by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

During the last month, I have made several videos showing, that the election of Cardinal Prevost was both canonically irregular and that on account of his previous statements contrary to the Catholic Faith, his election is nullified by the Bull of Paul IV.

For these videos I have cited Canon Law and the papal law of John Paul II, as well as the bull of Pope Paul IV.

Now I will add another important authority, that of Pope Nicholas II, who is the Pope who first ordered that Cardinals would elect the Roman Pontiff.

His authority is so preeminent, on that account, because he was the first pope to conceive the idea of restricting the election of the Roman Pontiff to the senior clerics, known as Cardinals. Thus, knowing his mind regarding this institution, is the best and surest way to authentically interpret all successive Papal legislation on the election of Popes.

Especially in regard to the thorny question: What is to be done, when the Cardinals conduct an election which violates papal law to such an extent as to result in an invalid election?

And the answer to this question, is found in the teaching of Pope Nicholas II can be found in his Bull, In Nomine Domini, published on April 13, 1059, a little more than 966 years ago, in n. 3 of that Bull, where he teaches:

§3. Wherefore, if the perversity of depraved, and iniquitous men, so prevail, that a pure, sincere and free election cannot be held in the City, the Cardinal Bishops with the religious Clerics, and the Catholic laity, even though few, obtain the right of power (ius potestatis) to elect the Pontiff of the Apostolic See, where it might be fitting.

What Nicholas II here says is of the utmost importance, for recognizing that his law might not be observable on account of the intervention of wicked men, he affirmed the apostolic right of the entire Church of Rome, Cardinals, Clergy, Religious and Laity to intervene in such extraordinary circumstances and proceed to a correct election of a Catholic pope. And his teaching is that in extraordinary times, to preserve the purity of the Apostolic See, the ancient right of the entire Church at Rome* revives, so that a correct election can be undertaken. This is what I have argued since 2019, HERE, on the basis of Divine, Apostolic and Natural right.

In fact, by saying they “obtain the right”, he refers not to a right he grants to them by his authority as pope, but to the right they have from a higher font of law: and in this case, the only higher font is Apostolic Right or Tradition, in that Saint Peter gave the Church of Rome the right to elect their own bishop. Thus, this affirmation has perennial power and represents a teaching of the Papal Magisterium.

While it is true that from a point of discipline, his Bull of Nicholas II no longer regulates papal elections, it is not true that the current papal law, that of John Paul II, Universi Dominic Gregis, says what to do, when it declares irregular elections invalid, in its 76th paragraph.

That is why, for those who want to authentically interpret the current papal law, having recourse to the Bull of Nicholas II is the MOST AUTHORITATIVE AND AUTHENTIC means of interpreting the present law, to know what to do when an election in a Conclave, now-a-days, is incorrectly done such as to be invalid or to have no juridical result, as the recent Conclave failed in the way it was done and whom it elected.

Indeed, according to the general principle of jurisprudence, confirmed in both the Code of Canon Law of 1917 and that of 1983, prior laws which are not abolished in their integrity, remain in force regarding those matters not integrated into newer legislation.

Thus, to all those who have dared to claim that the Faithful (clergy, religious laity) of the Church at Rome, in extraordinary circumstances do not have the right to elect the Roman Pontiff, Roma locuta est! That is, those who say otherwise, are the ones opposing the teaching of the Magisterium, even though they had the diabolic gall, in previous years to say that it was I who was the heretic.

So Steve O’Reilley and Estafania Accosta, I will mark down today’s date, and count the days for your apologies to arrive, not because I want them, but because you have led innumerable souls away from the truth by your unfounded, blatant lies in this matter.

Thus the papally approved teaching, that in extraordinary circumstances of evil and malfeasance, the Clergy and Laity of Rome receive the right to conduct a proper second election, clearly supports and declares legitimate the “Save Rome” Project‘s proposal. Indeed, it is not everyday, that any proposal is approved of by three Popes, against a gaggle of corrupt and incompetent Cardinals, but that day has come.

APPENDIX

For those interested in jurisprudence, the principle being applied by Pope Nicholas II is necessitas nullam legem cognoscit (“Necessity knows no law”). This principle enshrines the rationality of every legal institution which is for the common good in the end or purpose for which the law was written. When that end cannot be reached on account of an insurmountable and unprovided for menace (force majeure), then lesser conditional prescriptions must be understood to give way, so that the end be achieved. This is a common sense principle which sane persons resort too in daily life, in all matters from how to clean the bathroom to how to organize a vacation.

This is the exact opposite of the irrational  usurpation of right on the basis of privilege, which the Cardinals attempted in the Conclave of 2025, whereby they claimed that a privilege which did not belong to more than 120 was justification for violation of the precept of John Paul II that 120 be the maximum number of electors. For in their mad folly, they chose a means to be more important than the end, which is the valid election of a Roman Pontiff, and acted selfishly and recklessly, making the Conclave have no valid juridical result.

Thus, if conditions were so bad at Rome, that there were no Bishops or clergy or religious willing to come to a public place to elect a Roman Pontiff who was Catholic, not because there was any external inimical force such as armies in the city patrolling the streets, but because they no longer though it worth while to have a Catholic Pope and were content to submit to a formal manifest and pertinacious heretic, then by the same principle, “necessity knows no law'”, even the remaining electorate who had the faith and courage to come out to such an election, would suffice, since the apostolic right belongs to the whole Church in a uniform manner, and though it is fitting that Bishops and clergy and religious participate and take the lead, if they fail the Church does not lose that right, because, and especially because, there is never a more greater need for a Catholic Pope at Rome that in that day in which the Cardinals adhere to a heretic and among the remaining clergy there is none with the courage to stand against him, but the laity. And this was the argument I advanced two years ago.

---

** Note Well: In this article, “Church of Rome” is used properly and specifically to refer only to the Roman Rite Dioceses of Rome, Italy, and its suburbican dioceses of  Frascati, Palestrina, Segni-Velletri, Albano, Ostia, Porto Santa Rufina and Sabina-Poggio Mirteto.

I

+ + +

+ + + + + + +

The Book on the Trinity, every faithful Catholic priest would love as his next present

This is Br. Bugnolo's English Translation, of Saint Bonaventure's encylopedic book of theology on the Trinity: With this book, your priest will always have something intelligent and awesomely inspiring to preach to you about God the Father, God the Son & God the Holy Spirit!

+ + +