ends tonight, the Roman Catholics who join me every night have decided to keep thes prayers going as a Perpetual Prayer Crusade against the Church of Darkness. There are only 3 of us who presently come. I was alone for 18 days and our Lady granted 2 others to join me constantly and a third on occasion. I need your help to increase their numbers, because as Our Lady will say in the next section of the prophecy, which I will comment on, on Monday, She wants all the Catholics of Rome to come and pray.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]




Corona Virus arrived at Vatican at AI Conference

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

As reported yesterday, the Head of the Vatican Press Office, Matteo Bruni, the Corona Virus has officially arrived at the Vatican.

Bruni confirmed that “there has been temporarily suspended all the walk-in services of the Office for the Direction of Health and Hygene to enable the sterilization of offices. However, there remains in operation the station for Emergency care.”

The Corona Virus arrived, ironically, via the Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Those attending have been informed of possible infection. Patient 0 was a priest from Bergamo, in Northern Italy, who unwittingly arrived infected. Ironically, the Conference was held from Feb. 27 to Feb. 28, marking the 7th anniversary of the departure of Pope Benedict. The news, this Thursday, that the infection was positively identified as the Corona Virus means that the contagion has had 7 days to spread at the Vatican unnoticed.

As a consequence, Vatican authorities ordered the sterilization of the offices of the Secretary of State (the Vatican Foreign Office), the I.O.R. (the Vatican Bank), the Apostolic Archives and the Vatican Bookstore.

This last place is widely visited by many pilgrims to the Vatican.

Those who might be infected have been notified by email, according to the Vatican spokesman. But panic is reigning in the micro-state, as Ambulances were hear running to and fro in the narrow streets of Saint Peter’s Patrimony all day yesterday.


CREDITS: The Featured Image is of Saint Peter’s Basilica seen from the end of the Via Conciliazione, near the Castel Sant’Angelo. Photo by Br. Bugnolo.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]