Monthly Archives: August 2025

Call to Action

The Readers of FromRome.Info have a greater responsibility

7 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Being a Catholic requires both faith and action, not just faith, as Luther taught. But social media can do nothing about action, other than convincing you or urging you. Not to mention that those who have time and chose to inform themselves through “Catholic” media normally never find the tree of truth among all the trees of the knowledge of good and evil.

So the readers of FromRome.info who have found the tree of truth in the magisterial and papal documents which clearly show why Prevost was invalidly elected and why he is not the pope, have to start doing something to find a Catholic Bishop who wants to serve Jesus Christ in snatching His Flock back from the hands of the perverse and wicked men who are collaborating with the thief and wolf who is claiming to be the Roman Pontiff.

This is something that you just cannot sit around expecting to happen.

This is something that requires that you simply not just pray about it, as if your prayers are going to bring down an Angel from heaven to enlighten a Bishop.

Rather, you have to write letters to, and then meet with, a Bishop and explain the problem and invite his  participation to solve the problem.

Ask the Bishop to at least come to Rome and speak with the other bishops

And humanly speaking, I do not believe it’s sensible to expect that one Bishop all alone is ever going to make such a decision. But if he at least comes to Rome and speaks with other like-minded Bishops, he might. In fact, in the past, when Rome was held by an anti-pope, it was only when the Catholic Faction comprised several Bishops that any action which was accepted by the Catholic world was accomplished.

As for myself, though I will have the right to call for such an election of a Catholic Pope after September 23, 2025, I will not do so until I know there is at least one Bishop who is a candidate or willing to support a candidate, because a Pope needs to be a bishop, and certainly if there is not even one bishop in favor of the election of a Catholic as pope, it would be useless to elect any man, who is eligible, to be the Roman Pontiff.

So, far, however, I have only 2 readers who took action to contact any bishops. — And neither has yet had any success. Another is planning to write a good number of bishops.

So since it has been 90 days, and since NO ONE has even dared attempt to refute the argument that the Conclave is invalid, all of us, even you the readers, have an even more grave duty to find candidates.

Indeed, if no one can refute the argument that Prevost is not the pope, AND if YOU recognize this, what will you say to Jesus Christ if you do NOT try to convince bishops to come to Rome and support the election of a Catholic pope?

Though it does not matter on what continent the candidate lives, it is going to be a lot easier for a candidate who is a EU resident or citizen, since obviously to be the Bishop of Rome, when the civil authorities may be asked to persecute you, not having the civil right to remain at Rome would make being the Roman Pontiff more difficult, but not impossible.

So the rest of you 550+ readers need to consider this: because I am asking each of you to start to seek out Bishops who would be at least willing to come to Rome to hear a conference about this grave problem in the Roman Church and support one of themselves as a Candidate.

Humanly speaking this is going to make it much easier for anyone elected to accept his election.

And when you find such a Bishop, send me his contact information, making it known to me in a comment here at FromRome.info marked by the words, “Do not publish”.  Thank you! Or, if you have personally corresponded with me in the past, simply contact me directly.

UPDATE: I can now report than more than 108 Cardinals have received the “Letter to a Cardinal about the irregularities in the recent Conclave“. — None of them can claim ignorance any more of having acted illegally and of being involved in a heretical and schismatic conspiracy against Christ, against the Church and against every member of the Church.

UPDATE: Numerous Catholic Bishops who are ordinaries of their dioceses have also received copies of the Letter to a Cardinal, both in the USA and in the United Kingdom, in addition to many of the Bishops of the Roman Province, in Italy.

News

Kokx interviews Mazza & they both fall into numerous errors

A Critical Review by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

I really should not waste my time wading through videos which are full of errors. But as the fake “opposition” “Catholic” grifter media won’t allow the truth to be spoken, but rather attacks it either openly or by a back door in which they only interview persons who misrepresent it or make it appear foolish,* I see that it is necessary to publish a critical review of the above video, wherein Stephen Kokx, recently let go from LifeSite News and Dr. Edmund Mazza, the Catholic historian who nearly always gets it wrong on questions of ecclesiastical jurisprudence or theology, speak about the invalid Conclave of May, 2025.

Right out of the gate, Kokx shows he is a modernist who does not admit the existence of objective truth, when he asks Mazza, “Why do you believe that” Pope Benedict XVI validly resigned.  This is the standard tactic of framing a discussion in the wrong way, to prevent anyone from even daring to admit that there is an objective factual and legal reality about Pope Benedict XVI’s Declaratio and how he acted thereafter.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that Stephen’s surname is Dutch for “Son of Jacob”.

As for Mazza, he responds to this question in entirely the wrong way, with a historical textual journey into the past, rather than offering a juridical answer, the only answer which has any forensic validity to conclude the debate. For in a legal dispute, you begin with your strongest argument, not your weakest.

Then, Stephen calls Mazza a “sedevacantist”, which while Mazza objects initially, naming himself a “interregnumist”, end ups agreeing with, which just gutted his position as objectively rational and put it in the categories of conspiracy theorist or ideologue.

Then, Mazza quotes McCusker, quoting Billot, and attempts to limit the notion of heretics to those who also deny the Magisterium of the Church in addition. But he fails to realize that every pertinacious denial of a de Fide Catholica includes such a denial.

Then Stephen says he is willing to consider hearing out others who say all the popes since Pius XII heretics; doing this in such a away that clearly shows that he is probably a sedevacantist himself.

Then Mazza wrongly states that the Cardinals of antipopes in 1417  were allowed to vote for Martin V by reason of the principle of Ecclesia supplet, which is false, since it was by approval of the previous pope before his death.

Then, Stephen claims that opposition to Prevost’s magisterium is “starting now”, in the first week of August?  Talk about historical revisionism.

Then Mazza says, “papa dubia, papa nulla”, which is incorrect, the correct phrase is “papa dubius, papa nullius” or “nullus”. — A doubtful pope is the pope of no one, or is no pope. — Next he says, “I personally believe that Amoris Laetitia contains heresy”, and thus puts the entire discussion into the frame of relativism, rather than objective truth. — Then he says that “Cum ex apostolatus officio” was published by Pius VI, when it was published by Paul IV.

Then Stephen jumps to say that that Constitution of Paul IV was abrogated in with the first Code of Canon Law in 1917, which is false. — Then Stephen seems to claim that no one else is arguing that Prevost is not the pope, even though he and Mazza know that is a lie.

Then Mazza says “you have to speak the truth”, even though they just agreed to a lie.

Then Stephen calls the antipope, “Leo XIV”, rather than, “Prevost”, just to make clear that he has been faking it throughout this interview. Later he calls him the “predecessor” of Pope Francis, just to make clear he accepts his claims to be legitimate to have been validly elected.

Then Mazza says that those who oppose Leo XIV need to collaborate, even though he and Stephen just showed they are totally in favor of living by lies and collaborate with liars, which is exactly what the Russian author he quotes says NOT to do. — Which is a crazy principle to suggest that all Catholics accept, since it is so masonic.

Then Stephen concludes by saying we have to wait for a “true Catholic Pope”, but says it in a way to make clear that he is waiting for the Cardinals, after the death of Leo XIV, to elect one.

So you can see how this video is a complete and very excellent piece of masonic propaganda, which holds your hand and brings you back into the dominant narrative of lies. — If you want to know where Stephen Kokx is coming from, he took off his mask in this recent interview with Mazza: they are going to pretend to be Alt-Trad inc, but they are really Pro-Prevost Big-Narrative and they are committed to psychological manipulation of their audience to get you hooked back into that. Or, in other words, they are acting just like Globalist Freemasonic bought-and-paid-for intelligence operatives. That is why they appeared out of nowhere, when Francis 2.0 took to the stage.

** For example, in the U.S.A., back in 2008, when there was a very public debate over whether Barrak Obama was eligible to run for the office of President of the United States, since the Constitution of that nation requires that candidates be “natural born citizens” — a definition given by Der Vattel — that is born on the soil of, of two parents who were also citizens at time of the child’s birth; but never interviewed anyone except those who spoke about his place of birth and studiously avoided and avoid to this day, the fact that his father was never a U.S. citizen.

News

Cardinal Eijk is deeply confused about what it means to be Catholic

2 Comments

+ + +

Editor’s Note: If you want to face the reality of the problems in the Church and especially among Cardinal Electors in the recent Conclave, you can start by reading the above article, which summarizes a homily given by Cardinal Eijck, of the Netherlands, at the shrine of Our Lady founded by Cardinal Burke in Wisconsin, USA.

For therein he seems to be claiming that you are a Catholic, not because you accept the traditional Roman Rite liturgy, but because you accept Vatican II.

Here is a prime example of what I called out as the “presumption of right”, which is the fundamental Masonic legal principle, because what the Dutch Cardinal is saying is that a Council which did not teach anything under the note of infallibility nor imposed any discipline under any sanction or penalty is now the very corpus of texts whereby someone is to be defined a Catholic or not.

This notion of the Cardinal, if we reduce it to its principles in the juridical order or theological order, is simply absurd and totally false.

A Catholic by definition, from the first use of this term, means a Christian who accepts and professes the same kind of Christian Faith which is found everywhere the same in the world because it comes from the Apostles of Jesus Christ and is not a human invention.

Thus, only if a Christian breaks from communion or falls into some denial of that sacred deposit of faith, can he reasonably and honestly be said to not be a Catholic.  Certainly, whether you agree with or accept the documents of Vatican II, which themselves declare they are not obligatory, has nothing whatsoever to do with being Catholic or not being a Catholic.

If you are a Cardinal Elector and do not even understand this elementary school Catechism, then it is no wonder that you could not understand how to observe the Papal Law how to elect a pope, Universi Dominic Gregis, or even whether you violated it or not, because you are obviously totally incompetent and should not be allowed even to act as a prelate or a priest, because as soon as you open your mouth you will be spreading error.

The Church’s full authority to teach in the name of Christ does not grant to even Cardinal Electors the authority to redefine what it means to be a member of the Church or a faithful Catholic. Their arrogation of right in violating Universi Dominici Gregis nn. 4 and 33, is merely the consequence of their arrogation of right in saying that Vatican II defines what a Catholic is.

Theologically speaking, I think it is reasonable to suspect that Eijk is not a Catholic, since for some reason he finds annoying the claim that attachment to the form of the Mass imposed by the Bull of Pope Saint Pius V should not be in the definition of what it means to be a faithful Catholic, even though that Bull was promulgated nearly 454 years ago as perpetually binding by the Vicar of Christ, the Successor of Saint Peter, to whom Christ Himself said, Whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound in heave.

Seeing that it has been 60 years since Vatican II and no Vicar of Christ has yet established a canonical penalty which explicitly requires Vatican II to be accepted, it is factually erroneous to claim that it has entered into the definition of what it means to be a Catholic.

Finally, I think it should be obvious that there is something deeply wrong with how a man thinks, if he believes a papal law from 454 years ago means nothing, but a non-papal aw from 60 years ago means everything. This is theology 101, and Canon Law 101. And if Eijk was my student, he would have gotten a 0 our of 10, and a F.

Forensically speaking, such ignorance in an unlettered person is excusable, because in such a case one presumes that they are ignorant. But in a Cardinal elector no such presumption can be argued for his defense, since his status in the Church requires that he know these things.

Here is his biography at the Vatican Website: it seems he does not hold any degrees in theology, since they are not mentioned therein. I assume, at least that he has a STL, licentiate in sacred theology, since that is a requirement for ordination as a priest.

News

International Team of Journalists give up attempt to refute Br. Bugnolo

2 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

In my article about the errors in Ed Condon’s commentary on Universi Dominic Gregis, I wrote:

“But now I have been informed by a very influential Catholic Layman, that a group of journalists are looking for Canon Lawyers to debunk claims that more than 120 Cardinal Electors voting at the same time in a Conclave, cause a Conclave to have no juridically valid result. — I need not say who they are attempting to refute, as that is obvious.”

Recently, I have learned indirectly that this “group” of journalists have given up their task. None could find a canonist, in all the world, who was willing to refute my argument that the Conclave of May 2025 had no juridically valid result, on account of allowing 133 Cardinal Electors to vote at the same time.

I publish this short note for the sake of the historical record, as it represents a forensic milestone in legitimizing the election of a Catholic pope by Apostolic Right.

Other milestones in this endeavor, will be:

  1. August 8, 2025, when the Cardinal electors will have allowed 90 days to elapse after conducting an illegal invalid election, without repenting of their sin, even though the validity of the election was contested publicly in news, within days of the election, published by 3 electronic journals, which regularly feature news about Italy, and despite being warned, reproved and petitioned by written letters to recognize their error.
  2. September 24, 2025, when the Clergy of the Church of Rome, including the Suburbican Bishops having been given legal notice of the invalid election and informed of their rights to act, will have forfeited their right if they have by that date failed to convoke an election by Apostolic Right, even though I have informed them and made myself available to explain the matter to any one or all of them.
  3. November 8, 2025, when 180 days will have passed since the invalid Conclave, by which time, if Prevost does not abdicate and if the clergy of Rome do not take action to have a pope who is Catholic and elected in a juridically valid manner, though being fully informed by a number of articles and over 4000+ emails, that they will have forfeited their right and tacitly consented to granting permission to conduct such an election to the non-clerical Faithful Catholics at Rome.

For more information about the effort by Catholics at Rome to elect a Catholic Pope, as is their right, if the Cardinals fail to do their duty, see HERE.

While the silence or non-action by Catholic Clergy and canonists does not mean anything more than perhaps ignorance and fear of being persecuted, the action of the Cardinal Electors is clearly a sign of total moral and intellectual depravity on their part and the part of the other Cardinals who do not publicly break silence with their conspiracy. Such men deserve, as Pope Paul IV declares, to be stripped of their clerical dignities and cast out of the Church, for they have totally betrayed Jesus Christ, the Faithful and every moral and ethical duty of their offices.

News

WM Review’s Anonymous & illiterate comments on Paul IV’s Bull

1 Comment

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Pope Saint Pius X once decreed that no one without a Doctorate in Theology should be allowed to obtain a Doctorate in Canon Law: a salutary provision, since the entire jurisprudence of the Church is based on revealed principles of theology.

But recent years have demonstrated that the next Catholic Pope should impose even stricter obligations: such as being able to read Latin, having studied Scholastic Philosophy and Logic.

Here, in the above article by The WM Review, there was published back on March 10, 2025, an unsigned article discussing Pope Paul IV’s Constitution “Cum ex apostolatus officio”, of Feb. 15, 1559 A. D. You can find the Latin text and my new translation, HERE. You can find other translations HERE.

A Total Misunderstanding right out of the gate

A holy and learned priest once told me, that after Vatican II always look at the beginning of any lecture or document, because the errors will be there.

And this rule is proven true in the above. For the Anonymous author opens the article by this outstanding blunder:

There are many important questions about this Bull. — For example, it contained provisions of penal law, which stated (among other things) that a heretic could not be elected pope.

I will pass over the glaring logical error of speaking of “Questions” and immediately responding with a “For example”, which is not a question, nor is the document a Bull, rather it is a Constitution.

But I will enumerate the errors…

1. “provisions”

The Constitution contains a lot more than provisions. “Provisions” refer to prescriptions which regard the future. But if you actually read the Constitution, it begins with a renewal of past prescriptions, than thus does not contain only provisions.

2. “of penal law”

Here the author is attempting to characterize the entire Constitution under the category of laws which regard punishment. However, if you read the entire Constitution, this first thing that appears is that it is not a law in the specific sense of the term, since it does not regard one single thing. Nor is does it define a crime and impose a punishment, which is what “penal law” means in its proper sense.

3. “that a heretic could not be elected pope”

But the chief error in the introduction to the above article by Anonymous is this: he asserts that the Constitution states “that a heretic could not be elected pope”!  If you just read the Constitution, in any translation, you can see that this statement is simply false, for the Constitution declares null, void and irritus the election of any Cardinal as Roman Pontiff, if, after his election, he be found to have deivated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into heresy.

No where in the Constitution does it say, that a heretic could not be elected pope.

Here is the exact passage, from my new English translation:

§ 6. Adding, that if at any time it will have appeared that any Bishop, even acting as an Archbishop or Patriarch and/or Primate, or a Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, even, as as promoted, Legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, before his promotion as a Cardinal or assumption as Roman Pontiff, that he has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into any heresy, let the promotion or assumption of him, even accomplished in agreement and unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, stand forth as null, irritus and void,…

What Anonymous is claiming is that the Bull forbade, for example, that the Cardinals elect a man known to be a heretic or deviant in matters of faith. But the text of the Constitution clearly does NOT forbid Cardinals from electing such a man, it merely declares the election of such a man null, irritus and void. — It thus allows the Cardinals full freedom in choosing (electing) any man: it just says that after the election, that the election was null, irritus and void.

The distinction here is a juridical one. And if you cannot think, read Latin, or if you do not know the rules of logic, I admit this distinction might not even appear visible, but it deals with rights: what the Anonymous says regards the rights of the Cardinal and the rights of the candidate. But the Bull does not speak of those rights, it only speaks of how the Church is to regard the juridical value of the election of such a man, after his election.

In other words, the rights of the Cardinals to vote and the rights of the candidate to receive votes and accept his election are in no way prohibited, constrained, prevented, denied, abrogated etc..  However, it does declare that after the election and acceptance of office, the man elected has no rights which the office would otherwise grant him and that the Church must regard his election as non-existent.

This is also easy to understand, this way: that the Anonymous speaks of rights which PRECEDE the acceptance of the office by the one elected, but the Constitution regards the duties of all in the Church about how to regard the election’s juridical value AFTER the election and acceptance of office.

Mistaken notion of heresy

The author of the article and apparently all the authors he quotes speak in a very imprecise manner, which is part of the reason why they do not understand what they are talking about. Because the word “heresy” can refer to many different things: written statements, verbal statements, either in pubic or private, acts of the mind, violations of written laws, by Catholics or non-Catholics etc.. But what Pope Paul IV speaks of is obviously not a post-baptismal pertinacious notorious public contradiction of the faith, judged in tribunal and punished regarding matters which are defined dogmas of the Church. Rather, he is speaking of the sin by which one formally and manifestly denies or deviates from a truth which is de fide Catholica. Indeed, he has to be understood to speak in this manner, because in n. 6, he is speaking, among other things, of a person who is elected Pope during a sedevacante, when no heretic at Rome can be denounced to a Roman tribunal. — Thus in the prescription in n. 6 of his Constitution, Pope Paul IV casts a much wider net than unlettered or ignorant readers might suspect, since he is speaking of any denial of or deviation from the Catholic Faith, in the external forum, which can be discerned by fact or the existence of which is documented or is testified to by witnesses.

Conclusion

The rest of the above article, being founded as it is upon these 3 errors, is simply worthless and praeter rem. The Constitution is clearly disciplinary, not merely penal, because it not only regards what is to be done to heretics, it also grants Catholics rights in regard to heretics (cf. § 7.).

The assertion made several times in the above article, that this Constitution was abolished by the promulgation of the Code of Canon Law of 1917, is also simply false, as I have shown in my previous articles about this Constitution. — A papal Constitution cannot go out of force unless it is named and declared in its entirety to be abolished or substituted. That has never happened with this Constitution of Pope Paul IV, and neither do the Code of Canon Law of 1917 or 1983 say such things.

Consequently, in all things which no other papal law includes or abolishes, this Constitution remains in force.

Thus, since no pope ever published a law which declares the juridical value of an election or promotion to be valid solely by means of the observance of this or that other law, the prescriptions of this Constitution regarding such a determination remain in force, since they were promulgated by the Vicar of the Living God, Who declares, Whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound in Heaven.

To say otherwise is simply heretical. It is also contrary to Pope John Paul II’s law for Papal Elections, Universi Dominic Gregis, n. 4. It is also contradicted by Pope Pius X’s law for Papal Election, which declares that all prescriptions which are not contrary to his law, remain in force (Vacante Sede Apostolica, Title II, Chapter I, n. 29).

Finally, from all of the above it can be seen, that if an author won’t sign his article, then it’s probably not worth reading, and if the author has no ability to read Latin and has not studied jurisprudence, philosophy, or logic, then it’s probably a waste of time to read him on a question of ecclesiastical jurisprudence.

News

ROME: Youth Jubilee is a stunning Flop

Editor’s Note: The propaganda machine moves along, with news sources in Italy claiming from 500 thousand to millions for the Youth Jubilee. However, the reality is that its a big flop. — As you can see from the Italian Newspaper, Il Sole 24, only roughly 120 thousand attended. — To put that in perspective — and to indicate how they might guess 120,000 — Saint Peter’s Square can accommodate 300 thousand standing. — If you can remember the inauguration of the petrine ministry of Pope Benedict XVI, the square was more than full. Even at the funeral of Pope John Paul II, all the streets outside of the piazza were full, and then it was claimed that a million or more were in attendance.

However, for the Youth Jubilee being held presently at Rome, at Tor Vergata, an abandoned public space on the ENE of the City, outside of the belt-road which girds the City of Rome, the media are studiously avoiding showing pictures of the entire crowd, which appears to be even less than the number guessed above, of 120 thousand. — From what I saw, at Tor Vergata there is scarcely 50,000.

More than a million young people were expected to attend

And more than 10 million meals were purchased to provide for them. But determining exactly how many youth attended is becoming as difficult in calculating how many people died in this or that concentration camp, because the actual number has seemingly become a political secret.

UPDATE: Gloria.TV republishes Zenit.org’s propaganda claiming a million people were in attendance, but the photos published THERE show that, when you remove the space which is clearly occupied by sleeping bags, there is more like 50,000 that 1 million. Moreover, the same Zenit admits there were only 28 thousand sacramental confessions, which is keeping with the estimate of 50,000 in attendance. — So the question of the hour is, “Why is Gloria.TV republishing patently false propaganda?”

News

U.S. Senate approves Brian Burch as U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican

3 Comments

Editor’s Note: Brian Burch, who is being described in the press today as from Chicago, was approved as the Ambassador of the United States to the Vatican. While for Catholics this has some importance, it is actually not very important for the United States, which, though it has had full diplomatic relations with the Vatican City State since 1984, does not yet provide its Ambassador with an embassy at Rome: he gets a small office, with a secretary who receives mail. During the previous Trump administration, their Ambassador was rarely even at Rome. — Burch is the co-founder and former CEO of CatholicVote, a political organization which attempts to convince Catholics to vote for one of the two Masonic political parties in the United States.

The U.S. Senate stalled the approval of Trump’s nominee, Brian Burch, until the news broke that Prevost is about to be accused of being involved in sexual abuse. — The optics are horrible, as it implies that members of the U.S. Senate think such a personal qualification is enough to convince them to have an ambassador at the Court of Saint Peter.

Papal Documents

Paul IV’s “Cum ex apostolatus officio” — New English translation

5 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Since there are a plethora of bad translations of this Bull and because of its importance to not only the history of ecclesiastical jurisprudence but to the fact that it has never been abrogated by name — many of which provisions remain in force even unto today, according to what Pope John Paul II declares in his Constitution for the Election of the Roman Pontiff, Universi Dominici Gregis, n. 4 — I have chosen to make an entirely new translation.

This translation I have made directly from one of the most authoritative collections of Papal Bulls, since there are so many errors in the best English translation heretofore published, which attempts to make the text sound eloquent in English and thus obscures many juridical expressions which are customarily used in papal documents.

In addition to the English translation, I have researched the identity of each of the ones signing the Constitution, by using the information at Catholic-Hierarchy.org.  Thus, this edition of the Constitution now has more complete historical information about these holy men of God than any translation heretofore published.

The Latin Text of this Constitution is published below the English translation in PDF format (55 MB).

The three most important juridical principles, which I would draw the reader’s attention to, is that (1) in accord with this bull anyone who is a heretic is to be immediately deposed from office, and the first Catholic who is eligible can take possession of it. Also, that (2) the election of a Cardinal as Pope who beforehand had deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into heresy is declared null, irritus and void. Also, that (3) in heresy or a deviation from the Catholic Faith, that even a Roman Pontiff can be refuted and contradicted. —  This Constitution represents the high point in the Counter-Reformation, and if it had been continuously put into effect, the Church would be suffering nearly none Her present woes and maladies. — May a future Pope republish and renew this heavenly decree.

The Constitution, “Cum ex apostolatus”

Paul IV, Bishop
Servant of the Servants of God

February 15, 1559 A. D.

[Translated from the Latin text of the bull found in  Francesco Gaude’s,
Bullarum Diplomatum et Privilelgio, Turin, 1860, Tome VI, pp. 551-556.]

SINCE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE APOSTOLATE, divinely entrusted to Us, beyond the measure of Our merits, the general care of the Lord’s flock looms over Us, and hence from this We are bound for the sake of their faithful custody and salubrious direction, according to the custom of a Shepherd’s watches-at-night, to assiduously keep vigil, and to more attentively look ahead, so that those, who in this Age, with sins forcing them, as ones striving according to their own prudence, rise up more knowingly and more perniciously than usual against the discipline of the orthodox faith, and, who perverting the understanding of the sacred Scriptures with superstitious and fictive inventions, contrive to rend the unity of the Catholic Church and the seamless tunic of the Lord, may be repelled from Christ’s sheep-pen, lest they continue their magisterium of error, who contemn to be disciples of the truth.

§ 1. We, considering this kind of affair to be so grave and dangerous, that (even) the Roman Pontiff, who on earth acts in the place of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ, and who obtains the plenitude of power over nations and kingdoms, and judges all, as one to be judged by no one in this age, may, if he be found to be deviant from the Faith, be refuted; and that, where there is intended greater danger, one is to take counsel more fully and more diligently lest the pseudo-prophets or others having even secular jurisdiction miserably entrap the souls of the simple, and draw the innumerable people, committed to (their) care and government, in things spiritual and temporal, with them into the perdition and ruin of damnation, and lest it happen at some time that We see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, in the Holy Place;  desiring as much as We are able with God, for the sake of our pastoral charge [munus], to capture the foxes, striving to demolish the vineyard of the Lord, and keep wolves at a distance from the sheep-pens, lest We be seen to be dumb dogs, not wanting to bark, and be lost with the evil field-workers, and be compared to a mercenary.

§ 2. After having held a mature deliberation over these things with Our venerable brothers, the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, with their counsel and unanimous assent, We approve and renew with (Our) Apostolic Authority each and all of the sentences, censures and punishments of excommunication, suspension and interdict and privation and whatever others, had for such (cases) by whatever Roman Pontiffs, Our predecessors, even through their letters extravagantes, or received by the Church of God in sacred councils, and/or published and promulgated  in whatever manner in the decrees and statutes of the holy Fathers, or by sacred canons and constitutions and apostolic ordinances, against heretics and schismatics, and We renew, that they are to be perpetually observed and are to be returned to and ought to be in a flourishing observance, if perhaps they not be in it; and that also whomsoever, who be found or confessed and/or convicted, to have heretofore deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into any heresy or to have joined in or excited or committed schisms, or — which God deign to avert by His Clemency and Goodness to all — who will deviate in the hereafter, or fall into heresy, or join in and/or excite or commit schisms, and be found to have deviated or fallen into, or joined and/or excited or committed or will confess or be convicted (of the same), of whatsoever state, grade, order, condition and preeminence they be, even episcopal, archepiscopal, patriarchal, primatial or in any greater ecclesiastical dignity or honor of the Cardinalate, and of whatever land of the Apostolic See they shine forth, as much perpetual as temporal, by the munus of a legation, and/or even with the authority or excellence of a Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King and Emperor, and We will and decree, that these incur whatever of the aforesaid sentences, censures and punishments.

§ 3. And nevertheless, considering it to be worthy that those who do not abstain from evils by the love of virtue, be deterred from the same by the fear of punishments; and that Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals, legates, Counts, Barons, Marquises, Dukes, Kings and Emperors, ought to be those who ought to teach others also by their own good example, so that they may continue in the Catholic Faith: in prevaricating they sin more gravely than all others, since they not only destroy their very selves, but also draw into the perdition and pit of destruction the innumerable other peoples, entrusted to their care and government or otherwise subject to them, We, from the counsel and assent of the same, by this Our Constitution to be valid in perpetuity, in hatred of such crimes, than which nothing can be greater or more pernicious in the Church of God, do, from the fullness of (Our) Apostolic Authority, sanction, establish, decree and define that, with the sentences, censures, aforesaid punishments remaining in their strength and efficacy, having their effect, each and all Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals, Legates, Counts, Barons, Marquises, Kings and Emperors, who heretofore, as is aforesaid, have been detected or confessed and/or convicted, to have deviated or fallen into heresy, or joined in, excited and/or committed schisms, or (who) in the hereafter will deviate or fall into heresy or join and/or excite or commit schisms, and be detected to have deviated or fallen into heresy or to have joined in, excited or committed schisms, since in this they are rendered more inexcusable than all others, that beyond the sentences, censures and aforesaid punishments, they be by this very thing, without any service of right or fact, entirely and wholly in perpetuity deprived of their orders and cathedrals, even metropolitan, patriarchal and primatial churches and of the honor of the Cardinalate and munus of any legation whatsoever, and even of active and passive voice, of all authority, and monasteries, benefices and ecclesiastical offices, cum cura or sine cura, (pertaining) to secular or regular Orders of any kind, which, they had obtained by whatever concessions and apostolic dispensations, in title, in comendam and administration or in whatsoever manner you like, in which and/or for which they had any right, and even of whatever fruits, returns and annual proceeds over the similar fruits, returns and proceeds reserved or assigned to them, even by Counts, Barons, Marquises, Dukes, Kings and Emperors, and regarding that, concerning all other things, let them be unable and incapable, and let them be held as relapsed and subverted, in all (places) and for all (times), from this very thing, even if they will have abjured heresy of this kind publicly in judgement; nor let them at any time ever be restored, returned, reintegrated or rehabilitated to their pristine state or cathedrals, metropolitian, patriarchal and primatial churches, or Cardinalates and/or other honor or whatever other greater or lesser dignity, or active and/or passive voice, or authority, or monasteries and benefices, and/or counties, baronies, marquisates, duchies, kingdoms and empire, who indeed have not been relinquished to the judgement of secular authority as ones to be punished with due consideration, unless they are to be brought back to the apparent indications of true penitence and the fruits of condign penitence, from the goodness and clemency of this See, in any monastery or other place of regulars, for doing perpetual penitence on the bread of grieving (doloris) and water of mourning (maestitiae). And that for such ones existing by all (titles), of whatever state, grade, order, condition and preeminence, or enjoying whatever dignity, even episcopal, archiepiscopal, patriarchal and primatial or other greater ecclesiastical, and even the honor of the Cardinalate, or by the mundane authority of a Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor, let them be obliged to be held, treated and avoided as such and destitute of all human solace.

§ 4. And let those who pretend to hold the right of patronage or of naming the persons suitable to cathedrals, even the ones metropolitan, and patriarchal or primatial churches or monasteries and/or other ecclesiastic benefices, vacated through a privation of this kind, lest these be exposed to inconveniences of a too long vacancy, but be, rather, snatched from the service to heretics, let the same be conceded to suitable persons, who may faithfully direct their peoples in the paths of justice; (and) let them be bound to present other suitable persons to Us or the Roman Pontiff existing at that time, regarding churches, monasteries and benefices of this kind, within the time prescribed by right and/or under the statute of theirs according to the concordats or compacts begun with the said See; otherwise, with the time of this kind elapsed, let the full and free disposition of churches, monasteries and aforesaid benefices devolve in full right to Us and the aforesaid Roman Pontiff, by this very (fact).

§ 5. And, moreover, let those who will have presumed knowingly in any manner whatsoever to receive and/or defend the same thus found or confessed and/or convicted, or favor them and/or believe or teach their dogmas, incur by this very (fact) the sentence of excommunication, and let them be made infamous, nor let them be admitted by voice, person, writings and/or messenger or any procurator to public or private offices or councils or a Synod and/or Council, general and/or provincial, nor to a Conclave of the Cardinals or to any congregation of the Faithful or to the election of anyone, or to give witness, nor let them be able to be admitted; let them also be unable to write wills and to accede to a succession of an inheritance;  in addition, let no one respond to them upon any business.  Wherefore if they perhaps be judges, let their sentences obtain no firmness, nor let any cases be brought to their hearing; and, if they be lawyers, let their patronage be in no manner received; but if if they be messengers, let the credentials made for them be entirely of no strength and/or moment. And moreover let clerics for each and all churches, even cathedrals, metropolitans, patriarchals and primatials, or dignities, monasteries, benefices and ecclesiastical offices, even, as is preferred, those qualified, obtained for them in any manner you will, and both they and laymen, even, as is promoted, qualified and endowed with the aforesaid dignities, in whatsoever kingdoms, duchies, lordships, fiefs and temporal goods possessed by them, stand forth deprived by this very (fact); and let the kingdoms, duchies, lordships, fiefs and goods of this kind be confiscated and let them be as confiscated, and let them become of the right and property of those, who occupy them first, if they have been obedient in the sincerity of the Faith and in unity of the Holy Roman Church, and under Ours and that of Our successors, the Roman Pontiffs, canonically elected.

§ 6. Adding, that if at any time it will have appeared that any Bishop, even acting as an Archbishop or Patriarch and/or Primate, or a Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, even, as as promoted, Legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, before his promotion as a Cardinal or assumption as Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into any heresy, let the promotion or assumption of him, even accomplished in agreement and unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, stand forth as null, irritus and void, and let neither through his undertaking of the munus, consecration, or subsequent government and administration, possession, or as if, and/or enthronement or adoration of him as Roman Pontiff, or obedience proffered to him by all, and whatever course of time in the aforesaid, be able to be said to be convalidated or be convalidated, nor let it be had as legitimate in any of its parts, and let it be judged to have granted or to grant no faculty for such things to those promoted as Bishops or Archbishops and/or Patriarchs, or assumed as Cardinals and/or Roman Pontiff, in things spiritual and/or temporal, but let each and every thing said, done, accomplished and administered in any manner you will by them, and whatever things follow from these, lack force, and let them grant entirely no firmness nor right to anyone; and let these same thus promoted and assumed by this very (fact), without any declaration needed to be made over them, be deprived of all dignity, position, honor, title, authority, office and power; and Let it be licit, for each and all thus promoted and assumed, if they had not before deviated from the Faith nor were heretics, nor joined in or excited and/or committed schisms:

§ 7. for persons subject, both clerics and seculars, and regulars as even lay, and also Cardinals, even those who were present at the election of the Pontiff (who) deviated beforehand from the Faith or (was) a schismatic, or (who) otherwise consented, and proffered obedience to him, and (who) adored him, even castellans, prefects, captains and officials, even of Our beloved City and while Ecclesiastical Estate, even to the same thus promoted and/or assumed by homage or oath and/or obliged or constrained by caution, by obedience and devotion of the same thus promoted and/or assumed immune, (let it be licit) at any time to withdraw, and to avoid them as warlocks, foreigners, publicans  and hesiarchs; and for the same subject persons by fidelity and obedience of future Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals and Roman Pontiffs canonically elected nevertheless, remaining bound, and, (who) regarding the greater of these, thus promoted and assumed, if they wish to continue their government and administration, (let it be licit) to request the assistance of the secular arm to harass [confusionem] the same thus promoted and assumed; nor let those withdrawing from fidelity and obedience to the same thus promoted and assumed, on the occasion of the aforesaid, be, as tearers of the tunic of the Lord, subject to the vengeance of any censures or punishments.

§ 8.  Not withstanding the Apostolic Constitutions and ordinances, and even the privileges, indults and Apostolic Letters to the same Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates and Cardinals and whatever others, under whatsoever tenor and form, and together with whatever clauses and decrees, even (those) Motu Proprio and ex certa scientia, and from the fullness of Apostolic Authority, or even (those) conceded in Consistory or otherwise in any manner and even (those) approved and renewed over and over, and even contained in the Corpus Iuris, and even those by whatsoever capitular conclaves, even (those) strengthened by an oath or Apostolic confirmation and/or by any other firmness, even sworn by Us ourselves.  All of which, presenting their tenor as had in place of express (mentions) even (those) having been inserted word for word, with these otherwise remaining in their force, We especially and expressly derogate at least this time, with all others whatsoever (remaining) contrary.

§ 9. Moreover, so that the present letters might be brought to the knowledge of all, whom it interests, We will that they or their transcriptions — which We decree should be shown full faith after having been subscribed by the hand of a public notary and furnished with the seal of any person constituted in ecclesiastical dignity — be published and affixed upon the doors of the Basilica of the Prince of the Apostles in the City and of the Apostolic Chancery and in the perimeter of the Campo dei Fiori through any of our couriers, and that a copy of the same be placed therein affixed, and that the publication, posting and placing of an affixed copy of this kind suffice and be had as a solemn and legitimate (announcement), and that no other publication ought to be required or expected.

§ 10. Therefore, let it be licit to entirely no one of men to infringe upon this page of Our approbation, renewal, sanction, statute, wills to derogate, decrees and/or with temerarius daring to contradict (it). If, however, any one presume to attempt this, let him know that he will incur the indignation of the Omnipotent God and His Blessed Apostles, Peter and Paul.

Given at Rome, at Saint Peter’s, in the year of the Lord’s Incarnation, One Thousand, Five Hundred, Fifty-Nine, the fourth year of Our Pontificate.

+ I, Paul, Bishop of the Catholic Church
+ I, John du Bellay, Cardinal Bishop of Ostia
+ I, Rodolfo Pio de Carpo, Cardinal Bishop of Porto e Santa Rufina
+ I, Francesco Pisani, Cardinal Bishop of Frascati
+ I, Federico Cesi, Cardinal Bishop of Palestrina
+ I, Pedro Pacheco de Villena, Cardinal Bishop of Albano
+
+ I, Ranuccio Farnese, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Angelo in Pescheria, the Penitentiary Major, Latin Patriarch of Constantinople
+ I, Tiberio Crispi, Cardinal Priest of Sant’Agata dei Goti, Bishop of Sessa Arunca
+ I, Fluvio Giulio della Corgna, Cardinal Priest of Santo Stefano al Monte Celio, Bishop of Perugia
+ I, Giovanni Michele Saraceni, Cardinal Priest of Sant’Anastasia
+ I, Giovanni Ricci, Cardinal Priest of San Vitale, Bishop of Chiusi, Italy
+ I, Giacomo Puteo, Cardinal Priest of Santa Maria in Via
+ I, Girolomo Dandini, Cardinal Priest of San Marcello, Bishop of Imola
+ I, Bernardino Scotti. Cardinal Priest of San Matteo in Merulana, Archbishop of Piacenza
+ I, Diomede Carafa, Cardinal Priest of San Pier Damniani ai Monti di San Paolo, Bishop of Ariano
+ I, Scipio Rebiba, Cardinal Priest of Santa Pudenziana, Archbishop of Pisa
+ Jean Suau, Cardinal Priest of San Giovanni a Porta Latina, Bishop of Mirepoix, France
+ Giannantonio Capizucchi, Cardinal of San Pancrazio, Bishop of Lodi
+ I Taddeo Gaddi, Cardinal Priest of San Silvestro in Capite
+ I Virgilio Rosario, Cardinal Priest of San Simeone Profeta, Bishop of Spoleto
+ I, Francisco Mendoza Bobadilla, Cardinal Priest of Sant’Eusebio, Bishop of Alexandria
+ I, Clemented’Olera, Cardinal Priest of Santa Maria in Ara Caeli
+ I Guido Ascanio Sforza di Santa Fiora, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Maria in Via Lata
+ I, Niccolò Caetani di Sermoneta, Cardinal Deacon of Sant’Eustachio
+ I, Giacomo Savelli, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Maria in Cosmedin
+ I, Girolamo Recanati Capodiferro, Cardinal Deacon of San Giorgio in Velabro, Bishop of Saint Jean du Maurienne, France
+ I, Innocenzo Ciocchi del Monte, Cardinal Deacon of Sant’Onofrio
+ I, Luigi Cornaro, Cardinal Deacon of San Teodoro
+I, Carlo Carafa, Cardinal Deacon of Sainti Vito, Modesto and Crescenzia
+ I, Alfonso Carafa, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Maria in Domnica, Archbishop of Naples
+ I, Vitellozzo Vitelli, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Maria in Portico, Bishop of Citta di Castello
+ I, Giovanni Battista Consigliere, Cardinal Deacon of Santa Lucia in Septisolio

As God is My Help

Given on the 15th of February, 1559, in the 4th of (our) Pontificate

News

Cardinal Prevost has horrible skeletons in his closet

5 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, whom the Cardinals illegally elected as Pope Leo XIV on May 8, 2025, is about to be publicly accused of sexual abuse. The investigation is being done by an international group of journalists who are now involved in seeking to contact other possible victims.

FromRome.Info from even before the Conclave was held called out Prevost as a serial pedophile cover-up artist. I will not be surprised at all, therefore, that there are numerous victims, since it is impossible for a man of God without this vice to have a history of protecting pedophiles, who victimized both boys and girls, in both North and South America.

I personally counsel all victims who might want to come forward not to speak exclusively with a single person but to simultaneously distribute your story to multiple independent journalists while concealing your personal location, because Prevost is part of an international mafia of sexual abusers, and it should be presumed that he has mafia contacts who would be able and willing to retaliate.

We ask our readers to pray that if anyone has been abused in any manner by this man that they come forward as an act of justice for the whole Church, so that he might be prevented from promoting and covering-up further abusers.

FromRome.Info will keep its readers notified of further developments in this story, which is about the investigation of abuse, not abuse. FromRome.info is not in contact with any victims, and as of the date of the publication of this report, has no knowledge of any victim or potential victim. Therefore, we ask journalists to not contact us for such information.

UPDATE: It appears that Father Bob, while in Peru, had the habit of visiting young boys in families where there was no father figure, where he would gain the confidence of the boys and be their friends. This is a very disturbing prelude to you know what.

News

Fitts speaks with Dr. Jane Ruby about the Great Poisoning, Parts I & 2

Editor’s Note: Like Ian Carroll and Joe Rogan, Catherin Fitts believes that humans participate in intelligence, which is an old error of the Arabic Neo-Platonists. Do not buy into such junk. The truth is that each of us has the natural power of intellection as part of our immortal soul. And while it is true that those who believe in Jesus Christ receive more light to understand certain things, we have from God a more basic natural light to understand all things. To attribute these gifts to matter or something which is not our Creator is a grevious falsehood which leads to spiritism and the demonic.

News

Things Jesus Never said, in regard to the Conclave of May, 2025

4 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Sometimes you have to say the ridiculous to make dishonest people realize what kind of folly they are involved in. And as regards the Conclave of May of this year of our Lord Two-Thousand and Twenty-Fives, there is a lot which could be said, seeing that the Cardinals violated not only the Papal Law of Pope John Paul II, which only allows 120 Cardinals maximum to vote at any one given time, but also that of Pope Paul IV, who declared invalid the election of any Cardinal who had previously deviated from the Catholic Faith.

So, since there is a contemporary practice in regard to false beliefs of some Christians, which begins, “Things Jesus Never Said”, let’s go with that, since He is the touchstone of the Truth.

Things Jesus Never Said about the Conclave of May 2025

  1. Whatsoever the Cardinals do on Earth, is O. K. in Heaven.
  2. Whatever the Cardinals Electors get away with doing, is now O. K. in Heaven.
  3. Thou shalt not have any strange gods before me, except for Cardinal Electors.
  4. All men have sinned and have been deprived of the glory of God, except Cardinal Electors.
  5. No one can be saved, unless they believe in the Cardinal Electors.
  6. Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbors, unless the Cardinal Electors have approved of it.
  7. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, if the Cardinals say it’s O. K..
  8. Go make disciples of every nation, baptizing them and teaching them to observe all that the Cardinal electors say is O. K..
  9. Thou shalt not lie, unless you are a Cardinal Elector, then you can if you want to.
  10. It is impossible to be saved unless you always agree with everything Cardinal Electors say.
  11. I and the Cardinal Electors are one.
  12. Before Abraham was, there were Cardinal Electors.
  13. Blessed are you if you believe everything the Cardinal Electors say and do, for then you shall inherit the Kingdom of Heaven.
  14. For God so loved the Cardinal Electors, that He sent His only Son to agree with whatever they might so, so that they might be saved.

I could go on for hours, but I think you get the point. It has been 80 days since the illegal Conclave was held, and the facts are there for all who see. Those who refuse to admit the Conclave was invalid are involved in calling Jesus a liar, inasmuch as they are despising papal laws, about which Jesus declared, “Whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound in Heaven”. — And for all such persons there awaits only eternal damnation, because all their prayers are in vain, all their communions are in sacrilege, all their acts of piety serve Satan, and all their protestations to be faithful Christians are nothing but a godless mendacious grift.