Category Archives: Editorials

Salza & Siscoe’s Theory of Universal Acceptance is Masonic

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Everyone by now knows of the absurd strawman argument of John Salza and Robert Siscoe. It goes like this. I will mark the argument here and there with NDT, to indicate the terms which need to be defined with precision if the argument means anything at all:

The whole (NDT) Church (NDT) immediately (NDT) after the election of Jorge Mario Bergoglio accepted (NDT) him as the pope.

Universal (NDT) acceptance (NDT) of a man as pope is an infallible (NDT) sign (NDT) of his legitimate election.

Therefore, it is infallibly (NDT) certain (NDT) that Bergoglio is the pope and that his election was legitimate (NDT).

There are 11 points in the argument which can be changed at any moment to avoid objections, by simply redefining terms. That, in itself, is Masonic, because it is a fundamental rule of the Lodge to speak in ambiguous terms. But let us examine how the ideological structure of their argument is also masonic.

Infallibility

Infallibility according to Catholic Theology is a natural property of the true God alone. No creature by nature is infallible. Infalliblity means the inability to fail. It is the characteristic of a substance as regards its action.

However, truth itself is infallible, because truth is defined by Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas in a way which makes its infallibility necessary. Here I speak of truth as the truth of a proposition, because of such truth Saint Thomas says the definition is:  the adequation of a created intellect with the object known, or in other words, the right and just relationship between a knowing mind and the think known by that mind.

Examples of infallibly true statements are 1+1 = 2, and The Sun is the star of our solar system. Infallibility pertains to all propositions which regard the natural or supernatural world, when they are true in what they affirm. This is the wonderful way in which Our Creator, Who alone is infallible, has enabled us, fallible creatures, to draw near to Him, through knowing and accepting truth.

But men by nature are not infallible. Hence men can err or fail. Nor are we fallible in the knowledge of things. We can err. We can err also in what we believe is true on the basis of what other men tell us.  Thus human opinion based on things like human testimony is the most fallible of all kinds of knowledge.

But for John Salza and Robert Siscoe the universal acceptance by the Church of a man as pope is an infallible sign that his election was legitimate!

I hope you can see the ontological problem in that assertion. It moves infallibility from God and true propositions to men. And that is totally Masonic.

7 Slippery aspects of the argument

A common sense Catholic responds by saying, the Church does not teach or approve of such an absurd theory, as can easily be seen: because the Church has laws which say when and how a pope is validly elected and when and how a man elected is not legitimately such. Now the Church would be double faced if she taught a theory which said, there is no need for laws on papal elections, there is only need that everyone accept a pope. Also, Holy Mother Church recognizes as valid popes many men who were elected according to the rules but who were never universally accepted during their pontificates (e.g. the Roman Popes during the Great Western Schism). Thus the Church has never resorted to universal acceptance as a sign of a valid election.

It also does not make sense. Because if the election was legitimate, who cares if everyone accepts it or not? The truth of legitimacy is in an entirely different order of knowledge than that of popular opinion. Every Catholic can understand that. But Masons reject that. Truth for them is only at the ballot box, if even then. Moreover, the Masonic Lodge which seeks to overthrow God and all Monarchies in the name of exalting the common man and the masses would find such a trick delightful. It’s their own world view. Universal Acceptance basically is another way of knowing truth, one which the Church rejects in Canon 332 and in the Papal Law, Unversi dominici gregis. Therefore, whence comes this appeal to Universal Acceptance against or in spite of the laws and teaching of the Church? Such an appeal is gnostic and masonic.

Second, the word universal in Latin has a proper sense of each and everyone. However, I do not think any historian has every proven that after any papal election each and every Catholic in the world accepted the man elected as the pope. John Salza and Robert Siscoe evade this obvious fault by inventing a special meaning for universal: morally universal, by which the mean, nearly everyone. This nearly can be expanded as necessary for any arguent. To John Siscoe in debate yesterday, I mentioned I know 13 persons who never accepted it. Siscoe responded that absolute universality is not necessary. And he claimed their dissent was secret, so nobody knew about it. So universal, for S & S, is what they want it to mean. And as such, the theory itself means nothing, but what they say. So in effect, it means that you must accept them as infallible arbiters of who is the pope. And that is masonic.

Third, we come to Sisco and Salza’s idea of acceptance. They never really define it. Without a strict definition, their theory means nothing at all. Does it mean I do or do not like his face, his theology, his attitude, his episcopal lineage and therefore I hold that he is or is not the pope? Of if a Catholic holds that he is de facto pope but not the legitimate pope, has he accepted? Immediately upon the publication of the Declaratio by Pope Benedict scholars said it was invalid and that an antipope would be elected in the upcoming conclave. There was no acceptance, there, in any defined manner. Also, if I hear the news claim so and so was elected pope, does that mean that I accepted it. Does not acceptance mean examining the facts of law and history and then making a judgement? S & S seem to imply that acceptance has nothing to do with Canon 41 or truth, it is merely listening to the TV. But that is not a Catholic concept of acceptance, but it is very masonic. I guess the next step will be to announce that their candidate is the pope on TV and then dispense with any Conclave or Canon Law. How convenient!

Fourth, we come to Salza and Siscoe’s concept of Church. As every Catholic knows, the Church is one thing, and its members another. This touches upon the formal definition of the Church and the material definition of the Church. As you will see, Salza and Siscoe will play with these two aspects. Arguing in their major premise, regarding the principle of universal acceptance, using the formal definition, but arguing in their minor premise as regards the facts of the present case, in the material sense. I pointed this out in my article on Siscoe’s triple shell game. If you do not hold Bergoglio was the pope, then S & S will just put you outside the definition of the Church which they happen to be using at the moment. They play this game especially with dogmatic facts. A dogmatic fact regards the formal definition of the Church, but they assert human opinions which regard the material definition of the Church as dogmatic facts. And that is masonic.

Fifth, we come to S & S’s concept of immediacy. When does the vague universality of the vague acceptance need to take place. In one minute, in one day, in one week, in one month, in one year? They do not say. I think it would not be unreasonable to speculate that after every legitimate election, there is a delay even when there is canonical acceptance. It is never immediate. There are missionaries in remote regions of the past who never knew the name of the pope, because he died before the news arrived. I guess there was no infallible sign of their being the true pope, according to S & S! The level of absurdity here is manifest. They set up another criterion for true popes. And that is masonic.

Sixth, we come to S & S’s concept of certitude. This is closely allied with the concept of infallibility. We can be certain that a truth is true, because truth is of itself infallible and the assertion of truth is infallible. Certitude as quality of notion does not apply to opinion, because opinion by definition is the assertion of a thing with knowledge that its contradiction is a possibility. But human recognition of a man as the pope, when based solely on human testimony without any facts of history or law being established, is the most uncertain kind of news: it is common opinion! To say that any news in the modern world is certain, would take a very strict definition of terms, especially since journalists and news outlets are notorious for their mendacity. But to say opinion is certain is simply a contradiction of the very definition of the word. But contradiction and double speak is the very hallmark of the Freemason, who is told he can lie to everyone except a superior level mason. And that is masonic.

Seventh, we come to S & S’s concept of legitimacy. Legitimate means done in accord with a right which inheres in the subject by nature or grant. It differs from legal, in that it does not require positive law. It differs from lawful, because its measure is not in accord with the terms of any law. Of papal elections some were said to be legitimate others canonical others legal.  This is because throughout history the election of popes was at the beginning done in accord with Apostolic right, as I have previously mentioned, and since there was no law or canon about how to do such things, a legitimate election was every election in which the part of the Church of Rome regarded as valid immediately, and which all of the Church of Rome, long afterwards regarded as valid, even if there were rival claimants at the time. When the Councils established canons for episcopal elections, then some papal elections were said to be canonical or uncanonical in accord with whether the canons were followed. However, of some of these elections, the Church has regarded as valid and legitimate men who were uncanonically elected. This is because the Church of Rome has never accepted any law or canon established by Councils held outside of her jurisdiction as binding on Her ability to elect the Roman Pontiff. THIS IS IMPORTANT, and this explains why many theologians speak of universal acceptance of a papal election despite whether it was canonical or not. Because in such a case they are not speaking of obligatory canons, just customarily observed canons. Finally, some papal elections can now be legal or illegal, because Pope John Paul II published a law on papal elections which regulates what the College of Cardinals should do in such matters. Violations of this law make an election illegal and invalid. Elections perfectly in harmony with the norms of this law make an election legal and valid. Such elections are also legitimate, when they are legal and valid, because the Cardinals have the right to act lawfully. — Thus we can see that the theory of universal acceptance, by the mere fact that it is employed by S & S now, when it arise in ages past to be applied to times when there was no papal law for elections, only canons or the lack of them, is misapplied. It is anachronistic, in the technical sense of the term, because it does not apply to elections governed by papal laws. This is especially true when the current Papal Law EXPRESSLY says that no election which violates it is valid regardless. The current high bar of validity and legitimacy is what is lawful, not what is accepted. To reject that is masonic, because the freemason rejects Papal authority in principal.

Salza and Siscoe’s Theory as applied is Masonic

In summation, I would say that John Salza and Robert Siscoe’s theory, as applied, is Masonic for the following reasons:

  1. It rejects the binding norms of the Papal Law of Pope John Paul II which alone determine when a man elected by the College of Cardinals in a Conclave is legitimate, legal and lawful, excluding all other things as signs or causes of the validity.
  2. It is founded upon badly or poorly defined terms which can be held to mean whatever you want them to mean on any occasion.
  3. It places infallibility in human opinion rather than in God and His words to Peter: Whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound also in Heaven, words which obviously apply to all papal laws on elections.
  4. It ignores all facts of history and places the criterion of truth outside of historical fact, thus divorcing truth from reality.
  5. It is designed to force Catholics to accept whatever the Masonic Lodge in the Vatican says is true, regardless of historical facts or papal laws, and this is in accord with the Masonic principle that the higher lodges rule the lower lodges.
  6. It effectively makes the facts of a papal election a gnostic deposit of knowledge which no Catholic who is not initiated has the right to examine or seek to know.
  7. Salza and Siscoe use the theory as Freemasons, because as I have experienced on several occasions, if you point out errors in it, they response: You do not understand what universal acceptance is and then proceed to point out how you have not the right knowledge to comprehend it, as if you were some sort of intellectual inferior or non-initiate. At times they say the sign is an effect not a cause, but they treat it as a cause not an effect. Oh, and they ignore all examination of legal doubt.

John Salza admits he joined the Lodge. He also admits that Masons do not publicly contest his writings. I do not know if Robert Sisco is a member or has been a member. I do know that it is a rule of the Lodge never to argue in public with another member. I also know that many converts from non Catholic religions never quite reject some of the errors they learned there.

I must conclude, therefore, that Sicoe and Salza’s theory of Universal Acceptance is masonic because it inverts the notions of infallibility, universality, acceptance, Church, legitimacy, and plays games with the notions of immediacy and certitude. And just as everything which is of Hell, inverts the order of things which God has established, their theory reflects a diabolic way of thinking about the papal claims of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, whose own intelligence officer admits is a Freemason. Is that the real reason that Salza and Siscoe seek so zealously to defend his claim to the papacy? To defend a brother in the Lodge?

I hope this essay of mine own, helps both John Salza and Robert Siscoe see their errors and repent of them. But also, so that all the faithful see their theory for what it is.

______________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a 1805 water color of a rite of initiation into the Masonic Lodge at Paris.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

 

The theory of Universal Acceptance is contrary to Faith, Law and Fact

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Over at True and False Pope, Mr. Salza has published a reply to Ann Barnhardt full of vile insults, which is most unworthy of any man.

I do not usually comment on blogs, but I decided to join the fray. After soliciting from Mr. Siscoe a clear definition of the theory of Universal Acceptance, I show why that Theory in this case is contrary to Faith, Law and Fact. Here is my reply:

There are major problems with your theory and its application.

First of all, no theory of interpretation trumps canon law, because if it did, then Jesus Christ would be a liar Who said of Peter and the laws of all his successors, Whatsoever you bind upon Earth, shall be bound also in Heaven. Thus if a man were accepted by all in the Church as the pope, when however he had no legitimate claim to the papacy because of the non compliance with any papal law regarding becoming pope, then Christ would be proved a liar.

Therefore, to assert such a theory is applicable in such a circumstance is contrary to the Faith. Therefore, in such a case, if you want to use it, I would have to conclude you are a blasphemer and a heretic, and also a schismatic, since you would thereby adhere to a false pope.

The other problem with your theory is that in the present case, there never was universal acceptance. Bishop Gracida never accepted the renunciation or the election. And I just met about 12 persons at a Conference here in Rome, over the weekend, who told me they did not accept Bergoglio the moment he came out of the Loggia and said, Buona Sera!

The use of this theory of Universal Acceptance in the case of a papal renunciation has been abrogated explicitly by Canon 332 §2, which said that the acceptance of a renunciation by anyone whomsoever is not required for its validity. Therefore, it is not the cause of its validity, nor a sign of its validity. Therefore, to resort to it in the present case is to be a rebel against the papal law, and thus to be condemned by Unam Sanctam, because it is a grave duty of the Faith that we be subject to papal laws and to the true pope.

Finally, you resort to this theory of Universal Acceptance because you manifestly reject to accept the norm of Canon 332 §2 which defines the essential juridical act as a renunciation of munus, which never occurred. Nor can you legitimately read munus where ministerium is written in the Declaratio, because as Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori says in his tract on Interpretation of Law in his Theologial Moralis, that such an interpretation would require a positive additional act of the lawgiver. But such a requirement means the original act is not clear in itself. And as Mons. Arrieta of the Pontifical Council of Legal Texts affirmed for me on De. 11, 2019, such a renunciation which is not clear in itself would be invalid.

Please note, that I have used no ad hominems in my response to you. Unlike the comments you publish here which hurl them at me.

* * *

I add here, not at the other blog, that the use of the theory of Universal Acceptance is the last resort of the willfully blind. Because everyone trained in law knows that the validity of a juridical act has nothing to do with whether it is accepted as valid or not.

I will admit, here, however, that I only read True or False Pope Blog, because the authors of it admitted in substance that they did solicit the financial support for the Fatima Center and that the requirement of the donor was that the center be purged of anyone who held the opinion of Father Gruner, that Benedict was still the Pope.

So, here, I will ask Mrs. Siscoe, Salza and Ferrara a public question: Did any of that financial support arrive in your pockets directly or indirectly? And was it given before you adhered to the theory of universal acceptance?

Finally, it does not surprise me that the authors of the Book True or False pope cannot comprehend the present Church Crisis, in which we have both a True AND a False pope. When you begin with a false premise which you use as a principle of epistemology, then you have blinded yourself from the outset.

__________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screenshot of the blog mentioned in this article and is used here in accord with fair use standards for editorial commentary.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

In Italy there is Universal non-Acceptance

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

In Italy, wherever I go, I either meet Catholics who recognize that Bergoglio is not the pope. Some knew he was not the pope the day he was elected, as soon as he said, “Good Evening!” instead of imparting the Apostolic Blessing. Others recognized it when he refused to call himself the Roman Pontiff, and styled himself merely, Bishop of Rome. Others recognized it when he went to live at Santa Marta and not in the Papal Apartments. Others, when he began to preach Marxism instead of Christ.

Universal non-Acceptance

There is no universal acceptance in Italy. I would say that about 15% of practicing Catholics consider Bergoglio to be the true pope. That would not even win you an election!

And since according to some, universal acceptance is an infallible sign of a legitimate papal election, we must conclude that the election of Bergoglio was illegitimate for some reason.

Universal Acceptance

However, if you consider what Catholics think, here in Italy, once they are shown the actual text of the Declaratio and the actual text of the Canon on papal resignations, then you would have to say there is Universal Acceptance, however, but not the way Sisco or Salza want the reality to be. Because in such cases, and I have had more than a dozen occasions to test this as an Anthropologist, there is 100% unanimity that Benedict XVI is still the pope.

So, the next time you hear any supporter of Bergoglio, who cannot give a canonical argument in response to the question, Why is the Declaratio of Pope Benedict canonically effective of his loss of the petrine munus? and they take refuge in the theory of Universal Acceptance, remind them of the facts and the reality.

A Challenge to a Public Debate

I have challenged publicly the entire Catholic world to debate the Renunciation for more than a year, I think. No one has ever taken up the challenge. This is because they have neither the facts of history, nor of law, nor even the principles regarding the interpretation of laws on their side. A Public Debate would disprove their position logically, canonically, legally, philosophically, theologically and even on the principle of Universal Acceptance. And their refusal to debate me proves it.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

Dear Priests, be disciples not Pastors of the truth!

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

There are two things, which in my youth, greatly attracted me to attend mass: that at Church you could receive Jesus Christ in the Most Blessed Sacrament, and that at Church you could hear the Truth preached.

I did not yet recognize how important and great those 2 gifts were, for I just assumed everyone in the world was a Catholic, and did not know even of the existence of Anglicans until I was about 12 years old.

But with the passing of years, I have grown to appreciate those 2 gifts more an more, even though one of them is disappearing and rarely found anymore.

I speak here of the preaching of the truth.

The vocation to be a priest, is a call from God to be an Ambassador of Jesus Christ, first and foremost. I like this analogy because it makes it clear why a priest should open his mouth and what the purpose of his preaching and teaching should have. It also indicates clearly Whom he represents and the authority of his august office.

I read in a book in my youth, somewhere, that when the priest enters the Church at the start of Mass, one should recognize that Jesus Christ has entered the Church just behind His Ambassador and that He has come to offer His Sacrifice for us and with us.

And when a priest ascends the pulpit he preaches in the Name of Jesus.

Things were not so bad in the Church when I was young, you often heard homilies which touched your heart, and pricked your conscience. But with the passing of the years we faithful have been subject more and more to blather. And it is not only in the English speaking world, it is just as common even in Italy.

All this does not have to do with the priesthood. And not even with the abilities of the priests, all of whom, as far as I know, are quite cogent and precise outside of Mass, when they speak. It has to do with the growing persecution and ideological control of priests by their superiors. More and more is declared intolerable or insufferable. There is simply a long list of do’s and don’ts for each priest when he speaks.

And the problem comes from fellow priests, because you can see that the best priests preach most clearly and fervently when there are no other priests present.

We have to pray for priests and offer the acceptance of personal sacrifices to obtain graces for them, because they are in an awful battle.

This is why, though many priests recognize that Bergoglio is a heretic and that Benedict did not resign according to the norm of law, that they do not speak about the matter, and flee any discussion of it.

And part of the reason they do this, is because we the faithful are not strong backers of good priests. Priests know that no one or very few will remember them or help them if their superior transfers them to another parish, overnight. They know that the level of punishment and persecution they will receive will increase 100 fold if they even admit the kind of abuse they are receiving from their Bishop or fellow priests.

For these reasons, a good priest today has before his eyes Christ in His Passion whether he meditates on that during prayer or not, because as soon as he leaves the privacy of his own room, he knows that whatever he says or does can and will be used against him by wicked clergy.

I know a lot of good priest who for things far less than naming Pope Benedict XVI in the canon of the Mass were punished with loss of faculties or removal from the ministry. This is why so many priests are trying as hard as they can in public to pretend there is nothing substantially wrong with the Vatican.

A priest, however, has to be a disciple of the truth, not a pastor of the truth. That is, he has to follow Jesus, the Truth, and not try to shepherd truth to where he wants it to go.

As the Saints say, a priest is never alone. He goes to heaven with thousands of souls, or he goes to hell with thousands of souls. He cannot escape that reality.

As a Franciscan brother who lives by divine providence, and who decided more than 20 years ago to trust in God, I can assure priests that if they make the heroic decisions, God and His holy Angels and His Blessed Mother will be there for them, even if many laity are not. It is just impossible, that God would help a Franciscan brother more than a priest. Therefore, if He has helped me, he will help you.

Because, that is the one thing that only a good priest has, which a bad priest does not have. Heroism for priests consists in acting on that belief.

___________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a photo by Br. Bugnolo of the Chapel Crypt of the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, where the Cardinals and Bishops who served there up until c. 1930 are buried. It is found in the Cemetery of the Verano, here at Rome.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

The true ‘spirit’ of Vatican II, at last, exposed

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The average Catholic never imagined the depth of depravity and mendacity which could exist in the hearts of so many priests, Bishops and Cardinals. But at last the masquerade has ended and the perps are removing their masks.

There is much to be lamented in the Church since Feb. 28, 2013. But at last we know who has been behind the Aggiornamento, the Liturgical Renewal, and everything which is Vatican II.

As someone trained in Anthropology and who has done some translating from Latin to English, I always kept a part of my mind on neutral, presuming that there was some sort of good intention behind Vatican II: such as helping everyone understand easier the things of God. I readily recognize the problems the average person has in understanding Latin and in not being able to hear the teaching of the Church in the Liturgy in their own language on a daily basis. I wrote off the bad translations as ignorance, for the entirety of my adult life conceding only here or there, that bad will must have played a role.

But the universal acceptance and praise for Bergoglio’s advent by the Hierarchy and Clergy have finally convinced me that I was naive and overly trusting.

Bergoglio is the quintessence of everything wrong in the Church and of everything which needs to be excised from the Mystical Body of Christ. The Church has no need of fakers. There are plenty of opportunities in the secular world for men like that.

It is with Bergoglio that I finally understand why so many priests have hated me, throughout my life for simply believing the Catholic Faith. I remember my days in Minor Seminary, when I was accused of being rigid for only receiving on the tongue. I remember my days in the Monastery, when I was scoffed at for keeping the Rule. And I cannot forget the student from Steubenville University, at a ProLife March, who told me that the desire to be a saint was a sign of serious egomania.

I believe the Catholic Faith, everything in it. I have the utmost respect and reverence for the Catholic Priesthood and for the Episcopal dignity. But I do not have this by my experience. It is God’s gift, because, I can honestly say, I have never known personally a priest who inspired me to be holy, to follow Jesus, or to keep the Faith. I learned all these things from Scripture and the lives of the Saints, and the example of my parents’ simple unquestioning faith.

But with Bergoglio, its obvious to everyone, that the real reform in the Church which was necessary and which is necessary, is the Catholic priesthood. As Ann Barnhardt suggested the other day, the vineyard is so overgrown with rot, that the Church needs to start clean.

The true spirit of Vatican II is at last exposed: it is one of disbelief, hypocrisy, double-dealing, deceit, trickery, subterfuge, manipulation, pedophilia, sodomy, sacrilege, hatred of God, hatred of Our Lady, hatred of law and all honesty. It is the spirit of the clerical careerist who never had faith, of the Freemason, of the satanist and idolater.

The way to respond to Bergoglio, then, is jettisoning totally the propaganda of Vatican II. We need a Council of Trent reboot!

I say, “Council of Trent” and not “Pius XII” or “Saint Pius X”, because we need to return to the high ground of Catholicism, where the proposals come entirely from the bosom of the Faith and have nothing of the errors of modernity, modernism and marxism, and are founded on the most sober and sane doctrine of the Scholastics.  We have to get out of the idea that the Liturgy needs to be reformed or that progress is the natural course of history. And get into the idea that the clergy need to be reformed according to the image of Trent. And those who do not want to return to that Catholic norm: I think the salvation of souls requires that they be booted out of every institution in the Church, if they will not repent.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

They are not really men

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Perhaps I am old fashioned. I was raised to address everyone by their surname, and am old enough to know that it is improper to call the local priest by his first name. When I grew up men wore pants, which did not fall down as you walked along. Men grew side burns and did not use body spray or lotion.

And men were men of their word. If they made a promise they kept it.

Somewhere, however, some men became like 16 year-old conceited girls who rage at everyone else because of envy or jealousy or just egomania. I suppose that social media brings out the worst kinds of people, because if you acted the way some persons act on Social Media, but did it in the real world, you would return home with a bloody nose on a daily basis.

A real man, intellectually, is one who acts similarly. He knows the most unmanly thing to do is insult one’s opponent. You defeat yourself by insulting others. Your win the argument only by reasons which are better formulated and arranged than your opponent, and which are in conformity with reality.

But men who are not men begin with the insults. They more impotent they are the deeper their insults go. About the worst thing you could do in this regard would be by beginning to say of your opponent that he is not really married to his wife, he is only shacked up with her. The ring on his finger is just pretense.

I really do not know, therefore, how anyone can even consider such an insult as worth repeating. As a consecrated person, respect for the things of God is a grave duty. There would be no much point in praying daily if you do not respect God. To say of a consecrated person that he is a faker is about as low as you can go on the scale of insults. Its right up there will calling Jesus Christ a worker of prodigies with the help of devils.

I pity such men, for they are not really men.

I am a consecrated person of private vows who keeps the Regula Bullata of Saint Francis. I did a canonical novitiate as a religious brother in the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, and after separating from them in 1996, I have kept my vows with the tacit or explicit permission of the local Ordinary (Bishop). My current Bishop is Pope Benedict XVI, since I reside at Rome. I wrote him in 2012 and asked his permission. He granted it tacitly and thanked me for the copies of my books which I sent him.

“Brother” is the term Saint Francis uses for all who keep his Rule. It is also the common term for a consecrated person who is male, in the Franciscan tradition. You can call me anything you like and use every insult in the book, but sadly that does not prove anything I say is not the truth. It would be more manly of you to simply disagree and say, “I will try to think of a counter argument. Good day”.

I suppose it irks some men who do not give a Bleep about Jesus Christ, that I wear a tunic and sandals as He did, because the Rule of Saint Francis obliges me to do so. But what can I say of them? Religion is not in appearances. Appearances do not make you holy. So it is the most unreasonable thing to envy another person for them. Someone who wears the religious habit or the priestly habit to look holy, has serious problems. True men only wear these things because of the obligation of their state in life.

This reminds me of the problem some men have with reality and perfection. To them, there is no reality but what their superiors concede them, and there is no perfection but in doing what superiors ask of them. Visible superiors that is. I was invited once to a meeting of Liberation and Communion, here in Italy, and one man asked what I did. I said was I translating Saint Bonaventure’s Commentarium in Quatuor Libros Sententiarum from the critical edition into English. And he retorted, “Who asked you to do that?” I said, “No one.” And he said, something like, “But how can you presume to do that, if no one has commissioned you to do it?” And what I said to him, I cannot remember. But, I could have just as well said, “Since when do you need permission to read a book!” He thought that was utter presumption.

This approach riles the proponents of the Aggiornamento. To them you need their permission to believe in Jesus Christ and their permission to follow Jesus Christ and their permission to pray in any given way to Jesus Christ. The thought that somewhere someone might be practicing the Catholic faith in a way that they cannot control makes them sleepless at night. They actually think that the entire obedience of every Catholic belongs to themselves. That is why they cannot stand, even on social media, that anyone have an opinion which they do not sanction.

I find such a mentality aberrant among priests. But it is inexplicable among laymen.

_______________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a detail of a photo taken by Br. Bugnolo of the Statue of Don Juan of Austria, Captain of the Catholic Armada at the Battle of Lepanto, in the Piazza of Don Juan, at Messina, Sicily, the ancestral town of Br. Bugnolo’s maternal ancestors.

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

What spirit is really behind Trad Inc.?

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Bergoglio’s recent heretical document, Querida Amazonia — beloved Amazonia — is an outstanding example of jesuitical deceit: while not saying openly what many expected it to say, it approved of it. But worse of all it insisted that use of idols is not idolatry! And advocates their use in the Liturgy!

For anyone who knows the least thing about Catholic Tradition, that should be the last straw, because the opposition to idolatry is at the core and foundation of the Catholic Religion in all the examples of the ancient Martyrs of the Church and in all the works of art and architecture!

But now, you have Trad Inc., except for a singular case here or there, praising Querida Amazona. They are going so far to say it is a victory, a catholic document!

Over at Chiesa E Post Concilio they are even saying that its publication has shown that Bergoglio is at last acting like a pope! — I have to barf!

Why is it that as soon as Bergoglio began with the public idolatry that Cardinals Burke and Sarah and now seemingly Trad Inc. have all of a sudden found that there is absolutely no doubt that Bergoglio is the pope, that he is catholic and that he is acting like a pope!

Have they all lost their minds? Or do they now recognize in him something primal in their own religiosity?

___________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screen shot of the Traditionalist Blog mentioned in this article, and used here in accord with fair use standards for editorial commentary.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

Barnhardt has more sense than Burke

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

I am continually amazed at how many of the same arguments used to promote despair among us who are faithful to the Church and Canon Law are the same over many blogs. It is almost as if there is some campaign or pysop targeting us. Unfortunately for whomsoever is behind it, they err greatly by attempting to tangle with Ann Barnhardt.

Barnhardt has an excellent post entitled, Q & A: Ann, even if Pope Benedict were to re-submit a valid resignation, he will never publicly act as pope again, so isn’t this all an exercise in futility?

In her reply she exercises a prudence of a Cardinal, far beyond that of even Cardinal Burke because:

  1. She recognizes the problem
  2. She recognizes how deep the problem is
  3. She recognizes how to solve the problem radically
  4. She has the integrity and moral courage to say what it is in public
  5. She has the honesty to advocate it be done

I agree 100% with Ann Barnhardt’s analysis and solution and I undersign her proposal. But I want to add that one of the biggest problems in the 7 year Crisis in the Church has been the vain hopes we have all put in the Cardinals to act like men, to act like men of God, and to act like apostles of Jesus Christ. None of them has shown the capacity or competence to do this. At most, like Cardinal Burke, they limit themselves to commenting on the problem, as if, like Barnhardt and myself, who are not members of the clergy, he could do nothing about it.

Psyoptics

But here I would point out, something which Ann does not, that her questioner has proposed a question which is quintessentially characteristic of the psysop, of the individual trained to control your mind and manipulate your emotions. So let me unpack that question, in an critique which I will call “psyoptic analysis”, that is how to see pysops for what they are.

  • Ann, even if Pope Benedict were to re-submit a valid resignation

First, the questioner poses a question using Barnhardt’s first name: make it familiar, insinuate friendship.

Second, propose a possibility within the context of the affirmation of an impossibility, use “even if”.

Third, insinuate that Benedict already submitted a valid resignation by saying “resubmit”.

  • he will never publicly act as pope again

Fourth, affirm that which your want to come about as if it were a divine certitude: he will  never.

Fifth, deny that the Pope will every be allowed access to the public again:  publicly act.

Sixth, deny that the Pope, even if he is the pope, will ever be allowed to use his power again: as pope again.

  • so isn’t this all an exercise in futility?

Seventh, imply despair by affirming no solution.

I get comments like this from a operative in Minnesota/Wisconsin using a polish name. He leaves positive comments, but when it counts he leaves statements like this question above. Statements like this might be repeated by simple catholics who see them in comment boxes and do not think about them. But in themselves they are excellent examples of now nefarious a pysop can include so many lies and falsehoods and deceits and present them in a psychologically appealing way.

There is a lot of evil behind Bergoglio’s claim to be pope and behind the denial of all of those who say Benedict is not the pope. A lot more evil that we can imagine.

Beware, then of the pysop, and learn to crush it as Our Lady crushes the head of the serpent with a cogent response like that given by Ann Barnhardt in the post cited above.

___________

CREDITS: The Featured Image above is a screenshot of the webpage of Ann Barnhardt cited in this article, used here according to fair use standards for editorial commentary.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

CNN in 2013: Italian press says Benedict’s act was one of desperation

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

A lot of historical facts have been erased or forgotten or altered, to keep the narrative going that Bergoglo is the Pope. But some of them still remain. Here is a video report from CNN, dated seven years ago, Feb. 25, 2013, which says that Benedict despaired at all the corruption in the Vatican and that this was a prime motive for his act of Feb. 11, 2013.

Seven years later, the swift denials of the Vatican back then are seen for what they are. But the then unnoticed, and now noticeable, detail among them is that the Vatican spokesman characterized them as attempts to discredit the future pope.

Why would that be?

Unless of course the menace of the corruption had something to do with the invalidity of the Renunciation? And that Jorge Mario Bergoglio was involved somehow in both.

For more on this, see the articles on How Benedict has defeated “Francis”, Benedict’s End Game is to defend the Church from Freemasonry, and The Imprisonment of Pope Benedict XVI.

_________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screen shot of the Video embedded in this article, both of which are used in accord with fair use standards for editorial commentary.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

 

A Generation unfit to be members of the Catholic Clergy

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

There are a lot of reasons to call an extraordinary Synod to put the Vatican back in order — where a Pope is a de facto prisoner in a Monastery at the center of Vatican gardens, and an Argentine Jesuit is ruling the roost from a Hotel on the southern border. — No I am not writing a novel!

But one thing no one is talking about is the global or radical solution for the crisis of pedophilia in the institutions of the Catholic Church during the last 70 years. The numbers of victims world wide may be over a hundred thousand. That is not clear. But it is clear what generation of clergy perpetrated these horrible abominations and betrayed the most sacred trust in all of creation: being a Catholic priest of God.

It was the generation which wanted, enacted, promoted, promulgated, implemented and enforced Vatican II.

Every problem in the Church right now was either directly or indirectly caused by that generation of clergy.

What needs to be said is this: they are not fit to be clergy; they are not fit to rule the Church of God; they are not fit to be entrusted with the formation of the faithful in anything. They are completely morally bankrupt, and in recent years are showing everyone that they are also completely spiritually and theologically bankrupt. Very, very few of them can even calla spade a spade, anymore.

Until the Church deposes that entire generation, the Crisis will not be over. We are in and headed for truly apocalyptic scenarios of institutionalized devil worship on the altars of every Catholic Church in the name of obedience to this corrupt and perverse generation. We are already in an apocalyptic scenario, inasmuch as 99.99% of clergy offer their masses in communion with the Apostate, Arch-Heretic, Arch-Blasphemer and Idolater, as if he were as valid a pope as Saint Pius X and more valid than Jesus Christ, while ignoring the true Vicar of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Pope Benedict XVI!

They are a generation of fakers. The Catholic Religion means nothing to them other than appearances. And they need to be told that by the faithful, to their faces.

Being a priest requires that you are honest. The egomaniac, the psychotic, the pyschopathic and the sociopathic should not be admitted, let alone rule. Those who would sacrifice the whole content of our Holy Faith to keep up appearances are no less unworthy. And those, who wont do anything about it, are even worse! because knowing that there is a problem and recognizing it as a problem, they do not react as if it were a problem. Theirs indeed shall be a more weighty punishment!

I love Jesus Christ and the Priesthood He has shared with men. But I cannot ignore it when I see men unworthy in the most radical and fundamental measure to that MOST sacred duty. It would be disrespect for Christ and the priesthood to remain silent about these things any longer.

___________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a detail of a photo by Br. Bugnolo of the Altar of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, in the Basilica of Saint John Lateran, here at Rome.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

Does Chris Ferrara think he is a judge on the Roman Rota?

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

In recent months, the traditional Catholic Attorney, Chris Ferrara, has come out strongly against those who judge that Bergoglio is a heretic or that Pope Benedict is the pope, basing his position that private individuals have no authority to make determinate judgements on the matter.

His arguments are vague, in my opinion, so I will simply rebut here the general errors which it appears he seems to appealing to.

First, it strikes me as completely absurd that an Attorney-at-law should demand that everyone who knows of a notorious public crime and about which crime the evidence is manifest, public and equally notorious, should shut up and stop making pronouncements about guilt or innocence.

I can understand how the defense counsel for the alleged criminal(s) could take such a position, certainly. And I can understand how a judge of the case has to take such a position, because the juridical process of adjudication requires impartiality.

But none of us are the defense counsel. And none of us are the judges.

Even Chris, I think, has not been retained as counsel for the defense by any party involved. And as far as I know he has not been appointed a judge on the Roman Rota or the Apostolic Signatura — the highest courts in the Catholic Church, which however, do not have the competence to judge cases of failed papal renunciations or papal heresy.

So where does Chris get the idea that we or he should be impartial and await judgement from such future tribunal? Does he think Bergoglio is not a heretic? If so, why not say so.

And since such matters can only be judged canonically in a Synod or Council of Bishops, Cardinals or the clergy of Rome, where does he get the idea that all who might attend such a Council or Synod have to be impartial beforehand? Or that those of us who want such a meeting to take place have to be impartial?

Does being impartial now mean being honest and just in Attorney Ferrara’s mind? Or is Chris letting his habit of mind, as a defense counsel, inhibit his exercise of the virtues of faith and justice in regard to the solution of the Church Crisis?

I agree, Chris, that we are not the final arbiters of the canonical settlement which will put the Church back in working order. But I have to ask you, why you are acting like a Judge on the Roman Rota? Are you merely parroting the arguments of some former occupant of such a position

Please explain to the rest of us then, since you have taken such a position, why you take it!

Second, I would like to publicly ask Attorney Ferrara what purpose or effectiveness does he see in lamenting the problems on a weekly basis in his published editorials, but NOT seek a canonical solution to them? And why is it that he writes article after article about the problems in the Church if he seems so adamant about telling those who want corruption removed — like Ann Barnhardt — to shut up? Simply because she does not lament to lament, she decries and demands justice be done?

He is renowned for seeking justice for Catholics in U.S. Courts. As a Catholic, Chris, do you not feel the slightest tinge of obligation as an attorney with such a reputation, to demand, call and advocate for all Catholics to have a real solution to the problem? — Yes I have seen your public comment that you think Catholics have a right to call for such a solution. BUT why is it that YOU are not calling for it?

Third, as a Catholic and a citizen journalist, I want to ask, you, Christ, a public question? Are you acting under counsel or orders from Cardinal Burke to stifle any move by Catholics to call for the intervention of the College of Bishops and, or, the College of Cardinals to investigate the problems with the Renunciation or with Bergoglio being a heretic? And if so, what reasons does he give for such counsel or order?

If you think Chris should answer these questions, you can hear him speak and perhaps get a question in at the Keep the Faith Conference on Feb. 22, in Monterey, California, USA. For more information see: https://keepthefaith.org/conferences/

________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a partial screen shot of an Appeal by Attorney Ferrara for his Catholic Lawyers Association which provides free legal counsel to Catholics who are being persecuted for their religious expression in the USA. As such Attorney Ferrar has done some marvelous work defending the Faithful against injustice. Image used here in accord with fair use practice for editorial commentary.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

The Door to Sutri II is unlocking

In an article entitled, Waiting for Gregorian reforms 2.0, published by Polonia Christiana on Sept. 7, 2018 (and reprinted by ChurchMilitant.com, Prof. Grzegorz Kucharczyk lays out the historical and legal context of the current crisis of criminality in the Church which may lead to another Synod of Sutri.

The Synod of Sutri in 1046 A. D., was one of the most extraordinary canonical events in the history of the Church. It deposed 3 popes and paved the way for the election of Pope Clement II. Our knowledge of the event is confirmed by men of indisputable honestly: Bl. Pope Victor III in his annales, Saint Peter Damian who praised the proceedings and attended the coronation of Pope Clement, and Pope St. Gregory VII, who as an acolyte of Gregory VI was present at the Synod and saw his patron deposed from the papacy.

Later historians, after the Council of Constance, who wanted to defend against the implication that the Pope could be judged by a Council, have fiercely attacked the Synod of Sutri as an aberration, an uncanonical proceeding, an illegitimate act to be discarded to the history of the Seculum Obscurum of the Church, a long period in which the Papacy was ruled by despots appointed by Roman Nobility, without regard to the norms of law.

But the Synod of Sutri was a legitimate canonical proceeding accepted by all parties, save that of Pope Benedict IX, after whose death there were no supporters of his own to continue his opposition. Holy Mother Church by canonizing 2 witnesses and beatifying the third, gives the most certain refutation of this wrong headed papal maximalists, who erred out of excessive zeal in judging the precise nature of the canonical proceedings.

Three popes were deposed. But in truth no pope was deposed. Both statements are true, because both statements do not use the word, “pope”, in the same sense.  In the first, one speaks according to the appearances of their claims. In the second, one speaks according to the truth of canon law.

Popes Sylvester III and Gregory VI were never valid popes. The former usurped the office of the Papacy after an angry mob had driven Pope Benedict IX from the city. The latter, Gregory VI, had purchased the office of the papacy from Benedict IX who wanted to resign and marry, and needed the money.  Pope Benedict IX by the fall of 1046, had publicly resigned the papacy but wanted it back since his girlfriend had rejected his proposals to marriage.

So according to the norms of law, 3 pretenders to the papacy were deposed, not three popes.

The confusion about Sutri lies in the obscurity of history, since it is not known under what kind of precise wording Benedict IX resigned and sold the papacy to John Gratian, who took the name Gregory VI. And for that reason, some have said that Benedict was still the pope, assuming that the resignation and sale were one contract, and others have said that Benedict was no longer pope, assuming the two acts were separate. The sale of an ecclesiastical office and its reception by the buyer were always considered invalid legal acts from the time Saint Peter condemned Simon Magus for wanting to do such a thing (cf. Acts 8:9-24). Whence the name for such a crime: simony.

In my previous article on this, I spoke according to the first assumption, and riled the Sedevacantists. — I publicly admit that my assumption about he contract, there, might have been wrong.

But what Prof. Grzegorz Kucharczyk says in his article is true. The Synod of Sutri was the consequence of temporal power which required the resolution of a disputed papacy at Rome for its own purposes. Just so, the ongoing massive legal actions by several nations against the criminally corrupt clergy will inevitably lead back to Rome. And then the power that be will find it necessary to clean up the Vatican.

I will add my own observation, here. Namely, that the recent decision of the pro-Bergoglian government here in Italy — which enjoys now less than 15% support in the national polls — to put the most popular politician, Matteo Salvini, on trial for delaying the disembarkation of illegal immigrants in the port of Catania for 3 days, though with the consent of key members of the current government — Salvini will be charged with kidnapping! — will have its consequences. It will produce the certainty that the day the people of Italy again have a government which supports their views on immigration, that that new government will be implacably anti-Bergoglian and disposed to use their rights, under the Lateran Pact, to resolve the problem of a Vatican out of control and operating against the canons of the Church.

In this way, the doors to the Second Synod of Sutri are being unlocked: Christ the King will have His justice executed even in this world!

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00