Salus populi romani: March 10, 2020

Perpetual Novena


(Our English translation in Blue — Prayer will be said in Italian and Latin: Black)

The Prophetic Prayer of Pope Benedict XVI



(May 7, 2005)


In Nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

Tutta Santa, degna di ogni onore,
Tu sei la migliore offerta
che l’umanità possa offrire a Dio.

All Holy, Worthy of every honor,
Thou art the best offering
Which humanity can offer to God.

Vergine Madre, sempre vergine Madre,
rivolgi una supplica materna al Tuo Figlio.

Virgin Mother, always a virgin Mother,
Offer a maternal supplication to Thy Son.

Porta la barca della Chiesa al porto,
evitando le insidie ​​e superando le onde.

Bring the Barque of the Church to port,
evading the snares and overcoming the waves.

Proteggi questa città;
Confortate coloro che la raggiungono,
senza riparo o difesa,
ed estendono il Vostro sostegno a tutti.

Protect this City;
Comfort those who come to her,
without shelter or defense,
and share Your protection with all.

Con fede Ti veneriamo, Madre di Dio;
Con amore Ti onoriamo;
speriamo di venire da Te
e per Te proclamare ogni beatitudine.

With faith we venerate Thee, Mother of God;
With love we honor Thee;
we hope to come before Thee
and thorugh Thee to proclaim every blessedness.

Tu, mia Signora, la Mia consolazione di Dio,
aiuto della mia inesperienza,
accogli la supplica che rivolgo a Te.

Thou, My Lady, My consolation from God,
help for my inexperience,
receive the supplication which I make to Thee.

Tu, che per tutti sei fonte di gioia,
rendimi degno di esultare insieme a Te.

Thou, who for all are a fountain of joy,
make me worthy to exult together with Thee.

Guarda l’assemblea dei credenti,
Madre del Salvatore;
rimuovi disgrazie e afflizioni da loro;
liberali dal male e dal maligno;
proteggili con l’abbondanza della Tua benevolenza.

Watch over the assembly of believers,
Mother of the Savior;
remove from them the misfortunes and afflictions;
free them from evil and from the Evil One;
protect them with the abundance of Thy benevolence.

Al ritorno glorioso del Tuo Figlio, nostro Dio,
difendi con la Tua materna intercessione
la nostra fragilità umana
e accompagnaci alla vita eterna
con la Tua mano amorevole,
Tu che sei potente, per essere Madre.

At the glorious return of Thy Son, our God,
defend with Thy maternal intercession
our frail humanity
and accompany us to eternal life
with Thy loving hand,
Thou who art powreful, by being our Mother.


77 Our Fathers, that is 7 Rosary Decades of Our Fathers.

3 in Latin

71 in Italian — Or say them in your own tongue.

3 in Latin

3 Gloria Patri

Sacro Cuore di Gesù, abbi pietà di noi!
Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us!

Cuore Immacolato di Maria, prega per noi!
Immaculate Hert of mary, pray for us!

San Giuseppe, Patrono della Chiesa, prega per noi!
Saint Joseph, Patron of the Church, pray for us!


San Michele Arcangelo, difendici nella battaglia, contro la perfidia e le insidie del diavolo sii Tu il nostro sostegno. Che Dio eserciti il suo domino su di lui, noi supplichevoli Lo preghiamo! E tu, Principe delle milizie celesti, ricaccia nell’inferno satana e gli altri spiriti maligni, che si aggirano in questa Città a perdizione delle anime.


Saint Michale, the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou, o prince of the Heavenly Host, by the Divine Power, cast into Hell Satan and all the evils spirit who prowl about this City seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

San Gabriele Arcangelo, prega per noi!
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us!

San Raffaele Arcangelo, prega per noi!
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us!

San Franceco di Assisi, prega per noi!
Saint Francis of Assisi, pray for us!

San Antonio di Padova, prega per noi!
Saint Anthony of Padua, pray for us!

Beata Anna Caterina Emmerich, prega per noi e prega con noi!
Bl. Ann Catherine Emmerich, pray for us and pray with us!

In Nomine Patris et Filii e Spiritus Sancti. Amen.


* Salus populi Romani, is Latin, for The Salvation of the Roman People. It is the ancient title of the Icon of Our Lady see at the top of this article.

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.


Full Disclosure interviews Br. Bugnolo

Mike and Joe have a very intriguing guest on the show. A man, with a habit, building a Military Order to fight enemies and defend Christians in the Holy Land. Did you say “Deus Vult?” Some 300 men already lined up. (This program was pre-recorded on Saturday). The Link will be come active at 8 PM Rome Time, 2 PM New York City Time, 4 AM Syndey Time.

Siscoe & Salza attack Bugnolo on Dogmatic Facts: He replies

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

I appreciate a good debate, but the attack launched against me personally won’t offer much worthy of attention because it is founded upon a totally incapacity to think. As I will explain.

I am speaking about, Mr. Robert Siscoe and Mr John Salza’s article entitled, Br. Bugnolo Redefines “Dogmatic Facts” to justify Benevacantist schism.

First, let me publicly thank them for calling me Brother. I will respond by referring to them as Mister, because I believe that in debating a Catholic should be respectful of persons and of truth, and disrespectful of error and falsehood.

However, as regards the title it is incorrect. I am not a Bennyvacantist. A Bennyvacantist, if the word means anything but a purile slur — and I assumed Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza are gentlemen and would never stoop to such  behavior — must mean someone who holds that Pope Benedict has vacated the Apostolic Throne.  But that is not my position, that is the position of Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza.

So there is some major confusion. As the attack on me personally regards the accusation that I am misusing words and changing definitions, I am not nitpicking the title, I am merely showing that my interlocutors are misusing words and changing the proper meaning of particles. So that kind of puts doubt that their critique of my position on dogmatic facts will be sound.

Here is their opening charge against me:

There’s a common saying that schism always ends in heresy. If a false doctrine isn’t trumped up to justify the schism, a true doctrine is distorted and eventually denied to sustain it. The latter is taking place before our eyes with Br. Alexis Bugnolo, whose “Benevacantist” position has now forced him to falsify the meaning of dogmatic facts by entirely redefining the term. It was only a matter of time before this happened, since his rejection of the peaceful and universal acceptance (UPA) has always really been a rejection of the infallibility of the Magisterium in judging dogmatic facts. As we will see later, according to Cardinal Ratzinger himself, by rejecting the legitimacy of Francis’ election, Br. Alexis Bugnolo has rejected a truth of the faith, denied the infallibility of the Magisterium, and cut himself from communion with the Catholic Church. And this teaching of Cardinal Ratzinger is perfectly consistent with what all the theologians have taught, and what Martin V defined at the Council of Constance.

I concede the first proposition…but they should have not

It is true as regard the Greek Schismatics, for example. But why is it true. Because when you separate yourself from the true Pope you fall away from Christ’s Mediation of grace. We see heresy arise in all schisms which perdure a long time, when they intentionally reject the Roman Pontiff.

However, it is really poor judgement that my opponents cite this principle at the very beginning of their diatribe. Because, as you can see, logic itself turns against them:

MAJOR PROPOSITION: There’s a common saying that schism always ends in heresy. If a false doctrine isn’t trumped up to justify the schism, a true doctrine is distorted and eventually denied to sustain it.

MINOR PROPOSITION:  But Jorge Mario Bergoglio by the universal acceptance of every Catholic author in the last 7 years who accepts the perennial magisterium has spoken heresy, has refused to retract it and continues to profess it.

CONCLUSION:  Therefore, Bergoglio must be in schism, because he has ended in heresy. But if he is in schism he is not the pope.

Contrariwise, after 7 years, Pope Benedict XVI has not fallen into heresy. Therefore he must be in union with the true pope. But Bergoglio is not the true pope, since he has fallen into schism. Therefore, he must be the true pope, because the Church cannot be without its Head.

Truths of the Faith

As we will see later, according to Cardinal Ratzinger himself, by rejecting the legitimacy of Francis’ election, Br. Alexis Bugnolo has rejected a truth of the faith,

The Faith is defined as the totality of Divine Revelation, when “the Faith” is used as a metynymic term for the whole of the Catholic Religion. Faith as a virtue is not called, “the faith” in English, as anyone who has ever taken 1 course in theology at a Catholic institution should have learned.

So when Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza classify Dogmatic Facts as truths of the faith, I have to shake my head. They have just redefined the Faith.  It is a truth of faith, but not of the Faith. It is a truth of faith, because faith requires implicitly that when we show obedience of assent to the teaching of the Magisterium, that we accept that certain authorities involved in is promuglation are in fact legitimate. Thus, as Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza rightly say, elsewhere in their article:

Again, we see that a dogmatic fact must be believed with faith because of its connection to revealed truth, and is a fact that the Church judges infallibly due to its relation with a revealed truth.

Here, Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza change their definition of Dogmatic Fact. Now they say it regards revealed truth. Whereas before in their opening peroration they said is was “a truth of the faith”, which I explained, must mean a revealed truth.

The problem here arises from the Latin, since we say of truths of the faith that they are de fide. And Latin does not have the definite article, the. If you are skilled in the philosophy of particulars and universals, and in the theology of dogma and in the English language, you can understand this. But you won’t learn it in law school or in other disciplines, because they do not teach it.

So I can honestly concede that Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza are scandalized at my use of terms when speaking about all these three arguments, and about canon law, because they simply are trying to squeeze what I am saying into the wrong categories of their own minds, which do not know how to distinguish them properly. I see this commonly among many Catholics and I do not get angry at it, since I know that I once also did not understand this before I went to Seminary and 3 pontifical universities. Though for the record, I do not hold a degree in them. My degree is in Cultural Anthropology.

This leaves Br. Bugnolo in quite the predicament. If he remains in communion with Pope Benedict, he too is a member of the Church of Antichrist.

Here Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza make a grave error in their ecclesiology. As Catholics we should be in communion with all the other members of the Catholic Church. Not to do so would be schismatic. So whether you think Benedict is the pope or not, you should be in communion with him. To say that anyone who is is a member of the Church of the Antichrist is as much false, as it is an absurd exaggeration and horrendous thing to say. Because by saying it, they are implying that Pope Benedict XVI is the Antichrist.

I think this lapsus linguae is very revealing.

Yet if they refuse to accept his own judgment that Benedict’s abdication was invalid, he is “rebelling against the papal law,” and “condemned by Unam Sanctam.” 

But as regards the judgement that Benedict’s Declaratio did not have the proper canonical form to effect his separation from the petrine munus, I do not recall that I have ever said that this is so because I judge it so. If Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza can find such a statement, I will withdraw it. But as I have loved the Papal magisterium from my youth, and know well in what it consists, I learned when I was a boy, reading Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori, that in matters of the Catholic religion we must leave aside our own judgement completely and simply accept the words used by Holy Mother Church or by the Saints at their face value. And this includes canon law. Do my opponents do that?

I submit that all rational and sane men by universal acceptance will grant that in saying that “when Benedict renounces ministerium while canon 332 requires the renunciation of munus, that the renunciation is not in conformity to the norm of law and is rendered of no effect by canon 38, irritus by canon 188 and not binding on anyone in virtue of canon 41,” that I am not using my own judgement to support my such an assertion, I am merely reiterating the law in the circumstances which prima facie it appears to apply to. And as every lawyer knows, the prima facie meaning of a law or legal text has the presumption in every argument. For that reason, since the application of the to due circumstances is not an opinion, which wavers between doubt and assent, it is also wrong to call it my opinion. I do not hold it as an opinion, I hold it with the same certitude that the Sun rose this morning and that Rome is the capital of Italy, because those are facts of reality just as factual and real as that ministerium was renounced by Benedict in his text and that munus is found in canon 332 §2. From these facts, the conclusion follows with the same certitude: prima facie the renunciation of the papal office never was effected, therefore it must be held that Benedict is the pope still, because the cessation of power is not to be presumed.

Dogmatic Facts

In the formation of Catholic Clergy, prior to the study of theology or canon law, a seminarian has to study philosophy. This is required because you cannot understand theology without the intellectual ability to make the proper distinctions and to undrstand words in their proper senses. I have had such formation at Our Lady of Grace Seminary in Boston, where I graduated cum laude.

So on the central argument of Dogmatic Facts, I concede all the authors cited. But I point out that none of them is magisterial and that theologians are often imprecise even if they are substantially correct. This is mostly because they write for one purpose, but readers read them for another purpose and so miss the finer points of context, which change how you apply the principles or truths they enunciate.  That is why no theologian or canonist has publicly denounced my position. In fact, Edward Pentin on Saturday, at his blog, affirmed that Mons. Nicola Bux knows many canonists who hold the same position.

Let me cite Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza, where they write:

Here is how another real theologian, Tanquerey, explains dogmatic facts in Vol. I of Dogmatic Theology (1959).

The Church is infallible in regard to dogmatic facts. A dogmatic fact is one which is so much connected with a doctrine of the Church that knowledge of it is necessary in order to understand the doctrine and to preserve it safely. Dogmatic facts can be threefold: historical, doctrinal and hagiographical. Thus, dogmatic facts are the legitimacy of the Holy Pontiff, the ecumenical (universal) nature of a Council. That the Church is infallible in regard to dogmatic facts is certain.” (Tanquerey, Dogmatic Theology, vol. 1, 1959, p. 146.)

The debate with me, however, regards only the historical Dogmatic Facts, though I admit referring to doctrinal dogmatic facts. Elsewhere, above this, in their article they attack me claiming my examples of dogmatic facts are wrong:

As anyone who has ever consulted a theology manual concerning dogmatic facts would know, the nomination of a bishop is not a dogmatic fact, regardless of whether he accepts the nomination. Neither is the choice of the Cardinals during a conclave.

Here, I really got to chuckle. Evidently, Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza think that dogmatic facts are like points in a Cartesian plane, through which there are no intersecting lines. I know that this is false, because when I studied what dogmatic facts were under Dr. Peter Felhner, OFM Conv., I asked him the question:  If it is a dogmatic fact that Vatican I was a true council because it defined papal authority, then would not all the facts which lead to that also be dogmatic, like the fact that Pope Pius IX was the canonically elected, was validly ordained a Bishop, was validly baptized, and was born and existed. His answer was yes, they are remotely considered as dogmatic facts, whereas that Vatican I was a valid council is the proximate dogmatic fact. Also there are negative and positive dogmatic facts. A positive one is that which is connected to a dogma by positively affirming it. A negative one is that which is connected to a dogma by affirming that contrary evidence is not authoritative. Such as for example the teaching did not come from an authentic source, which becomes dogmatic inasmuch as it negative demonstrates that the contrary doctrine is not dogmatic.

Wherefore, when I say the nomination of a bishop is a dogmatic fact, I am referring to remote historical dogmatic facts. I did not specify their connection to dogma, because in the context of my writing I am referring to the acts themselves inasmuch as they are classified. Obviously, the nomination of a man as Bishop does regard a dogmatic fact, because as Bishop he holds the ordinary power of the magisterium, and his teaching enters into the ordinary magisterium of the Church only if he is a licitly appointed or validly ordained Bishop of the Catholic Church holding jurisdiction. If he did not accept, then that he was not a Bishop is a negative dogmatic fact. But his appointment by the Pope is a remote dogmatic historical fact, inasmuch the act proves that the Pope was the true pope, and the Pope exercises the Magisterium which touches upon many points of doctrine affirming or which will be used to affirm the definition of dogma or doctrine int he future.

If you know philosophy you understand these things.

Church Doctrine vs. the teaching of theologians

The next major confusion that Mr. Siscoe and Mrs. Salza have regards doctrine. The word means simply teaching. The Church teaches and theologians teach. But not every opinion of a theologian is Church doctrine.  For example, Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori wrote a book on Moral Theology in which he presents thousands of his own opinions on matters of morals. But it would be incorrect to say that since he is canonized and a doctor of the Church that his opinions are church doctrine or binding doctrine. Yes, they are approved of, inasmuch as the Church probably will not punish anyone for holding them, but nearly all of them have never been formally taught by the extraordinary Magisterium, even though many of them may regard and be derived from the ordinary magisterium.

When you study dogmatic theology 101, you learn these things.

So, I have to object to what Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza write when they say:

The consequences of rejecting this Doctrine

They make the statement in reference to the opinions they cite from theologians in the previous section:

  1. Fr. E. Sylvester Berry’s book, The Church of Christ: An Apologetic and Dogmatic Treatise, which was originally published in 1927
  2. Tanquerey, explains dogmatic facts in Vol. I of Dogmatic Theology (1959).
  3. Msgr. Van Noort provides the same explanation in his manual of Dogmatic Theology, The Church of Christ, published in 1957.

Now, as can bee seen from their identities, it is a dogmatic historical remote negative fact that they are not Bishops of the Catholic Church and never held an office which participated in the ordinary magisterium of the Church.  Therefore, their doctrine is not magisterial. And therefore it might contain some imprecision and may even be wrong. I do not think their doctrine is wrong, but I do think that some of their statements regard other kinds of dogmatic facts, or are extrapolations poorly expressed. No one is required to accept their doctrine as they state it, since it is not the doctrine of the Church in the form in which the state it, it is their own doctrine.

I am not sure if Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza understand these distinctions.

Nay, it seems that they suffer from super-scrupulosity in accepting the doctrines of theologians who are fallible men and yet suffer from a complete lack of scrupulosity in accepting the terms of Canon Law which does not come from man, but from the office of Saint Peter, approved in Heaven by Mouth of God Himself, saying:  whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven.

I find their inability to do this inexplicable. I find their imbalanced approach also inexplicable, though I tried to explain it here.

Intrinsic and extrinsic proofs

One of the fundamental problems that Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza seem to have is their inability to distinguish the proper hierarchy of forensic evidence.

Forensic refers to things which pertain to the scrutiny of a court. Forensic evidence is evidence presented to judgment. We are not talking about courts here, but we are talking about evidence which pertains to the truth or value of canonical acts in the Church. So I use the term forensic in this sense.

Now among such evidence there is a hierarchy. Let us take an example to illustrate this. A man is charged with murder. There is his confession, the video tape of the murder, the testimony of witnesses which saw it, or heard it when it happened, and of witnesses who heard others speak of it or of the accused confess it. Then there is the evidence from the crime scene which is strictly spoken of as forensic evidence when gathered for a prosecution in court.

In the USA the legal system puts the judgement about the evidence to be admitted for a trial before all other proceedings of the actual case, because it is important to get the evidence correct. Thus, I think we can agree that some evidence is more determinative than other evidence.

For example, if there is a video of the actual murder, and the testimony of someone a week later who heard the accused say he was not innocent. The testimony cannot be regarded as as crucial or important. Even the testimony of someone who heard the crime but did not see it. There is a hierarchy of importance. And this is determined by its proximity to the historical event or act which is under investigation or dispute.

But for Mr. Siscoe and Salza, they want the remote and post factum consequential evidence of what Bishops thought happened because they uncritically listened to the media say Benedict did in fact resign the papacy to be the SOLE determinative factor, and want everyone to ignore the crucial proximate evidence that Benedict renounced ministerium not munus.

I think anyone can see that is simply not a sound way of proceeding.

But that some theologian in the past at any time advocated the use of such remote post factum evidence as proof, is really praeter rem to the present argument. Because in the past documentation was hard to come by. Ancient manuscripts and notes and transcripts have been lost. One does not have certain proximate evidence, so there is some necessity to argue a case on the basis of remote post factum evidence. But with Benedict XVI that is not necessary as we all have all the proximate evidence  in his Declaratio and the Code of Canon Law.


Thus in regard to the election of Roman Pontiffs or their renunciations, the conformity of their election or renunciation to the norm of law in force at the time is the principle and proximate forensic criterion upon which to base the evaluation of the proximate or remote positive or negative historical dogmatic fact that they were elected or not, or did resign or not. That is what legitimacy means properly.

Legitimacy does not mean public opinion. But when the proximate evidence is lacking or obscure some theologians have appealed to post factum evidence to establish legitimacy. But they are not talking about canonical legitimacy in the sense of conformity to law, but in the sense of determined by the judgement of a Council or the Apostolic College.

The citations made to Martin V regard the Council of Constance which condemned Huss. The question of the legitimacy of Martin V’s election results from the 38 year controversy over who was validly elected in the election of 1378, whence sprang the Great Schism in the Church. Because Martin V was elected after both rivals renounced their claims, though one later fled to Spain and left a series of successors as anti-popes. Since the Great Schism was put to an end in a Council, it is one of the few dogmatic facts which prove the possible doubts to a papal title, in this case Martin V, whom the Hussites charged was not the valid pope on that account. So the statements made about universal acceptance had value in that debate, since the proximate evidence of 1378 was long put in doubt.


Understanding all of the above, because I learned it from those more knowledgeable than myself,  hold that Benedict still the pope for the reasons I have stated in my Index to Pope Benedict’s Renunciation. I do so because I recognize things the way the Church teaches them, while my opponents rush off to find some other kind of evidence while ignoring the proximate issues.

For this reason I think the arguments marshaled against my position are false, praeter rem, erroneous, mistaken, and based on a lot of lack of familiarity with philosophy, theology and canon law, and the principles of forensic evidentiary methodology.

Finally, please excuse any errors in this rebuttal, as I wrote it quickly in the space of an hour or so, and am a poor proof reader.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]



Cipriano de Rore: Missa praeter rerum seriem, Credo

As we continue our journey through the Sacred Polyphony of the 16th century, we come to Cipriano de Rore’s, Missa praeter rerum seriem, the Credo of which is sung here.

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.


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

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

This series will have four installments, one for each paragraph of the prophecies given to Bl. Emmerich in 1820’s 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 1822 in regard to the two popes, as cited here.

In this third and fourth installment, I will comment on the prophecies Bl. Emmerich received on the Feast of Saint Louis IX, King of France, Leader of the 7th and 8th Crusades, member of the Third Order of Saint Francis of Assisi.

Third Installment

August 25, 1822: “I do not know in what manner I was taken to Rome last night, but I found myself near the Church of St. Mary Major, and I saw many poor people who were greatly distressed and worried because the Pope was to be seen nowhere, and also on account of the restlessness and the alarming rumors in the city. These people did not seem to expect the church doors to open; they only wanted to pray outside. An inner urging had led them there individually. But I was in the Church and I opened the doors. They came in, surprised and frightened because the doors had opened. It seems to me that I was behind the door, and they could not see me. There was no office on in the Church, but the Sanctuary lamps were lit. The people prayed quite peacefully.“ „Then I saw an apparition of the Mother of God, and she said that the tribulation would be very great. She added that these people must pray fervently with outstretched arms, be it only long enough to say three Our Fathers. This was the way her Son prayed for them on the Cross. They must rise at twelve at night and pray in this manner; and they must keep coming to the Church. They must pray above all for the Church of Darkness to leave Rome.“


“I do not know in what manner I was taken to Rome last night, but I found myself near the Church of St. Mary Major, –  Bl. Emmerich in her mystical experiences was transported in spirit to distant places. But what is significant here, is that she was transported at night and not into the Church, but nearby it.  In fact, after 8 PM, the Basilica is closed until 8 AM the next morning. So even the Catholics who pray every night there, must stand near the Basilica, like Bl. Emmerich

… and I saw many poor people who were greatly distressed and worried because the Pope was to be seen nowhere, and also on account of the restlessness and the alarming rumors in the city. — Pope Benedict XVI has been hidden away for 7 years. Through the writings of Antonio Socci and others, Italians already recognize by large percentages (60%) that Benedict is the true pope. But this is becoming more evident recently with the admissions by Edward Pentin and Marco Tosatti that a great number of scholars also recognize these things.  There are NOW alarming rumors in the city of Rome: CORONA VIRUS.  In fact, Catholics can no longer attend any masses or receive the Sacraments — though perhaps in private Confession and Baptism are still being offered.

These people did not seem to expect the church doors to open; they only wanted to pray outside. An inner urging had led them there individually. — This is presently the objective of all the Catholic who are coming to the Basilica. We are praying outside without any expectation of the Church opening. And none of us know one another, the others came on the 18th and 19th day of the 40 Day Novena which recently concluded. One, because he was inspired to do a search on YouTube about Saint Maria Maggiore, the Church, and found my video casts for the 40 day novena.

But I was in the Church and I opened the doors. They came in, surprised and frightened because the doors had opened. —  Here Bl. Emmerich’s position has changed. She is now in the Church, in her vision. But her words here are very comforting. In fact, every night we end our prayers, by saying:  Bl. Ann Catherine Emmerich, pray for us and pray WITH us!  The doors of the Basilica have not opened, but grace is stirring inside, because on many nights there is seen in the windows or on the Loggia some individual walking about or taking our photos. If the doors open, it will be a big surprise, as she adds: They came in, surprised and frightened because the doors had opened.

It seems to me that I was behind the door, and they could not see me. There was no office on in the Church, but the Sanctuary lamps were lit. The people prayed quite peacefully. — By office, she means that the Divine Office of the Liturgy of the Hours was not being recited by the Canons of the Basilica, as was done in ancient times: which would be the only reason to open Church doors at midnight, in 1820, as it had been for more than a thousand years.  Finally, her vision that we will be allowed to pray peacefully in the Church is a great consolation.

Fourth Installment

“She (the Holy Mother) said a great many other things that it pains me to relate: she said that if only one priest could offer the bloodless sacrifice as worthily and with the same dispositions as the Apostles, he could avert all the disasters (that are to come). To my knowledge the people in the church did not see the apparition, but they must have been stirred by something supernatural, because as soon as the Holy Virgin had said that they must pray to God with outstretched arms, they all raised their arms. These were all good and devout people, and they did not know where help and guidance should be sought. There were no traitors and no enemies among them, yet they were afraid of one another. One can judge thereby what the situation was like.“

She (the Holy Mother) said a great many other things that it pains me to relate: she said that if only one priest could offer the bloodless sacrifice as worthily and with the same dispositions as the Apostles, he could avert all the disasters (that are to come). — Here Bl. Emmerich utters very sobering words. The shock which has descended upon all Catholics in Italy, from the decision of the Bishops to suspend all public services yesterday afternoon, until April 3 (and it is feared that it will not end then) has made everyone realize that we are indeed in apocalyptic times. That worse things might happen would be no surprise. Without the Mass, the forces of darkness will prevail for their hour of darkness.  What she says about the one honest priest, I totally believe. But from my contacts among the clergy, I can affirm that they do not believe that one such priest exists among the Roman Clergy. However, the Blessed did not say he would be a diocesan priest. So let us pray that this priest comes forward.

To my knowledge the people in the church did not see the apparition, but they must have been stirred by something supernatural, because as soon as the Holy Virgin had said that they must pray to God with outstretched arms, they all raised their arms. — Every midnight, I ask those present to raise their arms and hold them raised for the space of the 77 our fathers, or about 32 minutes. It is a great consolation knowing that Our Lady has asked us here to do that.

These were all good and devout people, and they did not know where help and guidance should be sought. There were no traitors and no enemies among them, yet they were afraid of one another. One can judge thereby what the situation was like.“ — I pray to God that we are as good as the Blessed saw, but I get the impression she is referring to a crowd, here, and not just 3 to 5, as is the case every night.

Where are the crowds? That part of the prophecy is yet to  be fulfilled. See below here.

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: Let the crowds know!

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.

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

We have met the goal in just 48 hours. Thank you!

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″]


In Italy, no more public Masses which name the Antipope in the Canon

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Monday, March 9, 2020: Sometimes there is a mystical or spiritual way of looking at reality which makes it comprehensible. And sometimes, if there is such, it is hard to understand.

The recent illegitimate and uncanonical decision of the Italian Episcopal Conference to mandate the suspension of all public religious services in Italy in all Catholic Churches, Monasteries, Convents, Sanctuaries, Basilicas, in Italian Territory is just one case.

They Government has not decreed such a thing. While the Government Decree concerns both the regions above (See Graphic above), and all of Italy, according to the Lateran Pact no law of the Italian State applies to the Church on the question of religious services. The new Decree does not therefore mention the Church. Legal Scholars in Italy are sounding out, even on national TV, and confirming this.

As one can clearly see, only a small part of the country is affected.  — To get an idea of scale, all of Italy is the same size as the State of Colorado. The regions placed under tight control by the Government Decree, are thus, no much larger than the suburbs of Denver.

The result of the Bishops’ Conference decision, however, is that the great sin of naming the Anti-Pope in the Canon of the Mass, in the very presence of God Almighty in the Most Blessed Sacrament — In Italy, the Italian Canon names the Pope after the Consecration — has definitively ended in public.

Now the people of God in Italy, at least, will not be responsible for that sin any longer.

So from a spiritual point of view, the panic among Bergoglians is shutting the Bergoglian Church down.

Also, since all masses are now private, those priests who in conscience know they should not name Bergoglio or should name Benedict are now free to do so. The make believe of the Bergoglian Pontificate has been unwittingly struck a major blow.


CREDITS: The Featured Image of the graphic was taken from a photo of today’s edition of Il Giornale, p. 7. If you live in Italy, you want to get a copy of this paper today, which has the best reporting on the Government Decree and how absurdly it was promulgated and hashed up. The image is used here in accord with fair use standards for editorial commentary and as a free advertisement of today’s edition of Il Giornale.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

Vatican City issues special decrees against Corona Virus spread

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Rome, March 9, 2020:  The office of the Governor of the Vatican City has issued a special decree regarding provisions to be taken to prevent the spread of the Corona Virus.

Here are photos of the two page decree. I will publish an English summary, below:


The instructions from the Director of Health and Hygene are basic precautions:

  • Wash one’s hand frequently
  • Avoid approaching those who are suffering acute respiratory infection
  • Do not touch one’s own eyes, nose or mouth with one’s hands
  • Cover the nose and mouth when sneezing or coughing
  • Do not take antiviral or antibiotic medicines without a prescription
  • Clean surfaces with a solution of Bleach or 75% Alcohol.
  • Use medical masks only if you suspect that you are sick or if you are assisting someone who is.


The Governor’s Office has issued the following norms:

  1. Post notices which regard these regulations at the entrances of all departments and facilities.
  2. Suspend all meetings and gatherings which include persons who work in the health sector or public sector.
  3. Suspend or avoid all activities in spaces which are enclosed which do not allow for the spacing of at least 1 meter between persons.
  4. Adopt measures for the sanitation of all public transport means.
  5. Suspend all educational meetings.
  6. Limit movements and trips which are unnecessary.
  7. There has already been forbidden that those accompanying the sick wait for them in waiting rooms of health facilities in the Vatican City state
  8. Residents of the Vatican City State are to notify Vatican Health Authories by telephone and schedule a visit at their residence, if they notice that they have contracted any possible symptoms of Corona Virus (dry cough, cold, sore throat, fever, and difficulty breathing).
  9. Non Vatican City residents are counseled not to go to the walk-in patient facility of the Vatican City state but to contact a Doctor at the Health Foundation at the Vatican.

The Governor’s office ends by emphasizing the importance of correctly following the instructions given. But no financial or criminal penalties are imposed for non observance.

It seems obvious, from this decree, which does NOT suspend religious services, that the Vatican is not taking seriously the news about Corona Virus, and that there is a massive disconnect between the Italian Bishop’s Conference suspension of all services in Italy, an no suspension of services at the Vatican.

Saint Peter’s Basilica remains open to tourists. However, the Vatican Museums are closed.

Italian Taxi Driver: This decree against Masses will destroy us

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Rome, March 8, 2020:  As I traveled back and forth to the Vatican, this morning, to file my report on the suspension of Masses (2nd, 1st), I took the opportunity to speak with two taxi drivers about the state of their profession.

The Health Measures decreed by the government have caused us to lose 70% of our business: said one taxi-man. He explained to me that there has already been a fall off of tourists to the city in recent months, but now with corona virus they have disappeared.

In regard to the decree from the Italian Episcopal Conference which was not published on the internet but sent electronically to Bishops and clergy: to stop all religious services in Italy, I asked another cabbie his views.

He told me: Yes, with this decision to stop all the masses, the pilgrims simply won’t come to Rome. It is a decision that will destroy us.

I wondered if there is any basis to all these fears. I thought to myself that if there was, the Taxi Company Cooperatives would give instructions to taxi cab drivers on how to avoid the Corona Virus. So I asked the second taxi cab driver: Have they issued to you any special instructions on how to protect yourselves as cab drivers?

No, he said. None at all.

If one simply looks at the sidewalks in the city, one can see that NO BODY is observing the new Decree from the Council of Ministers which says persons should not approach others closer than 1 meter.

The real penalties are that businesses such a bars and restaurants which are considered not observing the decree can lose their licenses to operate.  But I saw none observing them. Yes, there were much fewer locals at bars and shops, but the ones which were out and about, were moving normally. Only a few per thousand were wearing medical masks.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

Report from Vatican: Italian Episcopal Conference exploits crisis to suspend all services in Italy

FromRome.Info reports from the Vatican, this morning at 11:30 A.M.

Correction: The Government Decree in part II regards all the Italian territory, but says nothing specific about the Catholic Church. It forbids all religious services.

A Legal Note:  In accord with the terms of the Lateran Pact, the Church enjoys freedom of worship. Thus the Italian State has no authority whatsoever over determining whether the Church decides to open or close its churches or celebrate the Sacraments. Thus whenever a Decree of the Government regards religious services, the Catholic Church has an established exception by way of privilege. Therefore, in the present crisis, the responsibility falls entirely upon the Italian Bishop’s Conference, which just ignored the rights of the Church, and upon the Vatican, which just ceded on the central point of the Lateran Pact. Thus, the Government Decree makes no provision against the Catholic Church, since it never refers or says or mentions the Catholic Church or its services, nor could it, since it has no authority over them.

Reports to the contrary are coming from many sources, which simply do not know Italian Law. For a commentary in Italian on this, see Marco Tosatt’s website, today.

The major reason for the compliance here, is that the Bergoglian Regime and the Italian Bishops Conference are marxists and favor the marxist government now ruling Italy. They want to support it by being subservient. But they also want to eradicate the Catholic religion from Italy.

Back in 2010, when Pope Benedict XVI wanted to extend the Ancient Mass in Italy they insulted him for 3 days in their Conference meeting, that spring, saying it would cause terrible divisions in the Church.  What they really meant, it would exorcise the demons pretending to be bishops in that Church. Now they have shown their true faces and spirits.

This decision has also struck the Traditionalists who offer mass una cum Papa Francisco. They lamented the suppression of Latin Masses here or there in the last 7 years. But now that they all have been suppressed, there is not one peep of resistance.

No priest is obliged by the new Government Decree nor by the Conference of Bishops’ decree, and this would be easy to establish in any Italian court of Law, for the reasons stated above. Indeed, since both organization have no authority to issue such decrees regarding Catholic services, each decree must be held not to exist according to the norm of law, as regard such services.

+ + +

If you would like to help Brother Bugnolo do live transmissions from Rome, please subscribe to From Rome Info Video (Click here). He needs only another 400 subscribers to get permission from YouTube to make live reports for free.


CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screen shot of the news page of the Italian Episcopal Conference showing their public statement regarding the new government decree.

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

Lord, to whom shall we go?


by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Lord, to whom shall we go?

Now that the faithful of all of Italy have been denied the Sacraments by the Bergoglian Bishops, no one can receive Our Lord in the Most Blessed Sacrament!

This is a most terrible blow to the faith of believing Catholics.

But it is also a most terrible scourge.

If the Bishops of Italy think they will avoid the punishments of God by doing such things, God will shortly make it clear that rather they shall increase them!

Right now, undoubtedly, there are some saints alive on Earth. That God cannot give Himself in the Sacrament to them and to all those in the state of grace, here in Italy, a land of saints, it will be the cause of the most extreme Divine Anger possible.


Our Lady warned us that there would come a time when all we would have would  be Her Rosary and the sign of Her Son, the Sign of the Cross. It has happened. The Faithful have been refused communion by the Bishops of Italy. This is a sin of schism of the most horrible and satanic kind.

Will the Mass and Sacraments be restored to the Faithful after April 3? or will Bergoglio continue the suspension for 3 and half years, as Saint John the Apostle warns the AntiChrist will do in the Book of the Apocalypse?

When the Mass returns, will it be the same Mass, or will they replace the Sacrifice with the adoration of Pachamama or Islamic prayers?

Anything is possible with atheists.

You see, I told you, the assertion that ministerium means munus, in the Declaratio of Pope Benedict, is a grave error which implies the denial of the entire Catholic Religion and puts the Bishops in schism from Christ.  They have now sealed their sin with schism also from the faithful!


CREDITS: The Meme above is take from where the Catholic Institute of the Missionaries of the Divine Word offer for meditation the Scripture passage from whence the title of this post it taken.