Don Alessandro Minutella’s Apologia apostolatus

 Introduction by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

In this discourse, Father makes a declamation of his critics, in defense of his apostolic work, describing in spiritual and psychological terms the methods of argumentation used by them to ignore the facts of history and law regarding who is the true Pope. — In this video, Don Minutella responds to the recent coordinated attack against him by 5 internet personalities, following the revelations by Mons. Georg Gänswein, that Pope Benedict XVI has never celebrated in communion “with Pope Benedict”.

After publicly requesting a transcription in Italian, so I could publish an English translation, a devout Catholic over at CrossAzure.Net (see here) has transcribed the Italian.  What follows, below, then, is an English translation:


(00:00 – 3:33)

All those who continue to support (Pope Benedict XVI) for one reason or another, convinced or not that Jorge Bergoglio is pope of the Catholic Church, find themselves in a situation that becomes increasingly embarrassing and weak as time goes by. Years go by with this unprecedented lie; the partisans – the Praetorians – of the so-called Pope Francis – who is not pope of the church according to the laws of the church, is now appearing increasingly weak.

In their external expressions (4:07), in their attempts to convince others that Pope Francis is the legitimate pope, in truth, we see more clearly a disparate attempt to prove to themselves that Bergoglio is the pope of the Catholic church. And so we see that we are in the presence of the Logos and the false church of Chaos. Let’s see. Well this clear (4:43) almost 10 years of imposture, in a way it has never ever happened in the Catholic Church – which is the Church of the Logos where the Logos rules. And instead, on the one hand, we are in the presence of the opposite (5:00), the antithesis of the Logos the Reason that verifies, and  the antithesis of the Logos is Chaos. Bergoglio’s partisans – all those who persist without ever wanting to stop and reason with respect and with elegant tones on the face (5:20) are in an increasingly chaotic condition because they are unable to respond to (5:27), for a couple of years now, to their opposition.

(5:30) The Enemies of the Logos

The enemies of the Logos are enemies of themselves. They are not so much defenders first of all of Pope Francis but of the deep shadows of their conscience. Ultimately they are enemies of themselves. And therefore defenders of chaos. I like to define all these enemies as – scattered all over social media (6:05) of the evaporation of Roman Catholicism and employ an image by Diego Fusaro, who does not (6:13) need an introduction. He speaks of the evaporation of Roman Catholicism. These men, who are of the Church of Chaos and who deny the Logos enemies of the Logos – enemies of their own indefinite conscience and the last instance (6:32) have assisted at the front lines in the evaporation of the Roman Church (6:40).

And beyond the diversity of their positions, there is a common denominator – the so-called disadvantage – first of all (6:59) of the error that manifests itself with (7:02) the violent aggressive offensive to legitimize, first of all, and directly, that Jorge Mario Bergoglio was installed, as demonstrated, without (7:18) being obliged to do it, by Cardinal Gottried Danneels – who spoke of a Saint Gallen Mafia (7:23) that was placed there by ecclesiastical masonry to destroy Roman Catholicism, as evident. And, therefore, my enemies have little to do. They write that I’m not available confront (7:41) them – and everyone knows (7:41) that I’m always here, ready for them. And yet no one asks me. But they write that I refuse to appear with them. They sleep, moved by resentment of their own conscience, and not of Don Minutella’s voice. And then there is Don Minutella’s voice which matches, marries, and finds itself perfectly in agreement with the reproaches of their own consciences. And so between their consciences and the voice of Don Minutella they interpose themselves – with their stubbornness (8:14), as I will clearly demonstrate. With, let’s say, an inability to delve into the issues, which responds rather by going on the offensive — Do you understand? — with effrontery, with calumny, in the attempt to de-legitimize (their opponents). They are superficial par excellence; (8:33) as I will demonstrate tonight; these enemies of the logos, these assistants of the Chaos and of the definitively false Church, do nothing but (8:45) discomfort themselves because they are of an evident dishonesty.


I want to start with a video tonight. We’ll see it twice. I’ll show you right now. This is the speech of Monsignor Georg Gänswein, personal secretary of Pope Benedict XVI, who spoke last October (9:11) at the LUMSA university, one of the universities of Rome, and who made an impromptu declaration – and I beg you to listen with great Attention.

I’ll tell you right away: notice the absolutely out of line style of Monsignor Gänswein who seems almost crazy; who seems to be out of character; who says things that are there for those (9:39) senseless persons; which provoke the audience and, above all at the end of the two minutes, who says things that will upset you and which explain themselves, by demonstrating that Pope Benedict is in an impeded see. Let’s hear it for the first time. Then I will make (9:57) comment. Then we will listen to it again after we have underlined a few things (10:01) and finally I will respond in order to Arturo Periodista, to Giovanni (10:08), to Marcotullio, to Radio Spada, and to Don Tulio Rotondo – having made a selection, since — “ahme”, as we say — these are the defenders of Chaos who want to be cited. — I beg the director to broadcast the clip.

(10:24) VIDEO

The words of His Excellency Georg Gänswein, who is prefect of the (10:38) house of Pope Benedict. So it will do

(10:41) Greetings. Thank you, Doctor Magnificus. Greetings. The Salutations I have already given, I will not in fact give them according to protocol, as we say, or do I have to do it in a more diplomatic way? (The Rector says), “We are informal here” (Gänswein continues) Or shall we be more formal: Dear brothers and sisters? Can it be done in a Catholic way? Exactly.

So: Thanks for the invitation, and before coming here, I prayed with Pope Benedict as every Catholic priest does (11:18): Vespers. And then I spoke about the book and also, first of all, about those invited, or the presenters. So he says, “First thing, don’t give an institutional greeting; give a personal greeting. From me: “I salute you,” and say , say to everyone that I didn’t deserve this illustrious list of presenters. I said, “Holy Father, if I say this they won’t believe me. They won’t believe me.” (Someone on the panel says) “It is true.” — But I said, “I will obey”. (Here Gänswein changes back to the tone of voice used to quote Benedict): “Either you believe or you don’t believe. If you don’t believe, read either Jeremiah (12:06) or – how do you say Isai- in Italian? (Someone on the panel says, Isaiah in correct Italian) — Isaiah. I do not say which verse and which chapter, but there is the answer.”

(Editor’s Note: I am editing this text live — PLEASE BE PATIENT AND REFRESH EVERY SO OFTEN TO SEE UPDATES)

(12:20) What you have heard, the Freemasons try to keep hidden and do not circulate. A Monsignor Gänswein – with an unexpected style that is diversionary (12:33), which is absolutely out of the context for the presentation of a book: where one (12:39) expects an intervention on the book, a serene, academic intervention. Monsignor Gänswein goes there to the microphone, he even seems angry. And then he immediately provokes the interlocutors and says “Do I have to follow the protocol or do I have to?”, understood. (12:56) and this to those who are there as (13:00) participants at the table — let’s say representatives — and he really says this, understood, understood. What does this mean? “Do I have to do the protocol?” Understood? I say only (13:15) that those of the chaos do not notice that. But in two minutes Gänswein does something absolutely incredible: “Do I have to be diplomatic?”, He adds. “Do I have to do the protocol,” got it.? Diplomatic? And then he adds: “Brothers and Sisters can it not be done in a Catholic way.” “Can it not be done in a Catholic way?” But what does that have to do with it? What does this have to do with: CAN IT BE DONE IN A CATHOLIC WAY? I’ll explain right after.

He adds: “I come here to tell you what Pope Benedict told me. Before coming here I prayed.” And he adds, “Every Catholic priest prays with the Holy Father.” What does this mean? However, true Catholicism lies in praying in union with the pope. It’s so obvious. And then he adds, “I asked Pope Benedict what to say,” and He adds, Ganzwein (that is), “He (Pope Benedict) told me, “Don’t give an institutional greeting.”” Look at that nice hint, ehhh? “Don’t give an institutional greeting, give a personal greeting.” And then he adds the content of this personal greeting. He says, “that he (turns to Pope Benedict) and says, “Holy Father” – because He Calls him, Holy Father !!! Chaos lovers!!! Welcome the liar! He calls him, the Holy Father!!! The Holy Father is only one!!!

We want to stop! We want to stop with this comedy!! With this Masonic palace that is ruining the Church!!!

‘Holy Father’ is what only one is called one, and only one!! Either is it Pope Benedict or is it Pope Francis, or am I wrong? Or is it me who has no head? Someone answer me, some enemies. Chaos Farmers!. Renegades of (15:28) of their own conscience. Answer this if you are able! He called him “Holy Father”. Until proven otherwise, the Holy Father, there is only one!

Why (3:40), should he have not said “Pope Emeritus”, he should have said, I know not what. But not “Holy Father”! And then he adds. “I said to the Holy Father, “They won’t believe me. They won’t believe me.” And he adds, In the name of the Holy Father, and here is the (16:03) final quote which you have been waiting for, the saber stroke.

Look we are living in decisive moment. Look. (16:13). In unsuspected times those who have been following me for years know the spoken word, many have left, because “the road is difficult” (16:20) as Gänswein makes us understand. But in unsuspecting years, I said 2023 will be a decisive year. And look, these are decisive facts. They don’t believe me. (16:48) They don’t believe me provocatively throwing — Let’s say throwing — (16:52) into a shocking embarrassment. He adds, Gänswein adds (to this) — Now let’s listen to him again, you will have more clarity, he adds: Neither (17:01), I tell you neither chapter nor verse. Search and you will see it. (17:08). Like the always excellent Cionci — whom , I don’t understand why, from here and from there must always be a little under suspicion, but he is doing a historic work– but I mean historic dear children. It is a historical work. His was the first article to discover (17:27), to trace the text (17:30), to understand it is a code. And there are those who always know how to say of the code: “Sorry, it’s not right. It’s not spiritual.” But sorry. I bring you an example. Jesus goes to the temple when he is almost there and says, “Destroy this this temple and in three days I will rebuild.” Then, remember. And rightly so, as He is speaking in code, that too is an amphibology I present this precisely because those who have eyes do not see and those who have ears do not listen because they laugh at the children of logos: children of chaos (18:15) and they say, “Ha ha ha, this temple took 47 years to build and you will rebuild in three days?” And (the apostle) John (18:20) clarifies (this), “He spoke of the temple of his body.” This was a coded language for Jesus.

Answer me. Why (19:29) is it wrong for Pope Benedict to do it? Pope Benedict is following the Logos. Pope Benedict is in an impeded see. And now more than ever he plays his card. But let’s see. One searches in many chapters of Jeremiah, and Doctor Cionci is able to locate the text and is shocked (18:48). Because Gänswein says, “I’m not telling you ..” What way is this a speaking? Does it seem normal to you? But does it seem normal to you? A provocation for those who, seeing that Pope Benedict is increasingly near to God [Editor: that is near death], are launching decisive arrows from their own side but, also against the other side. I refer (to the forged Letter, which began:) “Dear Mr Minutella, … Pope Benedict is grieved You with the other eight priests say the Mass in …”, all false.

It is a decisive moment. These are moments in which a heavy barrage is being fired, dear children. I don’t tell you, Gänswein says, the chapter and the verse. You find it. And what happens. Go to Chapter 36, of Jeremiah, verse 5 . It’s not my find. It is thanks to Cionci, who did this research. I did not (19:41), the merit is not mine. I am always respectful. I hope others do too, at least they give them credit for (19:50) the first. This (19:51), however, and Cionci identifies Jeremiah chapter 36 verse 5 . Are you ready? Are you ready to hear what is written? “I am impeded and cannot go to the temple of the Lord”. Let’s listen to the audio of Msgr. Gänswein. And now it’s clearer.

(20:15) – (22:06) [Editor’s note: here the video of what the Archbishop says, is played a second time]

It seems to me that it is this most obvious point that Gänswein announces and undoubtedly a surprising statement. I would like to clarify immediately, however, given the clearly apocalyptic flavor situation that we live in, let us be ready for any kind of shock (22:27); let us be ready for any fire and heavy artillery, where it may appear, once again, that Gänswein, not be, not be with Pope Benedict. “He stands there and holds him prisoner.” No!, but “Pope Benedict said instead he is in common with Pope Francis.” They will produce, they will try to produce new proofs because they are in disarray (22:48). Never as in this moment is the false Church of Chaos in trouble. The statement, the intervention, by Gänswein at LUMSA (23:01) and then (in regard to the Letter) to me, (his declaration that it) was false what Msgr wrote. Gänswein, that is: to declare (these things) are two heavy conquests that have forced the enemies to retreat. Maybe that’s why in this period we enter the second part here. They are three parts. The introductory part, Now I go to the second part and then the conclusion (23:29)

This is the reason why in this period I don’t have time to respond to everyone. (23:33). Afterwards you just have to understand that I have to prepare a catechesis every day, and there is (23:39) maybe (23:40) (there are grumblings) because Don Minutella does not receive or give spiritual direction. Sorry. You tell me, how you will be able to deal with the fact that I do this but I don’t have time, but there are those who insist, insist, insist, that they feel bad about not meeting me. But I don’t have the time because then, I would have to stop to listen to the souls individually, as I go to pray, when I also have to pray. There is a ministry of everything. There is a ministry for everything. It is an important ministry. Here, parenthesis closed.

Then, as I don’t have time, they made me aware that in these days there is a real multiple attack against the undersigned [Editor’s note: this is the polite Italian way of referring to one’s self]. I was spoiled for choice of those things that (24:23) showed me and I chose you and I chose this evening to show Professor Zenoni’s captiousness, superficiality, total chaos, in chaos in the open and evident intellectual dishonest and these such bring to light. I chose Arturio Periodista, Professor Giovanni Zenone, the journalist Marco Tulio, and (24:46) Radio Spada, and finally Don Tulio Rotondo. I put it all for the last because at least ,, but what I saw, Don Tulio, is if only for another a little (24:59) more respectful than the others for whom I am… look at the intimate level of speaking. These others not so (25:08). Get angry with your own conscience. As long as they hear the things we say are true. They come down with unusual violence.

(25:18) Let’s start with Arturo Periodista. Who is he? I don’t know well. I know he’s a Youtuber. That in the Spanish language he is quite popular, but not top notch. (25:36). I surpass them all. I alone, all of them together in terms of numbers. But this isn’t important. When they do, it matters. I tell you, (they say that) I am proud. It was not understood why. And like when Marco Tulio makes everyone think. Truly dishonest total that I am not worthy of attention, because I publish an IBAN (to receive donations) (26:07). But does it seems to you, a way precisely, who knows, with Bergoglio (26:11) the Church of Chaos. But does it seem normal to you to intervene on the contents? Marco Tulio must say dishonestly (26:18) and then one who asks puts the IBAN, is not to be trusted, but in fact they ask for donations too. But they can do. Then everything is allowed. (26:29) Don Minutella (they say) that he shouldn’t do anything. Understood?

So, let’s proceed with the order. In Arthur Periodista. He is a Youtuber who last November (26:37) transmitted a reflection on his channel about Minutella, “Nada mas de una cum Benedito”,  who demands his mission be recognized (26:50) di resto fiel. (claiming that) I oblige all of you to recognize myself as the guide and leader of the faithful resto, the Little Catholic Resto. — How did I say that? I will say one more thing. Look at the total dishonesty of the guy, who he would say, “Doesn’t even deserve to be”, “I never do as you can see”, but like, “When I have to do it I do it” Then. Note this. That there must be a (27:19) rebellion (against Bergoglio). One who commands, one who directs. Who rules? It seems to me that this is human logic, the Logos. Logos foresees that in a reality one must lead. Here we are? This happens with movements. For example, Don Giussani was the leader of CIL, Communion and Liberation; what do I know… Chiara Lubich was the leader of dei Foccalari. — It is normal for there to be a leader (27:47) who interprets as a suggestion. But he does further (sayinng), it is true that I said (27:53) that I want to be a candidate to be Benedict XVI’s successor. — It seems to me that we are going from Logos to Chaos. From honesty to the dishonest. Got it? From professional elegance to the total cowardice of one who is at war with the Logos in his own conscience, because I’ve never said that. On the other hand, I tell you, this Spanish-speaking guy, (who says), “Why is Don Minutella in Latin America?”, the (28:23) connection, the connection like this is increasingly known, because in Italy there is a base of those that heavenly (choir of critics) and I won’t add anything else that claims that — evangelically, all right — that there will emerge that Don Minutella is a paedophile, that Don Minutella is crazy, Don Minutella is a candidate to be Benedict XVI’s successor. — I know the truth and what those who are expecting to enter heaven will say (28:50): “I know what he thinks, for the love of Benedict XVI.” What do I think I’m doing? Understood? And the capciousness of this Arturo Periodista which means, In this period he broadcasts videos against the undersigned and at the limits as I said of the honesty. He calls me a guru. And it is not an impression of him because it comes from the workshop of (29:18). And he says that I am applying for the leadership of the Piccolo Resto Cattolico. No. I said how to my confreres I am only one that the Madonna asked if I didn’t accept it is something else. Then there is debater. About that thing there that hasn’t (29:37) me to say, Our Lady doesn’t ask me. However, it also seems to me that Jesus in the Gospel says “By the fruit you know the tree”. I’ve been the first since (29:48) proves otherwise. I haven’t gone to all the chapels he wants but I’ve been the first. The first to take the field. Because it is true that someone (29:55) behind the desk disappeared from the scene yesterday. Five years that I spill blood. They forced me to take off the priestly habit. They have excommunicated me twice, which is one more time than Luther. So maybe it’s true because no one would handle (30:09) like I’m doing. That as soon as I looked let’s say that (30:14), he roars. And then he says that at the beginning of 2022, I know I said that I received (30:25) messages from the divine Heaven in (30:22) …

[Editor’s Note: here the transcription ends].

2 thoughts on “Don Alessandro Minutella’s Apologia apostolatus”

  1. DEO gratias. And may Almighty GOD bless & protect Don Minutella at all times, together with all priestly/lay friends in Christ who know for certain that Benedict XVI is Pope, and are prepared to declare that fact in public.

    Here in Essex, England, I find it sad but not surprising that a number of local friends in Christ who view Bergoglio as “just a bad Pope” are the very same ‘friends’ who accuse me of committing a mortal sin by refusing to attend a Novus Ordo Sunday liturgy in communion with “Pope Francis”.

    Our Blessed Mother in Her profound & sublime apparations at Fatima, Akita, and elsewhere, has given Holy Mother Church many severe warnings of the Chaos that would ensue if Her specific requests were not properly answered.

    But the Church’s proud/selfish/worldly hierarchy of so-called “shepherds”, devoid of supernatural Faith for so many decades, have been blinded by the darkness that the eternal enemy from hell so adores!
    Thus, the Catholic laity ‘sheep’ are widely scattered, lost, wandering, therefore deliciously easy prey for the spiritual wolves…….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.