Salus populi romani: March 29, 2020

Perpetual Supplica


This devotion is inspired by the request made by Our Lady Herself in
Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich’s Vision of

August 25, 1822: “I know not now how I went to Rome last night, but I found myself near the church of Santa Maria Maggiore. Around it I saw crowds of poor, pious souls, in great distress and anxiety on account of the Pope’s disappearance and the agitation and alarming reports throughout the city. Led by one common impulse, they had come to invoke the Mother of God. They did not expect to find the church open, they intended only to pray outside. But I was inside, I opened the door and they entered, astounded at the door’s opening of itself. I was standing aloof where they could not see me. There was no service, only the chancel-lamps were burning, and the people knelt in quiet prayer. Then the Mother of God appeared. She said that great tribulations were at hand; that the people must pray earnestly with extended arms, if only for the length of three Our Fathers, for it was thus that her Son had prayed for them upon the Cross; that they should rise at midnight to pray thus; that they should continue to come to Her church which they would always find open; and that they should, above all, pray for the extirpation of the Church of Darkness. … I know not whether the people saw the apparition or not, but they must have been impressed by something supernatural for, when the Blessed Virgin said they should pray to God with arms extended, all lifted up their arms … It seemed to be an association of prayer.” From this time Sister Emmerich assisted nightly at the pious exercises at Santa Maria Maggiore. (The Life and Revelations of Ann Catherine Emmerich, Book 2)



FromRome.Info Video Channel on Youtube. — Thank you!

(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 la migliore offerta
che l’umanità possa presentare a Dio.

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

Vergine Madre, Madre sempre vergine,
supplichi materna al Figlio Tuo.

Virgin Mother, Ever-Virgin Mother,
Offer a maternal supplication to Thy Son.

Conduci sino al porto la barca della Chiesa,
scansando gli scogli ​​e vincendo i mar rossi.

Bring the Barque of the Church to port,
avoiding the reefs and overcoming red seas.

Custodisci questa città;
Conforta chi vi giunge,
senza tetto né difesa,
ed estendi a tutti il Tuo sostegno.

Guard this City;
Comfort who comes here,
without shelter nor defense,
and extend Your protection to all.

Con fede professiamo a Te, Genetrice di Dio;
Con amore Ti onoriamo,
Con speranza Ti preghiamo,
Ti proclamiamo beata.

With faith we profess Thee, Mother of God;
With love we honor Thee;
With hope we pray Thee
We proclaim Thee blessed.

Tu, mia Signora, mio conforto da Dio,
aiuto alla mia inesperienza,
accogli la preghiera che rivolgo a Te.

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

Tu per tutti 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;
allontana da loro sventure e afflizioni;
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 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
ed accompagnaci sino alla vita eterna
con la Tua mano gentile,
Tu che sei potente, perche Madre.

At the glorious return of Thy Son, our God,
defend with Thy maternal intercession
our human fragility
and accompany us unto eternal life
with Thy gentle hand,
Thou who art powerful, as a 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 Heart 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 Michael, 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 spirits 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 Francesco 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!

Santa Rosalia di Palermo, prega per noi!
Saint Rosalia of Palermo, 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.


Al tuo tempio secolare
di ori e marmi rilucente
siamo accorsi ad implorare
il materno tuo favor.

At Thy Ancient Temple
of shinning gold and marble
we have come to implore
Thy Materna favor.

R. O Maria Madre Santa
tu del popolo romano
sei salvezza luce e guida,
nostra speme e nostro amor,
sei salvezza luce e guida
nostra speme e nostro amore.

Refrain: O Maria, Holy Mother
Thou art of the Roman People
the salvation, light and guide,
our hope and our love,
Thou art the salvation, light and guide
our hope and our love.

Col Prodigio della Neve,
segnò il luogo in piena estate,
dell’augusta tua dimora,
il supremo tuo favor.

With the prodigy of the Snow,
Thou signed this place in high summer,
of August as Thy dwelling,
as Thy supreme favor.

R. O Maria Madre Santa
tu del popolo romano
sei salvezza luce e guida,
nostra speme e nostro amor,
sei salvezza luce e guida
nostra speme e nostro amore.

Refrain: O Maria, Holy Mother
Thou art of the Roman People
the salvation, light and guide,
our hope and our love,
Thou art the salvation, light and guide
our hope and our love.









This Devotion is sponsored by the Committee “Salvaci o Maria!”

See our advertisement in the La Verità, throughout Italy, this month.



* 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.

Bill Gates: What YOU MUST do to respond to Coronavirus!

Listen carefully to what he says you MUST do, to understand how Bill Gates wants to direct the response to the Corona Hype and how he is dedicated to promoting it for his own personal gain. And he definitely wants to become the world health dictator, to control your life from now own.

Specifically see how at 7:15 in this video, he responds to the question as to when he knew Coronavirus was going to be a world threat. Watch his eyes, how he glances down away from the camera and how he fudges his response. It is clear he knew a long time before January about Coronavirus! He even begins to laugh, to show he knows he is lying.

Bill Gates knew of the Coronavirus pandemic beforehand



by Cesare Sacchetti

Authorized English translation by FromRome.Info of the original article, entitled,
Bill Gates sapeva già della pandemia del coronavirus

First Published: January 25, 2020

Links as in the original

For some, the arrival of a mysterious new deadly new virus from the coronavirus family was not at all unexpected.

Eric Toner, a scientist at the John Hopkins Center for Health Security, had in fact developed a study as early as 3 months ago where it was expected the spread of this type of virus on a large scale.

The simulation developed by Toner for the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has impressive similarities with what is happening today.

In the study of the American scientist, the coronavirus, called CAPS, does not spread from China to the rest of the world, but rather from Brazil and then spread to all the major urban centers of Latin America.

The characteristics of CAPS are almost identical to those of its Chinese relative. Both are transmitted from animal to man and then mutate later and spread from man to man.

In the case examined by Toner, the infection is contracted by pigs while in the case of Wuhan it is thought a probable contagion originated by snakes or bats.

CAPS gives the same symptoms as the Chinese virus. At the beginning there are respiratory problems and cold, symptoms almost identical to those of the flu and rather difficult to recognize. The Brazilian virus then spreads more and more and begins to claim victims all over Latin America.

The mortality rate of the Brazilian CAPS is quite high enough to lead to the death of 65 million people within 18 months.

To date, the mysterious Wuhan coronavirus has killed 41 people and the first cases of contagion have already been recorded in France, Japan, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

Neil Ferguson, a virologist at Imperial College, London, said that the Chinese virus could have the same mortality rate as the Spanish flu and consequently lead to the deaths of 195 million people.

Despite the fact that cases are beginning to appear all over the world, health organisations have not yet defined the current situation as a pandemic.

However, it is rather odd how the great think-tanks and globalist foundations have taken an interest in the spread of the coronavirus family.

The world economic forum that contributed to the implementation of the simulation in question is in fact considered to be the elite of the world financial elite that have recently met at their usual annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland.

The well-known environmental activist Greta Thunberg was also hosted in Davos and strongly recommended a zero-emission economic model.

Another proposal is also being put forward by supporters of climate change theories such as Greta. Feminist environmentalist Verena Brunschweiger, a feminist environmentalist, has recently proposed to put an end to human reproduction in order to save the environment.

In other words, man should choose his own extinction in favor of the alleged protection of the ecosystem.

Basically, the real goal of this movement would not seem to be so much to save the environment as to reduce the Earth’s population.

A thesis that does not seem at all to displease the globalist elite of Davos who seem to show a keen interest in deadly viruses capable of achieving this goal.

Bill Gates’ enormous profits from vaccines

Bill Clinton’s foundation, on the other hand, has long been at the forefront of vaccines and has invested considerable sums of money in their dissemination.

It was Bill Gates himself at the Davos forum in 2019 who explained how he made huge profits from this activity.

The U.S. entrepreneur’s foundation has invested about $10 billion in the spread of vaccines, which has guaranteed him an economic return of 20 to 1, which means the huge sum of $200 billion.

The interest shown by the large multinationals for the diffusion of vaccines does not seem to be linked only to philanthropic purposes, but especially to those of a speculative nature.

The coincidence is that the same centers of global economic power interested in having increasing profits from vaccines have collaborated in a study that actually predicted the spread of the coronavirus already in October last year.

Scientists rushed to say that a vaccine could be ready in three months’ time.

It should come as no surprise, therefore, that the father of Microsoft will be investing in the production of this future vaccine, and he has made a huge profit from this activity.

But the Toner simulation is not limited to examining the effects of the coronavirus on human health. It also takes into account the consequences on the financial markets. Such a pandemic would lead to a market crash, estimated at 20 to 40%, and a vertical fall in world GDP of 11%.

Knowing in advance what could happen in such a situation could prove to be extremely advantageous for financial speculators who could place numerous downside bets on market performance.

The Hong Kong stock exchange fell 2.8% after the spread of the Chinese virus due to the mass cancellation of flights and reservations.

According to the American virologist, this should not come as a surprise as “we live in an age of epidemics”.

Apparently, in this era the great elites seem to be perfectly aware of what could happen with this type of epidemics and they also seem to be the first to benefit the most from them.

The article above is an Authorized English translation of the original article, entitled,
Bill Gates sapeva già della pandemia del coronavirus

First Published: January 25, 2020





CREDITS: The Featured Image of Bill Gates is a public domain image taken during his visit to the Dept. of Health and Human Services by a US govt. employee. The Logo of the Website of Cesare Sacchetti is used here to promote his work, La Cruna dell’Ago, which in English means, The Eye of the Needle. If you like his work, please visit his website and support him.

EDITOR’S NOTE:  Cesare Sacchetti recommended to me this article by his in English, on the technology which is being rolled out to monitor the vaccination of each individual:

Palestrina: Exsultate Deo

As we continue our perusal of the sacred repertoire of  Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina, the greatest Italian composer of the 16th century, we hear his Exsultate Deo, the Introit for Feriae IV in the Ember days of September.

The performance is by the Voices of Ascension.

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.


When the Master of the Vineyard comes

by Don Elia, Catholic priest

Dominus de caelo prospexit super filios hominum, ut videat si est intellegens, aut requirens Deum. Vacate, et videte quoniam ego sum Deus: exaltabor in gentibus, et exaltabor in terra (Ps 13, 2; 45, 11).

Two weeks ago the Church in Italy woke up and to her surprise discovered she had become the Chinese Patriotic Association.

An exceptional situation brought to light what our Pastors really are. The unconditional subjection which, in these weeks, they are demonstrating towards the State is something which, in the history of the country, had not yet been seen, not even in the Ventennio (the era of Benito Mussolini: October 1922-1943). At that time, on the other hand, priests and bishops generally had the attributes and had been tempered by sixty years of confrontation with a declaredly Masonic regime.

But now seven decades of prostitution with various lovers, instead, have tamed our hierarchy into more than a walking dog: things never seen before, not even in the times of the bubonic plague. After all, the Church, they say, has opened herself up to a world, which certainly did not respond with conversion but rather has come to triumphantly install itself within her with its ideas, its vices and its pretensions. To lower one’s guard and embrace the enemy, when one is in battle, is obviously suicide, but a pastoral council unilaterally decreed that the war was over and that the adversaries – whether they knew it or not – had all become our brothers. The worst, however, is that this surrender disguised as an offer of friendship was the result of a denial of faith or, better, of its replacement with an ideological surrogate compatible with worldly thinking.

By now it is clear: what is taught in seminaries and theological faculties, to be then cleared through customs in parishes, is no longer the Catholic faith, but a vulgar forgery of it. The luminous clarity and virile incisiveness of traditional doctrine have been replaced by a mixture of smoky, bumpy and puerile ideas that cloud minds, when they do not come to reduce brains to mush. The behavior of the clergy in recent weeks is a factual demonstration of this sad reality. The outgoing ministers of the Church, indomitable heralds of indiscriminate welcome, open ports, ‘bridges instead of walls’, are entrenched behind heavy armored doors in their rectories and bishoprics, keeping at a safe distance those few faithful so senseless as to go to ask for absolution or communion… “Unbelievable! To demand these luxuries at a time of such danger! But there are still those who have not understood that everything has changed: by now we have discovered that the good Lord is merciful – and therefore everyone is saved, whether they want to be saved or not.” — Paradise has become obligatory; the Sacraments, on the other hand, are merely optional invigorating agents. And then, we are finally forced to fully recognize the value of the common priesthood of all the faithful!… What shall we call this type of argumentation? Theological brigandage?

A certain clergy is so “advanced” that they do not realize that their image of God is nothing more than the projection of an immature self that considers Him a distributor of confirmations, regardless of the real state of the soul, merits and demerits. This bizarre idea (which totally ignores the notion of subsisting Being, with all that follows) derives from a strange mixture of a spurious biblicalism that selects and deforms Scripture detached from Tradition and a twisted psychology that sanctions vice and sin as normality. In fact, it is a mere imaginary means that serves to reassure the “I” in times of difficulty, but it is incapable of intervening effectively in human affairs and, as a result, turns out to be insignificant: it is something one can do without, unless it becomes useful as an ingredient of positive thinking. Such a vain conception would be simply ridiculous, if it did not lead straight to practical atheism, typical of the consumerist attitude of contemporary society. The theoretical one, although rationally absurd, is far more demanding, since it forces man to grit his teeth and do everything himself, however vainly and hopelessly.

Certain decisions give the impression that a substantial part of the pretenders no longer believes in anything, but uses its position in the Church solely to ensure material security unencumbered by serious and constant commitment. From this point of view, the sustenance of the clergy has been resolved at the serious expense of pastoral ministry, since it is dispensed without any relation to the real efficiency of a priest. In order to make a living, at one time, most priests had to make a concrete effort; before the institution of the state-pension for priests, parish priests lived off the offerings of the faithful and the ecclesiastical benefits, things that evidently varied greatly from place to place. In any case, whatever their needs, they consumed themselves by spending even hours at the bedside of every dying person in their parish, plying their way through the streets to bring communion to the sick or for the numerous processions that marked the liturgical year, locking himself up for whole days in the confessional on the occasion of great feasts… This does not mean, of course, that everything was done out of pure zeal of souls, but that there was a sense of duty that the current system, animated by that fake theology that justifies everything and the opposite of everything, has simply annihilated.

The new Concordat, on the basis of post-conciliar pseudo-theology, has practically transformed clerics into well gagged and trained civil servants, of a loyalty and surrender that one would not even dream of demanding from others. The bishops reacted to the health emergency as sub-prefects of a strictly atheistic regime: Congratulations! The worst form of clericalism is that of those who, by covering themselves under the dispositions of civil authority and implicitly placing it above divine authority, deprive the faithful of the spiritual goods to which they have a sacrosanct right and abandon them to themselves in their hour of need. These clergy have revealed themselves for what they are: mercenaries. It was inevitable, on the other hand, that those who read Mao as young men would then find themselves carrying out the same duties as an official of the department for religious affairs of the Chinese Communist Party, just like a bishop or a priest enrolled in the Patriotic Association. The Catholic Church, in a similar context, can also formally exist, but only under total governmental control, suspended from a nod of approval or denial by any dictatorship of the nomenklatura. This is further confirmation that the Marxist regimes have been nothing more than a large-scale experiment of a fully bureaucratic world order, with a fully planned economy and absolute supervision of the population, reduced to a consumer mass whose needs are artificially determined by occult powers.

Atheistic materialism, functional to this result, has become the usual mental atmosphere also in the West, in the theoretically “free” countries. The “Church” in dialogue with the world, coherently, has launched itself into environmentalist battles for the defense of the common home, but it has nothing more to say to lighten the drama of illness and death. The best she can do is prostrate herself at the feet of state officials, completely forgetting the obligations that derive from her mission: she no longer knows how to speak of eternal salvation, of atoning suffering, of just punishment, of abandonment to Providence… All this, just as it horrifies the dominant thought, so it repulses many of her own ministers, who show that they no longer believe in it and, for this reason, no longer have any reason to be (other than the task and sustenance). What do you want celibacy to count for those who have lost their identity and lost their reason for being in the world? The problem is much deeper than the sacrosanct ecclesiastical discipline, but with the usual diversionary operation they have managed to divert attention by setting fire to the debate on a particular point, so as to make the real poison of the Amazonian synod, naturalistic pantheism, go unnoticed.

Thus goes the “faith” of most of the clergy: it is a bland Enlightenment deism: their “divinity” is a vague reassuring idea, an indefinite entity that should comfort us in difficult times, but is unable to intervene in creation or history; the concept of divine punishment would be nothing more than a legacy paying tribute to myth. The Marxist mentality that has permeated today’s culture is easily reconciled (being a further development) with the Kantian vision of a religiosity devoid of transcendence, but immanent to human thought, which is rooted in the subjectivism of the Lutheran conception of faith. If then we want to try to explain the incredible mental rigidity shown, in the present conjuncture, by an otherwise super-elastic clergy in areas in which it is instead strictly bound, we must go back to the common source of such aberrations, that is, to the Phariseism of those who filter the gnats and swallow the camels. It is Talmudic Judaism, with its overwhelming claim to ensure absolute impeccability excluding even the slightest or remote possibility of being accused. Following a similar criterion, even going to pray in a church could spread the contagion and is therefore automatically equivalent to killing an unspecified number of people. In their absurd ramblings, they do not realize that, with their serious omissions, they kill a large number of souls, starting with their own.

The effects of ecclesiastical measures, thus, are worse than those of the virus. The Gospel, instead, continually shows us that Jesus, in order to obey the Father, apparently disobeyed the religious authorities of His time, who with artificial doctrines had manipulated the divine law for their use and consumption until it was annulled. That the contagion is spread by going to church is an extremely remote danger and therefore does not involve the slightest moral responsibility. On the other hand, do people not go to work, to the supermarket or the pharmacy, since they cannot do without it? The same risk that one runs in order to ensure the nourishment and health of the body, cannot one run in order to guarantee those of the soul? But what do our Pastors believe in, if they still believe in anything at all?

As one of the faithful of Rome writing to me said, in this circumstance, “one is discovering who is a true priest and who is not”. Another reader observes that, after this emergency, “nothing will be the same as before”. She is right: the Lord is sifting His ministers to distinguish clearly who still has faith from those who have lost it or have never had it, who is worthy of trust from those who play a sleazy comedy, who is to be followed by those who are to be abandoned. Many clerics have lost all credibility; the faithful people will know well how to deal with them.

And so “the Lord, from heaven, looks to the children of men to see if there is one who is intelligent or who seeks God” (Ps 13:2) with prayer and penance; but he must take note that “all have deviated and at the same time have become useless” (Ps 13:3). The Almighty therefore thunders with a mighty voice to launch an extreme call: “Calm yourselves and consider that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted on earth” (Ps 45:11). It is the living God who speaks, the Creator of the world and Lord of history, the One who has total control of nature and gives to each one according to His works (cf. Ps 61:13; Pr 24:12; Jer 32:19; Mt 16:27; Rom 2:6; Rev 22:12). He punishes evil, both in this life and in the future, but in His mercy He uses the scourges also for our correction. This is how God revealed Himself: after eliminating the Tradition, do they want to trash even the Bible? Will they be so impudent, in the colossal mystification they are perpetrating, as to reach such a degree of intellectual dishonesty? They’d better think it over. Therefore, multiply the Rosaries for their conversion, as well as, of course, for the protection of your families! for the end of the epidemic, for the healing of the sick and – not least – for many who die without religious comfort and without funeral.

When the master of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those farmers? He will make the wicked wretched perish miserably and entrust his vineyard to other peasants, who will bear fruit in their time (Mt 21:41).

+ + +


Our Lady of Fatima appears over Vatican as Bergoglio denies the Faith

On social media and on the internet you can find many images of the Statue of Our Lady of Fatima, as it is carried in procession at Fatima. The iconic image is immediately recognizable by all devotees of Our Lady

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

There are some blasphemies and errors so great that they merit a divine intervention to refute them. Yesterday, at the Vatican was just one such case.

As Jorge Mario Bergoglio read his discourse, Urbi et Orbi, to a world reeling in the Corona panic, he said the following (full text at Vatican News):

Svegliati Signore!”. ‘Perché avete paura? Non avete ancora fede?’. Signore, ci rivolgi un appello, un appello alla fede. Che non è tanto credere che Tu esista, ma venire a Te e fidarsi di Te.

Which in English is:

Wake up, Lord! Why do you all fear? Do you not yet have faith? Lord, you make an appeal to us, an appeal to faith. Which is not so much to believe that You exist, but to come to You and trust ourselves to You.

The Catholic Faith, contrariwise, teaches that supernatural faith in God consists, first of all, as Saint Paul says in his Letter to the Hebrews, chapter 11, verse 6:

But without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God must believe that he is: and is a rewarder to them that seek him.

In response to this blasphemy, Our Lady of Fatima seems to have momentarily appeared in the clouds above the Vatican:


This video was shared with FromRome.Info via Whatsapp. The video was recorded by cellphone from a TV broadcast by Vatican News of the Urbi and Orbi ceremony. But I have uploaded it to From Rome Info Video’s channel on YouTube to make it known to the whole world.

About one our after the report you are currently reading at FromRome.Info, Il Giornale, one of the leading national newspapers in Italy, published their own report about this miracle.

The position of the apparition over the Vatican places it at the same angle on the compass as the direct route to the Holy House of Loreto, the home of Our Lady which was miraculously transported in the 13th century to Loreto, Italy, from Nazareth. It was in that house, that Our Lady received the message of the Archangel Gabriel, and said, “Let it be done to me, as you have said!”, thus inaugurating the Incarnation of the Son of God and the Salvation of the world. It is perhaps, for that reason, that She appeared over that part of the sky, as Bergoglio denied the fundamental obligation of faith, to believe that God exists.

This is not an isolated incident. On Wednesday, March 25, at 5 P.M., at San Carlos, in the province of Corrientes, Argentina, the image of Our Lady of Iquiti appeared in the clouds. You can read the story at the Daily Star, UK, here.  Our Lady of Iquiti is the Immaculate Virgin dressed in a style similar to Our Lady of Fatima.

+ + +



The Martyrdom of St. Thomas More – Part I


By Frank Magill

The story of St. Thomas More and his ultimately fatal disagreement with King Henry VIII of England leapt from the history books into the popular imagination, at least into that of the anglophone world, in the 1960 stage play by Robert Bolt, “A Man For All Seasons.” Bolt himself later wrote the screenplay for the critically acclaimed motion picture of the same name, released in 1966, for which he won one of the six “Oscars” awarded to the film.

Bolt’s work brought to the wider world the traditional perception of the case, at least among faithful Catholics and other adherents to the Biblical notion of marriage, as an unjust persecution of More and Bishop St. John Fisher by a tyrannical monarch bent on placing his own desires and ego above the law of God. In the play and film, both More and Fisher were convicted of treason and executed on the testimony of one man: Sir Richard Rich, a political weather-vane who, at the time, was a minion of Thomas Cromwell. Cromwell served Henry, among other ways, as the “brains” behind (and possibly the instigator of) Henry’s scheme to break the English church away from communion with Rome, and after the rupture Cromwell and Rich undertook the dissolution and distribution of the English monasteries, allotting them in exchange for political favors, thus destroying the spiritual fruit of centuries of faith. Ironically, at about the same time as Bolt was writing his screenplay for the film, an English historian, J. Duncan M. Derrett, published a work contending that the trial of More was actually a fair one, conducted in accord with then-existing English law.1

The view of Derrett (an Anglican-educated legal positivist whose primary claim to fame was as a scholar of Hinduism and Indian law, and who also wrote several books on interpretation of the New Testamemt) was accepted by a general consensus of historians in the 1960’s and thereafter. Recently, however, in 2011, a comprehensive review of the available documentation of More’s trial was published,2 in which Derrett’s view of the trial was challenged. Derrett, the legal positivist, argued that More clearly broke the law (meaning the statutes, passed at the behest of Henry VIII, upon which More was indicted and tried), and yet the judges at his trial were amenable to reasonable arguments, having dismissed much of the original indictment against him. From this, Derrett concluded More was treated justly by the day’s standards.

On the contrary, the American and Catholic historian Henry Ansgar Kelly argued that Derrett’s view is unreasonable. In light of all the available records, and considering then-existing legal and procedural standards, Kelly concludes that More was actually the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice, convicted largely upon the perjured testimony of an agent of the King who desired More’s conviction out of personal animosity, before a court made up largely of men with vested personal interests in getting More out of the way permanently, and a jury comprised of employees of the king.

More’s Life Before Royal Service

More was the eldest son of Sir John More, himself a lawyer who became a judge of the King’s Bench. More received a top tier education, including in a highly regarded London school, personal tutelage from the Archbishop of Canterbury, John Morton (later a Cardinal), and two years at Oxford. After beginning study of the law back home in London, More was admitted in 1496 to Lincoln’s Inn, one of the four prestigious Inns of Court, where he completed his legal education, becoming a full member of the Bar in 1501. At about the same time, More took up residence at the Carthusian monastery that was next door to Lincoln’s Inn, where he risked the ire of his father by seriously discerning whether he was called to the priesthood. Although More eventually concluded that he did not have a vocation to Holy Orders, his time in the monastery left its mark, as he continued for life to observe the holy habits which the monks had instilled in him, of prayer, fasting and the wearing of a hair shirt.

Having discerned his vocation to be that of husband and father, More married a farmer’s daughter, Joan Colt, in 1504 or 1505, with whom he had four children before her untimely death in 1511. Left with the care of four youngsters under six years of age, More shortly thereafter married a wealthy widow, Alice Middleton, who had one daughter. In addition to practicing law, More wrote a great deal, including works of poetry, history, and fiction, many of which are available free online, though some may be difficult for today’s readers to decipher as they are in old English spelling and typeface, if not in Latin. Perhaps his best-known work from this period is Utopia, a word invented by More which has become a common usage in modern English. The book combined satire, romance and political philosophy in a unique manner, describing a fictional society governed entirely by reason.

More first entered public service in 1510 as one of two “undersheriffs” of London, a quasi-judicial post he resigned in order to enter into the King’s service, full-time, in 1518. Rising through the ranks in various titles, including under-treasurer and Speaker of the House of Commons, More became known as Henry VIII’s “intellectual courtier” as well as being “a very active citizen of London. He developed one of the largest and most lucrative law practices in the city. He took on greater responsibilities in governing Lincoln’s Inn, and he was elected to the prestigious Doctors’ Commons. He also represented the city’s business interests in foreign embassies, and still found time to write and to correspond with Europe’s leading intellectuals.”3 More further burnished his reputation as a defender of the Faith by assisting and supporting Henry in a vigorous exchange of polemics between the king and Martin Luther, capped by More’s Responsio ad Lutherum (in Latin) in 1523.

The “Great Matter” 4

Henry first informed More of his theory of invalidity of his marriage to Queen Catherine of Aragon in September of 1527 at Hampton Court, which issue More thereafter referred to as the King’s “great matter.”5 Citing Leviticus, the King stated his belief that Catherine’s brief marriage to his deceased older brother Arthur meant that, by marrying Catherine, Henry had “uncover[ed] the nakedness” of his brother’s wife (cf. Lev. 18:16). Thus, claimed the king, her marriage to Henry was rendered barren, pursuant to Lev 20:21. More’s doubted that the referenced passages invalidated Henry and Catherine’s marriage, and opined as much, noting this would be true especially if, as Catherine maintained, she and Arthur had never consummated their union. Henry maintained that Leviticus ruled the issue, and suggested that More study it further.6

While, at this point, the primacy of the Holy See was not yet the central issue, as Henry did undertake to convince Rome to annul his marriage to Catherine, More did as Henry asked and made a serious study of the question of the royal marriage via Scripture, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church (such as Saints Jerome , Cyprian  and Gregory) and the records of the general Councils. In this, More’s opinion of the validity of the marriage of Henry and Catherine did not change. Moreover, the review led him to conclude that Papal primacy had been instituted or established “by the corps of Christendom”, manifested through “the general counsell of the whole body of Christendome” or the “whole catholike church lawfully gathered together in a generall counsell” governed by the spirit of God, corroborated by continual succession of popes over at least a thousand years; thus it did not matter whether the primacy had been instituted immediately by God or ordained by the Church; “it had become a matter of consensus and authoritative tradition.”7 Thus, More concluded that no secular authority had the power to overrule any papal decree. This, of course, would ultimately prove to be the cause of the fissure between More and Henry, and between England and the Catholic Church.

Lord Chancellor

In 1529, while working full time on judicial and administrative duties at Westminster and at court, and even as he began involvement as a representative of England in the lengthy peace negotiation which eventually produced the historic Treaty of Cambrai , More expanded his long-standing efforts to defend the Faith from the growing Lutheran heresy by writing A Dialogue Concerning Heresies,8 This was More’s first work published in the vernacular instead of in Latin, the purpose of which was, according to Ackroyd, “to
celebrate that common culture [ i.e., that of Catholicism] which was under threat; by employing the stories and proverbs that were in the air around him and by drawing upon the resources of the medieval tradition of caricature and speech he was implicitly appealing to his audience to consider what would be lost if Christendom fell into schism. A religion and a way of life might disappear.” 9

Also in 1529, a more ominous development occurred as Henry’s long effort to convince the pope to annul his marriage to Catherine ended in failure. The pope had dispatched an aging Cardinal Campeggio from Rome to England to preside over a legatine court that would hear Henry’s case. The court opened on the last day of May, and on June 21, Henry and Catherine both appeared and made their arguments. 10 Catherine’s emotional speech protesting the annulment, delivered kneeling at her husband’s feet, probably was responsible at least in part for the court adjourning without reaching a decision, as was her written direct appeal to Rome to deny Henry’s case. Also of no small moment was the fact that troops in the service of Catherine’s nephew, Charles V, King of Spain, had invaded and sacked Rome two years earlier, and the occupation was effectively holding the Pope, Clement VII, prisoner at Castel Sant’Angelo.

Thus, the pope was unlikely to grant Henry an annulment even had he been so inclined, at the risk of further jeopardizing his personal situation. 11

The failure of Henry’s case was decidedly bad news for Cardinal Wolsey , whom Henry had charged with the responsibility of obtaining the annulment. In October 1529, after the legatine court was adjourned without a decision, Wolsey was indicted under the Statute of Praemunire , a fourteenth-century law that prohibited appeals of English court cases to the pope, and charged with overstepping his legatine authority. Having thus been effectively deposed as Lord Chancellor, Wolsey surrendered the Great Seal of his office to Henry on October 18 or 19.12 Wolsey retired to York, and later was arrested for treason, on November 4, 1530, but died before he could return to London.

Henry met with various councillors, including More, for several days to choose a successor, and on October 25 More was notified that he was to be the next Lord Chancellor. Henry gave him the Great Seal that same day, and he was ceremoniously installed on the marble Seat of Judgment in the Chancery.

What Were They Thinking?

Henry knew More did not support his “great matter”, and More obviously knew he was opposed to the king’s fondest wish at the time, i.e., to be rid of his marriage to Catherine so that he could make his mistress, Anne Boleyn, queen in her stead. Both men must have known that a confrontation was inevitable between the monarch’s desires and the position of the Church. Why, then, would Henry appoint More to the highest office in the land short of his own, and why would More accept the appointment? Unfortunately, neither man left a clear record of his thinking on these questions, although much can be inferred from the records that do exist. For Henry’s part, his selection of More made sense from a purely practical perspective. More was, after all, well known and highly regarded throughout England. He had built a reputation as a first-rank lawyer, and had demonstrated the ability to deal with Parliament as Speaker of the Commons. The clergy had selected him as their polemicist in the fight against the Protestant heresy.13 Ackroyd then adds: “Perhaps most importantly, he had worked closely with the king for more than ten years; Henry believed that he could rely upon his loyalty and good judgment as the proceedings against his marriage continued their serpentine course. But by appointing a layman as chancellor for the first time in almost a hundred years, Henry was also reasserting his own power over that of the Church. Wolsey’s fall and More’s appointment, therefore, were directly associated with the king’s desire to separate himself from Catherine of Aragon.” 14

What, then, of More’s acceptance of the position? Did Henry discuss with him the “great matter” before offering him the Great Seal? The timing is unclear, though More later wrote that Henry asked him at some early point to ponder the question of the annulment, but declared that More should follow his conscience. Henry “…assigned the Archbishops of Canterbury and York as well as other dignitaries to persuade him of the merits of his case. But More proved obstinate, or merely impassive, and listened with great care to the various arguments without once changing his mind. He believed the original papal dispensation15 to have been valid and the marriage sound. Henry was disappointed but in More’s words, was “neuer the lesse graciouse lord.’ “16 Henry, ever the astute politician, also had personal reasons to elevate More despite their differences over the “great matter,” because Catherine was very popular with the people, especially in London, and More’s support of her was well known. Having More as Lord Chancellor thus may have struck Henry as personal protection against charges of animus against his queen.17

As for More’s own reasons, in light of his history of personal piety and vigorous defense of the Catholic faith, and although there is no evidence that he was compelled or coerced to take the job, the future Saint probably viewed the appointment as not only the culminating honor in the career of any English man of laws, but as a tremendous opportunity to serve the Church. By possibly avoiding the schism between London and Rome that he already feared from the Lutherans, if only he could turn Henry’s mind back to obedience, More also would greatly serve the interests of Catherine, whom he held to be the rightful queen. In ascending to the post of Lord Chancellor, then, More not only served his king and his queen, but he also greatly pleased his father, his wife, and likely of most importance in his mind, his God. 18



1 J. Duncan M. Derrett, The Trial of Sir Thomas More, in Sylvester, R.S. and Marc’hadour, G.P., eds., Essential Articles for the Study of Thomas More, Hamden, CT, 1977, pp. 55-78, 591-6, revised from original form in the English Historical Review 79 (1964), 449-77, cited in Kelly, et al., note ii., below.

2 Kelly, Henry Ansgar, Karlan, Louis W. & Wegemer, Gerard B., eds., 2011. Thomas More’s Trial by Jury: A Procedural and Legal Review with a Collection of Documents. Woodbridge, Suffolk, U.K.: The Boydell Press.

3 Center for Thomas More Studies, University of Dallas:

4 Ackroyd, Peter. 1998. The Life of Thomas More. New York: Doubleday.

5 Ibid., p.268

6 Ibid., 270-1.

7 The Correspondence of Sir Thomas More, 524, 498, cited in Ackroyd 1998, 271.

8 See also Center for Thomas More Studies,, The Dialogue Concerning Heresies, © CTMS, for free online version with study guides.

9 Ackroyd, 1998, 281.

10 Ibid., 272-3; See also, for June 21, 1529)

11 Ultimately, no decision was ever rendered on the legatine trial, and in 1530, Clement VII made peace with Charles V and crowned him Holy Roman Emperor.
12 Ackroyd, 1998, 287.

13 Ibid., 288-9.

14 Ibid., 289.

15 The pope had granted dispensation for Henry’s marriage to Catherine to deal with the very issue Henry now raised in attempting to attack the validity of the union, that of the Biblical injunction against marrying one’s brother’s widow. See

16 Ackroyd, 1998, 289.

17 Ibid., 290.

18 Ibid.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Frank Magill is a retired attorney and a 2005 convert to the Catholic faith.  He and his wife of 40 years reside near Dallas, Texas, USA.


CREDITS:  The Featured Image is a detail of Rowland Lockley’s copy of Hans Holbein’s, Saint Thomas More and Family.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

The clergy’s reaction to the COVID-19 stunt demonstrates their apostasy from Christ

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

There are a lot of holy Bishops and priests right now who are doing all they can to bring the Sacraments and God’s graces to the faithful during the world-wide Corona panic. And, sadly, most of the clergy do not realize the panic is a political stunt willed to promote the agenda of globalists.

However, the clergy who think the viral threat is real, are, apart from these courageous and heroic priests, showing themselves to be utter apostates from the Catholic religion, in this, that they are not reacting in any supernatural manner to the perceived threat.

This has palpably revealed to the entire world and to the Catholic Faithful, if they have eyes to see it, that Vatican II and all its reforms was just another stunt. All the propaganda to push the so-called reforms was promoted by a clergy who cannot even get the courage to open the windows of their rectories to give a blessing or absolution during the Corona lock-down!

It is just stunning, how, here at Rome for example, you can go into a Church and see a priest saying his breviary, and he has much less concern about your being there to receive a Sacrament during, what many think is the imminent death of everyone by a virus, as he would have for a mouse which entered the church. At least he would chase the mouse!  But no! the only sin left is violating social-distancing! The Book of the Gospels has been dumped into the trash-can of political correctness!

I personally cannot imagine how they can dare pray to God!

I hope you can see what this means for the Church. And I hope you can see that it is your duty to preach repentance to the clergy and remind them that they will surely be damned for this treachery against their priestly duties to save souls., if they do not.

I could understand their personal fear if they have AIDS. But if that is their excuse before God, then they should admit it before men and resign, because if they have AIDS they should not be administering the sacraments, because they are highly infectious with a virus which is dozens of times more fatal than the COVID-19, which it appears they are afraid of contracting from you!

God willing this panic comes to an end. But you should NOT forgive your local priest who betrayed you, UNTIL he publicly asks for forgiveness. Because no where in the Gospel did God ask us or require us to forgive someone without a sign of repentance. And since those members of the clergy who will not repent, will be damned, asking them to repent is the greatest charity you can show them in the post corona-hyped world.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]