https://youtu.be/qv_OKaj3s5s
Tag Archives: Freemasonry
S&S’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 known by the mind and expressed in 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 thing 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 infallible 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 argument. 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 HISTORICAL FACT 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 by the Cardinals illegal and invalid. Elections in Conclave 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 arose 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. Its applicatoin by S & S 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:
- 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.
- It is founded upon badly or poorly defined terms which can be held to mean whatever you want them to mean on any occasion.
- 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.
- It ignores all facts of history and places the criterion of truth outside of historical fact, thus divorcing truth from reality.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
+ + +
[simple-payment id=”5295″]
The god of the Club
REPRINTED FROM DECEMBER 4, 2019.
With Addendum, added today, at end.
by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
As Catholics round the world write their Bishops and priests in regard to the failed renunciation of Pope Benedict XVI, it is becoming increasingly obvious that there is a crisis much more grave than pedophilia or homosexuality in the Catholic Clergy.
Time after time, Catholics are sharing with me the bizarre and even incoherent responses they are receiving from members of the clergy: arguments which range from sheer infantile petulance at loosing one’s rattle to absolutely diabolic attacks on God.
Underlying them all is a constant theme. The ecclesiastical club is the arbiter of truth, not God, not Christ, nor Canon Law, not the philosophy of Aquinas or Aristotle, not reason, not facts, not history, and especially not words.
As an Anthropologist, I would sum up the responses as evidences of faith in the god of the club: the concept that one should do everything to keep the club of the clergy afloat (in whatever decisions it makes for itself), no matter what you have to deny or what you have to affirm.
Not being a youngster, I have personal experience with members of the club over 40 years. This mentality is not accidental, it did not infiltrate into the Church. It was cultivated, invited and required. If young men believed in absolute, eternal unchanging divine truth, they simply were either not accepted into the club, or they were progressively harassed and attacked and destroyed or driven out. The club works this way, whether they worship in Latin or the vernacular.
I know priests who were kicked out of their diocese simply because they preached that abortion was evil. I know priests who were kicked out of their Traditional Latin Mass society simply because they hung a curtain in the confessional. I could go on and on about cases of absurdity. To punish priests for absurdly unjust reasons became a hallmark of the post Vatican II era.
Hundreds of new communities and societies were founded. But a vast majority had a single unifying principle: abnormality. I mean ab-norm-ality: that is, a society not founded around the observance of God’s Law (nomos in Greek) but around some other human law: whether the will of the superior, the will of the bishop, the will of the founders: whether or not that will conformed itself to God or to Church teaching or not. Violate the “will” and you are out. Defend the Will of God against the “will” and you are out. It did not matter whether you were expelled for stealing or for kneeling at communion, both were equally grave.
The end result is that well over 60% of the clergy today simply do not worship Jesus Christ in practice. They worship the god of the club.
The problem with this moral error, over and above that it is explicitly demonic and idolatrous, is that when you accept as Head of your club a freemason or satanist, then your club has no problems at all with that.
The silence of the rest of the clergy, is thus, perhaps not so much a sign of disagreement, as many of us hope.
A priest who is silent must be questioned. I think you have the right to eternal salvation, and that you have the right to know which god your local priest worships.
And a discussion about the invalid resignation of Pope Benedict XVI is proving to be the best revealer of which god your priest worships. It is absolutely stunning to see the responses of clergy on this topic. The truth frightens them. Literally.
I myself saw that yesterday, when, after asking to meeting with the Head of an important section of the Roman Curia, I saw the head run down the stairs to avoid being seen by me. I guess having read my scholastic question on the Renunciation, a copy of which I mailed to him a few weeks ago, he chose flight over dialogue.
CREDITS: The Palazzo Roffia is a Masonic Lodge, the image is from wikipedia: Notice how much it looks like a “Catholic chapel”
ADDENDUM:
The events since December 4, 2019, have proven my observation 10,000%. The club really does have another god. They abolished the Sacraments to protect themselves from a winter flu and now insist you blaspheme God to His Face by wearing a mask in Church while celebrating the Resurrection of Christ, our God, from the Dead.
And less than 1% of 1% of all priests have refused to worship the god of the Club.
Nothing can be more clear. This is the religion of the Antichrist. And it required, as a presupposition, that you say that Benedict is not the pope, that renouncing ministry means you lose office.
Yet, they themselves, the members of the club, have renounced their sacred ministries, and nevertheless they still demand FROM YOU an obedience greater than any creature owes to God Himself, because God is owed rational obedience, but they want you to obey them in a GOD-less political make-believe.
+ + +
If you would like to support FromRome.Info, click the banner below.
[simple-payment id=”5295″]
COVID-19 has unmasked the Italian government as Anti-Italian & Anti-Catholic
by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
It is often said by Catholic intellectuals in Italy that the real truth about what happened in the 19th Century, was not il Risorgimento (the Re-rise) of Italy but the Detenzione (Imprisonment) of Italy: the imposition by foreign interests (France and the Great Britain) of a form of government which guarantees from hence forth the Italian cuture and the Catholic religion will both be attacked and destroyed and obstructed as much as possible, to make of Italy a new test ground for Freemasonry.
And COVID-19 has shown that that analysis is 100% accurate.
In a single day, all the civil and human rights guaranteed by the Italian Constitution were cancelled: the freedom of assembly, the freedom of expression, the freedom of religion, the right to work, etc.. I could go on.
The health decrees of the government went to far as to explicitly name the Catholic Mass and all other Sacraments as forbidden. It was outrageous.
The only thing more outrageous is that Bergoglio ordered the Bishops to comply without so much as a peep of protest.
Now everyone is literally under house arrest! Everyone except the illegal alien, who can roam around as he pleases or enter the country at will.
And not just the illegal alien. Any foreigner I think.
I get the sense of this when I interact with the police during the quarentine. As soon as they hear my American accent they are more deferential with me. And that is plain wrong. Italy belongs to Italians!
Italy needs a new government. Not only in the Italian sense of the word, “government”, which in a parliamentary system refers to the ruling party or coalition controlling parliament — but in the Latin sense, of a new form of government. The modern liberal democracy has show that it is neither modern, nor liberal, nor democratic. It is totalitarian, autocratic and tyrannical.
And what is worse is that all the apparatus of the State does not even bat an eye-lash. When I encounter State Police or the Carabinieri, I ask them, if their consciences can support what they are doing to the people. And they respond, “We are not allowed to talk about that”!
Oh Joseph Stalin! You are probably turning over in your pit of despair and damnation with envy at Giuseppe Conte!
+ + +
[simple-payment id=”5295″]
Abp Lenga: Masoński wirus w Kościele i radość Zmartwychwstania
https://youtu.be/ouXfsTqhf7g
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 known by the mind and expressed in 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 thing 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 infallible 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 argument. 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 HISTORICAL FACT 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 by the Cardinals illegal and invalid. Elections in Conclave 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 arose 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. Its application by S & S 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:
- 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.
- It is founded upon badly or poorly defined terms which can be held to mean whatever you want them to mean on any occasion.
- 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.
- It ignores all facts of history and places the criterion of truth outside of historical fact, thus divorcing truth from reality.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
+ + +
John Salza, how I joined the Masonic Lodge
John Salza is associated with the Fatima Center and the SSPX in the USA.
He is also associated with ChurchMilitant.com, where it is impossible to get interviewed unless you get deep approval:
In this second video, Michael Voris asks Salza at about 9:00 mark, Can you recognize the stench of Freemasonry? Listen to his answer: he does not attribute to Freemasons directly, the problems in the Church. He says something like: I am not saying that Freemasonry has a plan to infiltrate the Church, Our Lady is. He further affirms that “good Catholics” can be duped into joining the Lodge.
That Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a Freemason was admitted by his own head of intelligence in Argentina, as FromRome.Info reported recently.
A Catholic who publicly admits to have joined the Masonic Lodge cannot be received back into the Church or to the life of the Sacraments without signing a public document in which he renounces his membership, in due canonical form.
John Salza has authored a number of books, two of which deal with Freemasonry:
Masonry Unmasked: An insider reveals the secrets of the Lodge
The blurb for the Book, at Amazon.com is thus:
A lifelong Catholic, John Salza was initiated into a Wisconsin’s Masonic Lodge, lured by the group’s camaraderie and philanthropies. Yet, as he rose through the ranks, he became increasingly troubled by its dangerous teachings, mysterious rituals, and complete incompatibility with the Catholic Faith. Now, former Freemason, Shriner, and Lodge Officer John Salza reveals the astounding truths about what’s really going on behind the lodge door. For the first time, get a surprising, inside look at the group’s controversial rituals, practices, and philosophies from one of their own ? secrets sworn to be upheld under the threat of death! Essential for anyone affiliated with or considering the Lodge, their families, and their friends, this eye-opening book presents evidence on: ? The deception in recruitment, initiation, and covenant oaths ? The problematic ideology of Freemasonry and relativism ? How their spiritual beliefs contradict Catholicism ? and Christianity at large
And, Why Catholics cannot be Masons, which is described thus at Amazon:
Many good Catholic men have been deceived into becoming Masons. In this powerful little book, a Catholic attorney and former 32nd degree Mason, John Salza, clearly shows why joining Masonry (including the Shriners) means embracing a false religion.
Having authored Masonry Unmasked for general readership, here John Salza writes specifically for Catholics, showing why the Church has always condemmed Freemasonry, and continues to condemn Freemasonry today (despite mistaken claims to the contrary.) He explains Masonic doctrines, history, rituals, oaths and curses, showing that Masonry is totally incompatible with Christianity and the Catholic Faith.
He answers the questions: Who is the god of Freemasonry? How does Freemasonry view the Holy Bible? What are the self-curses of Freemasonry? Why does Freemasonry appear to be compatible with the Christian Faith? What have the Popes said about Freemasonry? Are “Catholic Masons” excommunicated? How does a Catholic exit Freemasonry?
Packed with facts and very well documented, Why Catholics Cannot Be Masons is a brief but potent revelation by a man who has been there – and then returned to the One True Faith.
John Salza has appeared on EWTN, and he hosts Catholic radio programs on Relevant Radio and EWTN Radio. He is the author of several apologetics books including: The Biblical Basis for Purgatory, The Mystery of Predestination, and The Biblical Basis for the Papacy.
Vatican Intelligence officer: I am a Freemason and so is Bergoglio
By Br. Alexis Bugnolo
BREAKING — In an intercepted phone call — one of many which were captured during the corruption investigation in Argentina over foreign influence from Iran, the Head Vatican Intelligence officer in Argentina affirmed that he and his boss, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, were indeed members of the Masonic Lodge.
The explosive revelations where made on Roberto Garcia’s TV program, La Mirada, which aired on November 27, 2017 on Channel 26 in Argentina.
Here is the full video:
The video above, at 27:57, features the guests Edgar Mainhard of Urgente24 and the man who speaks about Bergoglio, Juan Bautista “Tata”” Yofre, who was State Intelligence Secretary in Argentina between 1989-1990 and was the Ambassador of Argentina, concurrently to both Portugal and Panama, during the government of Carlos Menem.
In the interview, Roberto asks Tata to discuss the “unpresentables of Argentina that surround the pope”.
“Tata” recounts a phone call that had been aired during a time of “negotiations with Iran” and that such phone calls had been aired on national television. In one phone call between “Yussuf and Karim” which had come out in the outlet “La Nación”, but later disappeared, Tata says, during the call, Yussuf tells Karim about his encounter with Bergoglio’s Vatican Chief of Intelligence in Argentina. “Tata” made a parenthesis to emphasize that Bergoglio indeed had a Vatican chief of Intelligence there in Argentina and that he knew him personally, but did not mention the name.
Tata continues recounting that on the phone call, “Bergoglio’s Vatican Chief of Intelligence told Yussuf that he [the Chief] was a mason and so was Bergoglio.” Tata says, “This was on ‘La Nación’. You could have listened to it yourselves. I listened to it because I had to give it credit.
Canonical Implications
The penalty for becoming a member of the Masonic Lodge is excommunication. That this was the case, even after Vatican II was made clear in a letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, dated Feb. 17, 1981 and signed by Cardinal Franjo Seper (See text here). Cardinal Seper in that letter declared:
On 19 July 1974 this Congregation wrote to some Episcopal Conferences a private letter concerning the interpretation of can 2335 of the Code of Canon Law which forbids Catholics, under the penalty of excommunication, to enroll in Masonic or other similar associations.
Since the said letter has become public and has given rise to erroneous and tendentious interpretations, this Congregation, without prejudice to the eventual norms of the new Code, issues the following confirmation and clarification:
1) the present canonical discipline remains in full force and has not been modified in any way;
2) consequently, neither the excommunication nor the other penalties envisaged have been abrogated;
Two years later, on Nov. 26, 1983, following the promulgation by Pope John Paul II of the new Code of Canon Law, a public doubt arose regarding whether that penalty had been removed or not in the new Code. Cardinal Ratzinger, now head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith responded with an extraordinary intervention, confirmed in forma specifica by Pope John Paul II. The key passage of which reads:
Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enrol in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.
It is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give a judgment on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a derogation from what has been decided above, and this in line with the Declaration of this Sacred Congregation issued on 17 February 1981 (cf. AAS 73 1981 pp. 240-241; English language edition of L’Osservatore Romano, 9 March 1981).
In other words, the excommunication leveled in Canon 2335 against all Catholics for enrolling in a Masonic Lodge remains in force. This is in accord with the principle of Canon 6 and Canon 20. And thus, the excommunication of Canon 2335 in the old Code is to be understood, in accord with this declaration made by the CDF, to be subsumed into Canon 1364, which punishes by excommunication latae sententiae the crimes of Heresy, Schism and Apostasy, since clearly affiliation with the Masonic Sect is equipollent to all three under the diverse aspects of its creed, its purpose, and its manner of working.
THE CONSEQUENCES ARE SERIOUS: An excommunicated person cannot validly receive any dignity, office or munus in the Church in virtue of Canon 1331 §2 n. 4, of the new Code of Canon Law. That means, that it is canonically impossible that Bergoglio have assumed any ecclesiastical office after his enrollment.
My Comments
Since Cardinal Ratzinger no doubt had knowledge that Bergoglio was a Freemason, as both head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and as Pope, it follows that as pope, if it was demanded of him that he resign the Papacy, so that Bergoglio might succeed him, he would have had the most grave obligation to dissimulate, so that while appearing to renounce, he would deprive Bergoglio of the Petrine Munus, by renouncing something else, as I surmised in my previous article, How Benedict has defeated “Francis”. And especially in my article, Benedict’s End Game is to Save the Church from Freemasonry.
I think, now, you can see why no supporter of Bergoglio cares the lest thing for Canon Law. Cardinals included. How many others in the Vatican are members of the Lodge?
Will Chris Ferrara and Steve Skojec and others, like Cardinal Burke, now stop saying that Bergoglio is definitely the pope? Or are they Freemasons too? — I ask this question because the public has a right to know the answers.
POSTSCRIPT on Evidence and Actionability
There are 3 kinds of evidence, about matters as grave as someone being a Freemason. There is non actionable and actionable. Of the first kind, the non actionable, is information which is hearsay, that is third hand, where there no certainty if the chain of transmission has not invented, corrupted or faithfully related what happened or was said. No legal system in the world accepts such uncertain third party evidence. Of the second kind, actionable, there are two kinds: morally actionable and legally actionable. Morally actionable evidence is the kind upon which you are obliged to act, but cannot bring a legal charge due to lack of records. Legally actionable is of the kind upon which you can bring a legal accusation. This includes third hand testimony given in affidavits or recordings or before credible witnesses. Even in the Church there is law. And, of the kind of evidence Pope Benedict XVI had as of Feb. 2013, I surmise it was only the morally actionable kind, because I have no legally actionable evidence that it was anything else.
However, with this intercepted phone call, the Entire Church has legally actionable evidence, because the phone call was heard by the entire Argentine people on live TV, and we have the testimony of an Argentine Ambassador that that phone call was broadcast. Just find 2 or 3 others persons who heard it, and have they swear an affidavit. Then the Cardinals who are NOT Freemasons, and or any group of Bishops, call a Council and declare the man outside of the Church and deposed from all offices.
+ + +
[simple-payment id=”5295″]
Letter to the Editor: Bergoglio is a Freemason!
Dear Editor,
As you know, there is more than sufficient evidence that demonstrates Bergoglio is a Freemason and that even his papal name (Francis I) is of masonic importance and origin, having absolutely nothing to do with the Seraphic Father, Saint Francis. We know that he is working with leaders from all of the main false world religions to unite them into an “interfaith” confederation of religions under one guide which is himself.
The sodomite rabbi Bergman from Buenos Aires, Argentina is a Freemason (observe the background on his shelf here) and he is not only one of Bergoglio’s close friends but was the one that called for Bergoglio to lead their one world coalition of religions in the G6 Interfaith Summit event (found in the above link) which was held this past September. Here is another video with rabbi Begman sitting next to Cardinal Bergoglio while Bergoglio gives a few words about the masonic rabbi’s book release. Here is also a video of the same mason/sodomite, rabbi being blessed by a priest right behind an altar!! It happens right in front of the sacred species!!
1) Bergoglio teaches masonic doctrine. See document of Abu Dhabi (this is the strongest of all evidence)
2) Bergoglio joined the Rotary Club in Argentina when he was young (As you can see this was known as of 1999)
3) Bergoglio signs as a Freemason as of 1977
4) Bergoglio gives hand shakes like a freemason
5) Italian masonry officially supports Bergoglio (among other masonic lodges worldwide). There are dozens of articles about this. Here’s one by Skojec that makes sense of all of it.
6) Bergoglio’s papal name (Francis I) appears for the first time in history with King Francis who is venerated by Italian masons as a protector of the Carbonari which Pope Leo XIII fought during his time by unmasking them, demanding that their well known “Instruction of the Alta Vendita” be published and also condemning masonry strongly during his pontificate. In the “secret” document, they planned to infiltrate the papacy.
7) Bergoglio demonstrates 666 hand sign here. (at 0:08 second)
8) Bergoglio, upon his fake papal election, greets from the loggia with the “mano marrana” gesture which is a well known hand sign of the Freemasons. See here
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck…it is a duck.
A pig with high heels, a wig, eye lashes and lip stick is still a pig..
Sincerely,
A Worried Catholic
____________
CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screenshot of the Google Image search results for Bergoglio, Freemasonic hand sign
+ + +
[simple-payment id=”5295″]
You have a right to question your priest
by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
It is a principle of natural law, that anyone who presents himself as anything, has the duty to give reasons which justify his claims in public. This in past ages has never been much of an issue with regard to Catholic priests or Bishops. It was sufficient to know that he was a priest or a Bishop.
But with the planned and organized and generation-long effort by Masons in and outside the Church to corrupt the priesthood of Jesus Christ in the Church, it is no longer always and everywhere safe to presume the priest you know is Catholic, that is correct in doctrine, even when he is a Catholic priest.
So you should ask your local priest questions and not merely act as dumb sheep, if he appears to deviate from right doctrine or orthodox practice.
And no, I am not talking about him mistakenly leaving the cruets on the Altar rather than on the credence table. I am talking about issues which regard whether he has accepted the religion of Globalism or whether he is a Catholic.
If he says in a homily, that Greta Thurnburg is a Saint. Then you do not need to discuss anything with him, you need to denounce him as a heretic to your Bishop. I counseled one laymen on this matter recently, and after writing his bishop, the priest was removed as pastor from his parish.
No, I am speaking about ambiguous speech. If a priest says we must be accepting to habitual sinners and goes on and on about this, then you should question him, because he may be a habitual sinner himself with intentions of corruption your sons and/or daughters.
If he says he hates honest politicians like Donald Trump or Matteo Salvini, you should question him about his politics. Because if he is a Marxist he is an apostate on account of this, that he rejects the entire soteriology of the Church. Soteriology is the theology of salvation. Salvation consists in our supernatural conformity, body and soul, to the will of God, through the Sacraments, with the merit of eternal life in Heaven. It does not consist in fulfilling the political platform of the local left wing party.
In fact, if your priest admits he votes for the Left, you should question him, because with a few questions you will be able to reveal that he is either a heretic or an apostate, and then you can denounce him to your Bishop and leave the parish for another one.
If he preaches against the prolife movement, against those who want right doctrine or praxis, if he says that truth does not matter or says things which are confused, you should question him. I remember years ago, I was visiting a Church on Holy Trinity Sunday, and the priest said: At the baptism of Jesus a voice was heard, the voice of the Holy Spirit saying, “This is my beloved son, listen to him”. In charity I assumed the priest was drunk on some physical liquid, and so I denounced him by letter to his bishop. In a week or two he was removed from the parish.
I know of a real case, in the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts, where a priest spoke in favor of contraception and abortion during a homily. The whole parish rose up and physically ran him out of the parish. The Bishop graciously responded by removing the priest as pastor. They questioned him before the ran him out, but they did the right and Catholic thing. God bless both them and their Bishop.
So it is important to speak with your priest, when he starts acting strange. Because if you don’t, it will lead to more serious scandals and the lost of faith of your brother and sisters in Christ. And do not hesitate to denounce bad priests, because this is a blessing for all: for by denouncing bad priests, you make the life of every other good priest in the Diocese easier, by removing a stain, a cross and a plague on the local Church.
If you have a question about the strange behavior of a priest, and seek advice, publish your story in a comment, but remove all identifying information as to place and person, so as to protect the reputations of all involved.
__________
CREDITS: The featured image is of Fra Angelico’s, The arrest of Christ, and is in the public domain, being a faithful reproduction of an original work of art which is mroe than 200 years old.
+ + +
[simple-payment id=”5295″]
Beware of Laymen posing as the Church
Br. Alexis Bugnolo
I have always had the Catholic sense that the Church was founded by a Priest and was handed down to us through the Twelve Priests and through them and priests throughout the generations to ourselves and to our own time. I have always found that laymen do not have the moral, intellectual or even common sense abilities of priests. And I have never heard a prophetic word which touched my heart which came from the mouth of anyone but a priest.
The priesthood is part of the Catholic Religion. Believing in the power and dignity of the priesthood is part of the Catholic Faith. I would say it is de fide.
For that reason, I cannot contain my shock and consternation what what LifeSite News just did through publishing a report by Maike Hickson, entitled, Catholic Laity protest Cardinal Marx …..
Because, as LifeSite News knows, and as Mrs. Hickson knows, Archbishop Viganò was present. And that means it was not the “Catholic Laity” who protested, it was the Catholic Faithful, because it was not just laymen, and not just laymen make up the Church or count. — GOODNESS, the very top photo in the article is of Archbishop Viganò who is not a layman!
But this mistake was no error. It was lapsus linguae which, in my judgement, revealed the true spirit behind the political PAC which backs LifeSite News and the true spirit behind Trad Inc, which is run entirely by laymen and laywomen (with minor exceptions).
Namely, they have accepted the Protestant error that the Church is composed first of the non-ordained and that the non-ordained have the pride of place in the Church.
That error is called laicism. It is the contrary error of clericalism.
And we all know how FreeMasons love to play with contrary errors to lead everyone astray.
Here at FromRome.Info you will never see that error made, because the rule of all our journalism is the Catholic Faith the way it has always been.
_________
CREDITS: The Featured Image above is our own screen shot of the page linked to and is used as a free unsolicited advertisement of the publication in question, according to fair use.
_________
[simple-payment id=”5295″]
It’s the Great Apostasy, let’s stop the denial
By Br. Alexis Bugnolo
The beloved disciple and faithful son of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Apostle Saint John warned us a little less than 2000 years ago: In the end, a Great Apostasy would sweep away many Christians.
Saint John tells of the Great Apostasy in the Twelfth Chapter of his Book of the Apocalypse, also known as the Book of Revelations. I will put in red text the interpretation of this chapter given by Franciscan Saints* and I will use the English text of the Douay Reims Bible for the scriptural citation:
12 And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars: (Heaven here refers to the Catholic Church, which is Heaven on Earth. The appearance of the woman refers to the Dogmatic Declarations of the Magisterium about Our Lady, as Ever Virgin, Immaculate Conception, Assumed into Heaven, Queen of Heaven and Earth. The twelve stars refer to the affirmations by the Church of Our Lady’s 12 privileges)
2 And being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered. (This refers to the struggles in the Church among theologians and believers against the faithful Catholics who are true children of Mary and know that the most authentic and certain path to God is through Mary to Jesus.)
3 And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns: and on his head seven diadems: (This refers to the Satanic plot of Freemasonry and other nefarious groups to establish the Mystical Body of the Antichrist in the Church and thus prepare the world for the coming of the AntiChrist)
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered; that, when she should be delivered, he might devour her son. (This refers to the Great Apostasy which will occur after Our Lady is declared Assumed body and soul into Heaven. It will entail the near total apostasy of all the Clergy, who are as the stars in the Heaven of the Church, and it indicates that they will submit to the Father of Lies and give themselves up to the most horrible vices and errors)
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne. (This refers to the Rise of the true Church in war against the Anti-Christ. This true Church will be faithful Catholics consecrated to Our Lady and embracing the whole doctrine of God, and who by their fidelity will be raised up to form a renewed Sacred Hierarchy to replace the old which has apostatized)
6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared by God, that there they should feed her a thousand two hundred sixty days. (This refers to the true Catholic Faith which in the end times will have to take refuge in lowly and humble places, because the wealthy and powerful will give up their souls to the rule and domination of demons)
7 And there was a great battle in heaven, Michael and his angels fought with the dragon, and the dragon fought and his angels: (This refers to the war between the sons of God vs the sons of the Devil, that is, the war between the true Church and the Anti-Church. The Leaders in this war will be led on each side by men inspired and devoted to Saint Michael and Lucifer, respectively)
8 And they prevailed not, neither was their place found any more in heaven. (This refers to the victory of the true Church over the false AntiChurch).
9 And that great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, who seduceth the whole world; and he was cast unto the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. (This refers to the definitive excommunication of the AntiChurch and its members from the Catholic Church).
10 And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying: Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: because the accuser of our brethren is cast forth, who accused them before our God day and night. (This refers to the future pope of great virtue who will preside over the renewed Church and condemn the AntiChurch)
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of the testimony, and they loved not their lives unto death. (This shows that the victory will be obtained by faithful Catholics who risk everything to defend the true Faith, putting their trust in the Blood of Jesus, Who already overcame the world, flesh and the devil).
12 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you that dwell therein. Woe to the earth, and to the sea, because the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, knowing that he hath but a short time. (This refers to the joy Catholics will have in those days seeing the Church delivered from this monstrous cult of satanists, pedophiles and sodomites, but warns the world, since being cast out of the Catholic Church they will seek to rule over and weaponize the world against the Faithful).
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman, who brought forth the man child: (This refers to the ensuing attacks of the godless against the true Faith until the end of time, for the whole world led by the AntiChurch will attack Our Lady who defeated them)
Obviously, the teachings of the Franciscan Saints about these matters is not binding in faith, but so far their predictions have turned out to be very accurate. The hatred of the Catholic Faith and the plot to destroy the Church, while brewing for ages, broke out in the Church after the Dogmatic Definition of the Assumption of Our Lady, body and soul into heaven. The wicked clergy could not stomach this dogma which countered their lusts, impiety and fake religious pretensions. They engineered a Council which ushered into the Church the “smoke of Satan” (as Pope Paul VI said):
The pope, concerned, writes:
“… We would say that, through some mysterious crack—no, it’s not mysterious; through some crack, the smoke of Satan has entered the Church of God. There is doubt, uncertainty, problems, unrest, dissatisfaction, confrontation.
“The Church is no longer trusted. We trust the first pagan prophet we see who speaks to us in some newspaper, and we run behind him and ask him if he has the formula for true life. I repeat, doubt has entered our conscience. And it entered through the windows that should have been open to the light: science.”
Storm clouds
The post-conciliar wounds make themselves felt:
“… It was thought that, after the Council, sunny days would come for the history of the Church. Nevertheless, what came were days of clouds, of storms, of darkness, of searching, of uncertainty … We tried to dig abysses instead of covering them …”
(Source: “What did Paul VI mean by saying the “Smoke of Satan has entered the Church”?”, citation from Aleteia article from 2018)
This Satanic Smoke has progressively blinded the eyes of the Clergy and Sacred Hierarchy, and even of many of the religious orders, into inclining more and more away from the perennial columns of Faith and Devotion, Hope and true Charity which the Church established from of old in Her Sacred Liturgies, Canons and Disciplines. It was under this Smoke that the good were persecuted and driven out, the wicked and perverse introduced into the high places. This was a necessary preparation for the Great Apostasy, because to achieve their goal the servants of the Father of Lies needed to prepare a whole generation of clergy who either loved falsehood or who had not the manliness to fight it.
This was achieved by introducing the God of the Club, which was initially proposed as merely a form of extreme clericalism but transmogrified to be a true idolatry upon the altar of which 10s of thousands of young people were sacrificed to sexual predators and only those who kept it quiet were promoted to the status of Bishops.
However, without a doubt this “striking out of heaven of a third of the stars” refers to a moment when nearly all the Clergy are separated from the Church (heaven). This, in my opinion, is adequately and perfectly described by the apostasy of the clergy from Christ’s true Vicar by following the lie of the MSM and wicked clergy that Benedict had resigned the office of the papacy, when in truth he never did anything of the kind. By no longer naming Benedict in the Canon of the Mass they show and seal their schism from Christ, from Benedict, and from the Church. They become fallen stars and are swooped up into the work of the great Dragon who is Satan.
Because, in the Greek, the word Apostasy means a falling away. It does not have the technical meaning we attribute to it in Canon Law today as a complete intellectual denial of the Catholic Faith.
As we are now in the full swing of the Dragons tail, we have to stop denying what is going on. All those Bishops who teach heresy and promote sacrilege by giving the Sacraments to public sinners, by condoning wickedness and teaching it, plus all those Bishops who do not oppose this, are all part of the Apostasy. There are even a few very wicked men, who agree with the apostasy but want to raise money by pretending to criticize it even as they insist you remain in communion with the leader of the Apostasy.
In this battle, we cannot afford to pretend any longer, nor to compromise. As Our Lady lamented at Akita, the Church in this battle will be filled with those willing to compromise, especially among clergy and religious.
The Pachamama worship was no accident. The adoration of the Andean Dragon Demon of the underworld is not a coincidence. This was not a political decision, it was an intentional act to involve everyone in the worship of Satan.
We must join the battle (See, Saving souls in the time of Apostasy) and urge the bishops and clergy to condemn the heresies of the Anti-Church and to break off communion with Bergoglio. (See the Article: Every Priest has the Right etc.) So long as the False Prophet and AntiChurch is recognized as having authority they will use it to destroy the entire Church world wide. Those who insist on recognizing their authority therefore must be presumed to be deceived by some sort of devil, because they are giving power to the Beast, who hungers to damn all souls to Hell so he can reign over and torment them for all eternity.
The wicked know what they are doing. They might try to gaslight you into not seeing what they are doing or in not doing anything to oppose them, but they know what they are doing. — I see this on a daily basis at Rome. As soon as you put a value judgement on heresy, apostasy, immorality or show canonically that the Renunciation is invalid, they lose all composure and snap at you like mad devils, a torrent of lies and abuse coming from their mouths. Their faces warp with the most nasty and biting expressions. They cannot endure your presence and run off. — Though this is not new. When I was studying at Rome 7 years ago, I found the same spirit, though confined, to certain faculties of theology in the Pontifical Institutes. But now this spirit reigns, it has captured the Vatican by guile and treachery.
Finally, I want to emphasize that, when Saint John says a third of the stars, I believe he means nearly all of them in that age, because in the night sky you can only see about a third of the visible sky on any one night.
And we have entered the night…. and it is WAR!
Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do Thou, o Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the Power of God, thrust down into Hell Satan, and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world, seeking the ruin of souls!
Saint Michael the Archangel, First Defender of the Kingdom of Christ, pray for us!
,________
* I heard this explanation from an old Franciscan priest, when I became a Franciscan. I no longer remember the Saints he cited. And he has now passed from this life.
The god of the Club
by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
As Catholics round the world write their Bishops and priests in regard to the failed renunciation of Pope Benedict XVI, it is becoming increasingly obvious that there is a crisis much more grave than pedophilia or homosexuality in the Catholic Clergy.
Time after time, Catholics are sharing with me the bizzare and even incoherent responses they are receiving from members of the clergy: arguments which range from sheer infantile petulance at loosing one’s rattle to absolutely diabolic attacks on God.
Underlying them all is a constant theme. The ecclesiastical club is the arbiter of truth, not God, not Christ, nor Canon Law, not the philosophy of Aquinas or Aristotle, not reason, not facts, not history, and especially not words.
As an Anthropologist, I would sum up the responses as evidences of faith in the god of the club: the concept that one should do everything to keep the club of the clergy afloat (in whatever decisions it makes for itself), no matter what you have to deny or what you have to affirm.
Not being a youngster, I have personal experience with members of the club over 40 years. This mentality is not accidental, it did not infiltrate into the Church. It was cultivated, invited and required. If young men believed in absolute, eternal unchanging divine truth, they simply were either not accepted into the club, or they were progressively harassed and attacked and destroyed or driven out. The club works this way, whether they worship in Latin or the vernacular.
I know priests who were kicked out of their diocese simply because they preached that abortion was evil. I know priests who were kicked out of their Traditional Latin Mass society simply because they hung a curtain in the confessional. I could go on and on about cases of absurdity. To punish priests for absurdly unjust reasons became a hallmark of the post Vatican II era.
Hundreds of new communities and societies were founded. But a vast majority had a single unifying principle: abnormality. I mean ab-norm-ality: that is, a society not founded around the observance of God’s Law (nomos in Greek) but around some other human law: whether the will of the superior, the will of the bishop, the will of the founders: whether or not that will conformed itself to God or to Church teaching or not. Violate the “will” and you are out. Defend the Will of God against the “will” and you are out. It did not matter whether you were expelled for stealing or for kneeling at communion, both were equally grave.
The end result is that well over 60% of the clergy today simply do not worship Jesus Christ in practice. They worship the god of the club.
The problem with this moral error, over and above that it is explicitly demonic and idolatrous, is that when you accept as Head of your club a freemason or satanist, then your club has no problems at all with that.
The silence of the rest of the clergy, is thus, perhaps not so much a sign of disagreement, as many of us hope.
A priest who is silent must be questioned. I think you have the right to eternal salvation, and that you have the right to know which god your local priest worships.
And a discussion about the invalid resignation of Pope Benedict XVI is proving to be the best revealer of which god your priest worships. It is absolutely stunning to see the responses of clergy on this topic. The truth frightens them. Literally.
I myself saw that yesterday, when, after asking to meeting with the Head of an important section of the Roman Curia, I saw the head run down the stairs to avoid being seen by me. I guess having read my scholastic question on the Renunciation, a copy of which I mailed to him a few weeks ago, he chose flight over dialogue.
(Credits: The Palazzo Roffia is a Masonic Lodge, the image is from wikipedia https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Palazzo_Roffia,_galleria_00.JPG: Notice how much it looks like a “Catholic chapel”)
Padre Pio warned us
https://twitter.com/HicksonMaike/status/1201555136935538689
Now, as God has given us intellects by which we are able to think and understand, let us think about what Padre Pio said to Father Amorth, the chief exorcist at Rome for many years:
Satan. — Q. Which organizations worship Satan and are also known infiltrators of the ecclesiastical hierarchy? Hmm…… A. The Freemasons.
The bosom of the Church — Q. What could this refer to? Hmm.. A. Bosom is the center or heart. Many mistakenly think this refers to the womb, but it actually refers to the chest or thorax. The heart of the Church is without a doubt the Vatican.
Soon come to rule a false Church — Q. What does it mean to rule a Church? … Hmm. A. To control the leadership and especially the top leader.
Church — Q. What is the Church? Hmm. … A: A world wide hierarchical religious organization ruled by the Bishop of Rome and Bishops in communion with him, with clergy who show their communion by naming the Bishop of Rome in the Canon of the Mass, and who promote and spread his teachings.
False Church — Q. What is a false Church? Hmm. A. Not the Church founded by Jesus Christ upon truth, the power of the office of Peter and that of the Bishops, with the preaching of the Gospel and the Sacraments. A false Church, therefore, will have a false Bishop of Rome, a false Gospel and will show itself by naming the false Bishop in the Canon of the mass.
Now, of whom could Padre Pio be speaking, but an uncanonically elected man who is regarded by Bishops and clergy as the pope, but who attacks Jesus Christ, undermines His Gospel, teaches falsehood and worships demons?
The facts point clearly to whom that is. Those who have eyes can see it. Those who say they do not see it already worship the darkness, even if they worship it in Latin.
POSTSCRIPT: Compare what Archbishop Fulton Sheen said about the Anti-Church, as quoted here by the indomitable Ann Barhnardt.
INIMICA VIS: The prophetic teaching of Pope Leo XIII to the Bishops of Italy
Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII promulgated on December 8, 1892.
To the Bishops of Italy:
The enemy forces, inspired by the evil spirit, ever wage war on the Christian name. They join forces in this endeavor with certain groups of men whose purpose is to subvert divinely revealed truths and to rend the very fabric of Christian society with disastrous dissent. Indeed, how much damage these cohorts, as it were, have inflicted on the Church is well-known. And yet, the spirit of all previous groups hostile to Catholic institutions has come to life again in that group called the Masonic sect, which, strong in manpower and resources, is the leader in a war against anything sacred.
2. Our predecessors in the Roman pontificate have in the course of a century and a half outlawed this group not once, but repeatedly. We too, in accordance with Our duty, have condemned it strongly to Christian people, so that they might beware of its wiles and bravely repel its impious assaults. Moreover, lest cowardice and sloth overtake us imperceptibly, We have deliberately endeavored to reveal the secrets of this pernicious sect and the means by which it labors for the destruction of the Catholic enterprise.
3. Now, though, a certain thoughtless indifference on the part of many Italians has resulted in their not recognizing the magnitude and extent of the peril. And so the faith of our ancestors, the salvation won for mankind by Jesus Christ, and, consequently the great benefits of Christian civilization are endangered. Indeed, fearing nothing and yielding to no one, the Masonic sect proceeds with greater boldness day by day: with its poisonous infection it pervades entire communities and strives to entangle itself in all the institutions of our country in its conspiracy to forcefully deprive the Italian people of their Catholic faith, the origin and source of their greatest blessings.
4. This is the reason for the endless artifices they employ in their assault on the divinely inspired faith; this is the reason why the legitimate liberty of the Church is treated with contempt and beset with legal oppression. They believe that the Church does not possess the nature and essence of a true society, that the State has priority over it, and that civil authority takes precedence over sacred authority. This false and destructive doctrine has been frequently condemned by the Holy See. Among many other ills, it has been responsible for the usurpation on the part of civil authorities of that to which they have no right and for their unscrupulous appropriation of what they have alienated from the Church. This is clear in the case of ecclesiastical benefices; they usurp the right to give or withhold the revenues of these according to their good pleasure.
5. Likewise, in a manner no less insidious, they plan to soften the opposition of the lower clergy with their promises. Their purpose in this endeavor can easily be detected, especially since the very authors of this undertaking do not take sufficient pains to conceal what they intend. They wish to win over the clergy by cajolery; once the novelties have confused them, they will withdraw their obedience to legitimate authority. And yet in this matter they seem to have underestimated the virtue of our clergy, who for so many years have given manifest examples of their moderation and loyalty. We have every reason to be confident that, with God’s help, they will continue their devotion to duty no matter what circumstances may arise.
6. This summary indicates both the extent of the activity of the Masonic sect and the goal of its endeavors. What compounds this harmful situation, however, and causes Us deep anxiety is that far too many of our compatriots, driven by hope of their personal advantage or by perverse ambition, have given their names or support to the sect. This being so, We commend first and foremost to your efforts the eternal salvation of those whom we have just mentioned: may your zeal never waver in constantly and insistently recalling them from their error and certain destruction. To be sure, the task of extricating those who have fallen into the snares of the Masons is laborious, and its outcome is doubtful, if we consider the cleverness of the sect: still the recovery of no one should ever be despaired of since the force of apostolic charity is truly marvelous.
7. Next, we must heal those who have erred in this respect out of faint-heartedness, that is, those who, not because of a debased nature but because of weakness of spirit and lack of discretion, have allowed themselves to be drawn into supporting the Masonic enterprises. Sufficiently weighty are the words of Our predecessor Felix III in this regard. “An error which is not resisted is approved; a truth which is not defended is suppressed…. He who does not oppose an evident crime is open to the suspicion of secret complicity.” By reminding them of the examples of their forefathers, the broken spirits of these men must be reanimated with that courage which is the guardian of duty and dignity alike, so that they may be ashamed and regret their cowardly actions. For surely our whole life is involved in a constant battle in which our salvation itself is at stake; nothing is more disgraceful for a Christian than cowardice.
8. It is likewise necessary to strengthen those who fall because of ignorance. By this we mean those, not few in number, who, deceived by appearances and allured by various enticements, allow themselves without understanding it to be enrolled in the Masonic order. In these cases We hope that with divine inspiration they will be able some day to repudiate their error and perceive the truth, especially if you try to remove the false outward appearance of the sect and reveal its hidden designs. Indeed these can no longer be considered hidden since their very accomplices have themselves disclosed them in many ways. Why, within the last few months, the designs of the Masons have been publicly proclaimed throughout Italy, even to the point of ostentation! They wish to see the religion founded by God reudiated and all affairs, private as well as public, regulated by the principles of naturalism alone; this is what, in their impiety and stupidity, they call the restoration of civil society. And yet the State will plunge headlong into ruin if Christians are not willing to be vigilant and not willing to labor to support its well-being!
9. But in the presence of such audacious evils, it is not sufficient merely to be aware of the wiles of this vile sect: we must also war against it, using those very arms furnished by the divine faith which once prevailed against paganism. Therefore, it is your task to inflame souls by persuasion, exhortation and example, nourish in the clergy and our people a zeal for religion and salvation which is active, resolute, and intrepid. These qualities frequently distinguish Catholic peoples of other nations in similar situations. It is commonly claimed that the ancient ardor of spirit in protecting their ancestral faith has grown cold among the Italian people. Nor is this perhaps false; especially since if the dispositions of both sides be inspected, those who wage war on religion seem to show more energy than those who repel it. But for those who seek salvation there can be no middle ground between laborious struggle and destruction. Therefore, in the case of the weak and sluggish, courage must be stirred up through your efforts; in the case of the strong, it must be kept active; with all trace of dissent wiped out, under your leadership and command, the result will be that all alike, with united minds and common discipline, may undertake the battle in a spirited manner.
10. Because of the gravity of the matter and the necessity of repelling the danger, We have decided to address the Italian people in a letter which We are including along with this one; propagate it as widely as possible and, where needed, interpret it to your people. In this manner, with the blessing of God, we can hope that spirits may be aroused through the contemplation of the threatening evils and betake themselves without delay to the remedies which We have pointed out.
11. As a presage of divine gifts and testimony of Our benevolence We affectionately accord to you, Venerable Brethren, and the people entrusted to your care, the apostolic blessing.
Given in Rome at St. Peter’s, 8 December 1892, in the 15th year of Our Pontificate.
_________________________
[English translation from Papal Encyclicals online; compare the text at the Vatican website English – Italiano].
“Team Bergoglio” and the legacy of Cardinal Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro
Rome, January 10, 2015: It has been a little over 111 years ago, since another controversial Conclave met and elected a now famous Pope. That was the Conclave of August 1903, and the Cardinal elected was St. Giuseppe Sarto, who took the name Pius X.
Several historians, basing themselves on the testimony of none other than Cardinal Merry Del Val and Cardinal Matthieu in the last hundred years have sustained that that Conclave was marked by a remarkable occurrence, the veto by the Austrian Emperor, Franz Josef I, against one of the leading contenders, Cardinal Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro, the Secretary of State of Pope Leo XIII. The motivation of this intervention has been attributed by Msgr. Jouin and Craig Heimbichner (the latter in his book, Blood and Altar) to the association of Cardinal Rampolla with French Freemasonry. [Editor’s Note Sept 4, 2023: This veto is mentioned in the newspaper, The Sun (Christchurch, New Zealand), Volume VI, Issue 1838, 5 January 1920, Page 8.]
The curious Conclave of 1903 had a curious consequence: that during the reign of Pope St. Pius X, the followers of Cardinal Rampolla who were raised to the dignity of the episcopate, where ordained by the Pope, and those of the Pope by Cardinal Rampolla. In the first case, the co-consecrators were either both or at least in one individual, themselves bishops ordained by Cardinal Rampolla.
Does this indicate a sort of compromise in the Conclave itself, by which the Catholic Cardinals and the Cardinals who were Freemasons came to some agreement, not to contest the validity of the election of Pope St Pius X?
Cardinal Rampolla passed away suddenly on Dec. 16, 1913, exactly 23 years before the birthday of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, born Dec. 17, 1936.
In any event, it is noticeable that the members of “Team Bergoglio” can trace their episcopal lineage back to Cardinal Rampolla and Pope St. Pius X in such wise as to both seemingly confirm the existence of such a compromise and to mark “Team Bergoglio” as the ecclesiastical heirs of the legacy of Cardinal Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro.
But don’t take my word on it, go to catholic-hierarchy.org and check for yourself. Here I will summarize what I have found there among the lists of the episcopal lineages of the alleged members of “Team Bergoglio”.
An episcopal lineage is the list of names of the principal consecrators of each bishop in the line extending from the bishop ordained back to the Apostles. Episcopal lineages have been traced in the Roman Rite back to the 15th century. When reading a lineage, the first named is the one consecrated, the next his principal consecrator, the next the principal consecrator of the principal consecrator. When ordained a bishop, every bishop is ordained by 3 bishops, the principal and 2 co-consecrators, which are normally chosen by the individual to be ordained. This can, thus, give some indication of the allegiance of the one to be ordained to existing factions withing the Sacred Hierarchy.
Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio
His direct episcopal lineage can be traced thus: Jorge Mario Bergoglio was ordained a bishop on June 27, 1992, by
- Antonio Cardinal Quarracino † (1962)
Archbishop of Buenos Aires, whose principal consecrator was - Bishop Anunciado Serafini † (1935)
Bishop of Mercedes, whose principal consecrator was - Archbishop Zenobio Lorenzo Guilland † (1935)
Archbishop of Paraná, whose principal consecrator was - Archbishop Filippo Cortesi † (1921),
Titular Archbishop of Siraces, whose principal consecrator was - Antonio Cardinal Vico † (1898)
Cardinal-Bishop of Porto e Santa Rufina, whose principal consecrator was - Mariano Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro † (1882)
Thus, Cardinal Bergoglio is a direct episcopal “descendant” and “heir” of the Rampolla legacy.
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor
Next, the alleged ring-leader of “Team Bergoglio”, who was consecrated a bishop on Dec. 21, 1977, by
- Archbishop Michael George Bowen (1970)
Archbishop of Southwark, England, whose principal consecrator was - Archbishop Domenico Enrici † (1955)
Titular Archbishop of Ancusa, whose principal consecrator was - Archbishop Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini † (1954)
Archbishop of Milano {Milan}, whose principal consecrator was - Eugène-Gabriel-Gervais-Laurent Cardinal Tisserant † (1937)
Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia, whose principal consecrator was - Eugenio Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Cardinal Pacelli † (1917)
Cardinal-Priest of Santi Giovanni e Paolo, whose principal consecrator was - Pope Benedict XV (1907)
(Giacomo Giambattista della Chiesa †)
Cardinal Giambattista della Chiesa was the personal secretary and close ally of Cardinal Rampolla, from the time that the latter was Apostolic Nuncio to Spain. Cardinal della Chiesa was ordained a bishop, however, by Pope St. Pius X.
Cardinal Christoph Schönborn
Next, one of the members of “Team Bergoglio”, whom Dr. Ivereigh names in his book, but whom is not one of the 4 who have made public denials, is the Cardinal of Vienna, who was consecrated a bishop on Sept. 29, 1991 by
- Hans Hermann Cardinal Groër, O.S.B. † (1986)
Archbishop of Wien {Vienna} whose principal consecrator was - Franz Cardinal König † (1952)
Archbishop Emeritus of Wien {Vienna}, whose principal consecrator was - Bishop Michael Memelauer † (1927)
Bishop of Sankt Pölten, whose principal consecrator was - Friedrich (Gustav) Cardinal Piffl † (1913)
Archbishop of Wien {Vienna}, whose principal consecrator was - Archbishop Raffaele Scapinelli di Leguigno † (1912)
Titular Archbishop of Laodicea in Syria, whose principal consecrator was - Rafael Cardinal Merry del Val y Zulueta † (1900)
Cardinal-Priest of Santa Prassede, whose principal consecrator was - Mariano Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro † (1882)
Cardinal-Priest of Santa Cecilia
Thus, Cardinal Schönborn is a direct episcopal “descendant” and “heir” of the Cardinal Rampolla legacy.
Cardinal Santos Abril y Castelló
Next, one of the members of “Team Bergoglio”, whom Dr. Ivereigh names in his book, but whom is not one of the 4 who have made public denials, is the Cardinal-Archpriest of Santa Maria Maggiore, who was consecrated a bishop on June 16, 1985 by
- Agostino Cardinal Casaroli † (1967)
Cardinal-Bishop of Porto e Santa Rufina, whose principal consecrator was - Pope Paul VI (1954)
(Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini †), whose principal consecrator was - Eugène-Gabriel-Gervais-Laurent Cardinal Tisserant † (1937)
Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia, whose principal consecrator was - Eugenio Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Cardinal Pacelli † (1917)
Cardinal-Priest of Santi Giovanni e Paolo, whose principal consecrator was - Pope Benedict XV (1907)
(Giacomo Giambattista della Chiesa †)
Cardinal Giambattista della Chiesa was the personal secretary and close ally of Cardinal Rampolla, from the time that the latter was Apostolic Nuncio to Spain. Cardinal della Chiesa was ordained a bishop, however, by Pope St. Pius X.
Other alleged members of the Team trace back to Cardinal Gasparri
Other alleged members of “Team Bergoglio” are Cardinals Godfreid Danneels, Karl Lehman and Walter Kasper all descend from Cardinal Pietro Gasparri, whose episcopal lineage does not cross Cardinal Rampolla. Similarly, Cardinal André Armand Vingt-Trois of Paris, another named member, who has made no public denials, traces his lineage back to Cardinal François-Marie-Benjamin Richard de la Vergne, who was the principal consecrator of Cardinal Gasparri.
However, Cardinal Pietro Gasparri himself has been accused of being a collaborator with Cardinal Rampolla in opposing the reforms of Pope St. Pius X, in particular, the effort to extirpate the heresy of Modernism among the upper clergy.
Other implicated Cardinals
The text of Ivereigh also implicates Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley of Boston, and the African Cardinals, such as Cardinal Napier of Durban. Both of these Cardinals have lineages tracing back to Cardinal Gaetano De Lai, both of whose co-consecrators were themselves consecrated principally by Cardinal Rampolla.