Sunday, 18 February 2018

Saint Jorge Bergoglio - Patron Saint of Pervert Protectors

Every Pope since 1958 is to be a Saint. This includes the current two.

How blest is our generation to have so many holy popes!


The whole process of proclaiming saints has become a fraud. It is about as credible as the Nobel Peace Prize since it was given to Hussein Obama. 

At one time, it meant that the person was in heaven. Now it is nothing more than a publicity show for a political agenda.

It is as much a fraud as the papacy of Bergoglio.

Now, Bergoglio declares his own canonization!
“There are two [recent] Bishops of Rome already Saints [John XXIII and John Paul II].  Paul VI will be a saint this year. One with the beatification cause in progress, John Paul I, his cause is open.  And Benedict and I, are on the waiting list: pray for us!”

Image result

Look at the self-satisfying grin on his face. 

Such hubris. Such arrogance from this boil on the seat of Peter. 

Behold, Pope Francis of Rome, Patron Saint of Pervert Protecting Bishops

Saturday, 17 February 2018

Hey George, If you don't read the blogs that call you a heretic then how do you know?

Image result for angry bergoglio
"For mental health, I do not read the websites of this so-called" resistance. "I know who I am, I know the groups, but I do not read them, simply for my mental health ... Some resistances come from people who believe they have the true doctrine and they accuse you of being a heretic: when in these people, for what they say or write, I find no spiritual goodness, I simply pray for them." 

Nobody believes that humble line anymore

Bergoglio's Child Porn, Sodomite Infested Church is not Christ's - How many times has this Bergoglio refused to clean out the excrement from the stables?

In yet another sex scandal in the Church of Bergoglio, a prelate of the Roman Rota, under suspicion of sexual harassment since 1991 and again in 2004, has been convicted of possession of child pornography. Pervert Monsignor Pietro Amenta was given a slap on the wrist and a suspended sentence.

It is just one more example of the homosexual filth present in the Vatican, a putrid swamp of sodomites, perverts, child pornography aficionados that Jorge Bergoglio has refused to deal with. From "Who am I to judge" to the refusal to extradite to Canada, Msgr. Carlo Capella, to the cocaine snorting sodomite Msgr. Luigi Capozzi, to the Barros scandal in Chile, the insults by Bergoglio to the victims and then the "pope's outright lie about the facts of knowledge of the event when the evidence was put in his hand by Cardinal O'Malley of Boston, Bergoglio has refused yet again to confront the evil infiltration of homosexuals in the structure of the Catholic Church.

Just think of it, sorry for the image that will be burned into your brain. Here is Monsignor Amenta sitting in front of his computer, masturbating to the images of young children or more likely, teenage boys, being raped, sodomised and abused for his pleasure and then, the next morning, offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Imagine a concelebration by these three perverts, Amenta, Capella and Copozzi. What filthy swine. 

Joseph Ratzinger, as Pope, commisioned an investigation by three retired Cardinals into the corruption in the Vatican and handed it over to Bergoglio. He has done nothing to expose and eliminate this putrid evil and in fact, has emboldened it by refusing to act against such heretical homosexualists as James Martin, S.J., Daniel Horan, OFM and Blaise Cupich,, whom he has made Cardinal Archbishop of Chicago.

Catholics, wake up. Bishops, Cardinals where are you? You sit by and say nothing whilst this filthy rot continues. Yet again, we awake to another story of evil, of sexual perversion in the leadership of the Catholic Church. Yet, these prelates wonder why the pews are empty and people are leaving the faith. It takes a great deal of faith and grace to withstand this assault on a daily basis. Do we stop reporting it, lest we create scandal and cause people to leave? No? It was St. Gregory the Great who said, "It is better for scandals to arise than truth to be suppressed." 

The truth is, the Holy Catholic Church has been infiltrated in every diocese by homosexual men who are there for self-gain, lust and to destroy the faith. Every bishop, every cardinal who refuses to act against these filthy perverts, this scum, is guilty before God and man and will burn in Hell for their lack of faith and zeal. They are hirelings and wolves. 

Catholics, where are you? When will you rise up and fight for the Jesus Christ and the Truth?

Beroglio says he does not read blogs for his mental health and that he knows who we are who call him a "heretic."

I will go further than calling "Pope" Francis a heretic. I will call him a derelict. A sodomite protecting enabler. A homosexualist and a liar.

Did you read that George?

Image result for Pietro Amenta
A homosexual judge of the Roman Rota is convicted for possession of images pornography

Nicolas Senèze, in Rome (with Il Messaggero), 
16/02/2018 at 5:34 pm
Bishop Pietro Amenta pleaded guilty after the discovery of 80 child pornography photos on his computer and was sentenced on Thursday, February 15, to 14 months of the suspended sentence. 

A prelate auditor of the Court of the Roman Rota, the highest court of the Church in matrimonial matters, was sentenced on Thursday, February 15 by a judge in Rome for possession of images of child pornography, reports the daily Il Messaggero.

Having chosen to plead guilty, Msgr. Pietro Amenta, 55, priest of the Diocese of Matera (southern Italy), received a suspended sentence of 14 months in prison.

According to the Roman daily, the affair broke out one evening in March after an altercation, when an 18-year-old Romanian boy accused a man of touch in a market.

Image result for msgr pietro amentaKnown to the police

To explain his ambiguous gestures, the man, who turned out to be a priest, first argued that there was not much room between the stalls before he fled, pursued by the young man.

Both were then caught by an off-duty municipal officer, before the arrival of a carabineros car where the young man complained that he had twice been touched by the priest.

During the carabineros' inquiries, it became clear that the young Romanian was not known to the Italian police, while the priest, prelate auditor at La Rote since 2012, had already been the subject of a complaint for obscene acts in 1991 and, in 2004, for sexual harassment. In 2013, he also filed a complaint after being robbed by two transsexuals.

Investigations at the Vatican

During a search of his home, the carabinieri then found on his computer 80 pornographic photos with minors in the foreground. If he denied having downloaded them, the priest then chose to make a deal with Italian justice.

The case concerned the Italian justice, the promoter of justice of the State of the Vatican City had revealed in early February at the time of the Vatican judicial return, that his services were currently investigating two cases of pedophilia from people working for the Vatican.

So far, only one case was known: that of a priest of the nunciature in Washington targeted by an investigation for possession of child pornography.

"The investigations initiated are at the preliminary stage and are carried out conscientiously, with the most absolute reserve, out of respect for all the persons concerned", assured the prosecutor Gian Piero Milano, expressing the "determination" of the Vatican justice in the material.

Nicolas Senèze, in Rome (with Il Messaggero)

Wednesday, 14 February 2018

Bergoglio and Parolin Despise the "Genuine Faith" of Those Who Defend the Church!

From the blog of Cardinal Zen translated by LifeSiteNews:

I still can’t understand understand what they are dialoguing with China over

by Cardinal Joseph Zen

Response to “Why we are in dialogue with China,” the interview His Eminence Cardinal Parolin granted to Gianni Valente (that is, the interview they cooked up together).

I have read the interview several times, and now I am reading it again (even though doing so disgusts me).

I am grateful to His Eminence for having acknowledged that “it is legitimate to have differing opinions.”


First of all, one notes the insistence with which His Eminence says that his point of view and the purpose of his activities are pastoral, spiritual, evangelical and faith-based nature, while our thinking and acting are only politically driven.

What we see instead is that he adores the Ostpolitik diplomacy of his teacher, [Agostino] Casaroli, and despises the genuine faith of those who firmly defend the Church, founded by Jesus on the Apostles, from any interference of secular power.

I cannot forget my astonishment in reading one of his addresses a few years ago in the Osservatore Romano, where he described the heroes of the faith in Central-European countries under the communist regime (Cardinal Wyszynsky, Cardinal Mindszenty and Cardinal Beran, though without naming them) ) as “gladiators,” and “people systematically opposed to the government and eager to appear on the political stage.”


One also notes the repeated mention of his compassion for the suffering of our brothers in China. Crocodile tears! What suffering is he talking about? He knows very well that they are not afraid of poverty, nor the limitation or deprivation of liberty, nor even the loss of life. But he doesn’t respect this at all (they are “gladiators”!)

He also speaks of wounds that are still open, and his intention to heal them with “the balm of mercy.” But what wounds is he talking about?

Towards the end of the interview, at a certain point he says: “With frankness, ... I will say: I am also convinced that some of the suffering experienced by the Church in China is due not so much to the will of individuals, as it is to the objective complexity of the situation.”

Therefore, he knows very well that, in the Church in China, it’s not (or rarely) a matter of personal offenses or resentments, but that they are all victims of persecution by an atheistic totalitarian power. Use the balm of mercy? But there are no personal offenses to forgive. It is a slavery from which they need to be liberated.

Mercy for the persecutors? For their accomplices? Reward traitors? Castigate the faithful? Force a legitimate bishop to surrender his post to an excommunicated one? Is this not rather rubbing salt in the wounds.

Let’s go back to the “objective situation.” The painful state wasn’t created by us, but by the regime. The communists want to enslave the Church. There are those who refuse this slavery, there are those who submit to it. Unfortunately, there are also those who embrace it.

Faced with this reality how is it possible not to speak of “power, resistance, clash, compromise, failure, surrender, and betrayal”?

Parolin wants us to talk about communion and collaboration. But are there conditions? Where do we unite? How do we collaborate? Let us analyze two fundamental matters that need to be clarified.


What is the nature of the unity we want to achieve?

    a) His Eminence praises Chinese Catholics and says that “there are not two Catholic Churches in China.” If I am not mistaken, I was the first one to say this at a meeting of the Synod of Bishops, given that, in both communities, the faithful are loyal to the Pope in their hearts (today with the increase of opportunists in the community run by the Government I no longer dare to apply the statement to the whole Church in China).

But Parolin cannot deny that, for the moment, there are two communities with two structures based on two different, opposing principles. One structure is founded on the principle of the Primacy of Peter, on which Jesus established his Church, while the other structure is imposed by an atheistic government intent on creating a schismatic Church that is subject to its power.

    b) Eliminating this division and reestablishing unity must be the desire of every Catholic, but not with a clean slate, let alone by manipulating the Pope Benedict’s Letter [to Chinese Catholics].

In the Pope Emeritus’s letter there is this paragraph (8.10): “Some [bishops], not wishing to be subjected to undue control exercised over the life of the Church, and eager to maintain total fidelity to the Successor of Peter and to Catholic doctrine, have felt themselves constrained to opt for clandestine consecration. The clandestine condition is not a normal feature of the Church’s life, and history shows that Pastors and faithful have recourse to it only amid suffering, in the desire to maintain the integrity of their faith and to resist interference from State agencies in matters pertaining intimately to the Church’s life.” Father Jeroom Heyndricks, quoting out of context the phrase “the clandestine condition is not a normal feature of the Church’s life,” took as his mission to spread the word throughout China (where he enjoyed great freedom of movement): “There is no longer any need for clandestine communities. Everyone must come out into the open, i.e. become part of the community subject to the Government.

In the Commission for the Church in China we noted this great error, but both the Secretariat of State and the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples have ignored this warning, obviously supporting the idea of ​​Father Heyndricks.

Only after two years, when this error had already done immense damage, did we manage insert into the “Compendium” booklet several notes that aim to distinguish a reconciliation of hearts from unity in the structures.

    c) Parolin says that one should not “maintain a perennial conflict between opposing principles and structures.” But obviously this does not depend on us alone, because one of the two structures is under the power of the Government, which certainly already controls it and gives no sign of giving it up.

Pope Benedict says that the journey toward unity “is not easy and cannot be accomplished overnight” (6.5, 6.6).

But our diplomats want to perform a miracle immediately and accuse others of “clinging to the spirit of opposition in order to condemn their brother,” of “using the past as a pretext to forge new resentments and closures,” and of “not being ready to forgive, which means that there are other interests to defend.”

How cruel are these reproaches addressed to faithful members of the Church, who for many long years have suffered every kind of deprivation and oppression for their fidelity to the true Church!

When the other party has no intention of respecting the essential nature of the Catholic Church and, on our side, they want to achieve unification at all costs, there is only one possible choice, that of forcing everyone to enter the “cage.”

    d) With the solution of the “enlarged cage” will we walk together? Will it be a new path? With serenity? With confidence?

They say it will be a gradual process, but suppose the planners already have in mind what the next step after the legitimizing of the illegitimate will be.

What will become of the legitimate Bishops according to the law of the Church but not recognized by the Government? Will they be “accepted”? That is, also admitted to the cage? Will there finally be “one” legitimate episcopal conference? (With the Government holding the key to the cage?)

Parolin and company recognize that this solution is not perfect, it is a lesser evil. Once can endure and suffer an evil (harm), but you can never do wrong (sin), however great or small it might be.

Suffering as others create a schismatic Church may be inevitable, but we cannot help in its creation.

Furthermore, there is no reason to fear a schismatic church created by the party. It will fade with the collapse of the regime. But a schismatic church with the Pope’s blessing will be horrible!


Having clarified the nature of the unity to be reached, it is easy to consider the following problem: How do we achieve this unity?

Through reconciliation (ad intra) and dialogue (with the Government).

    a) Reconciliation is not without difficulty but it is possible, because it depends only on our goodwill. Dialogue with the Government is more difficult.

    b) Pope Francis had said in Seoul: “The first condition of a dialogue is consistency with one’s own identity.”

It is a matter of honesty, of justice. We need to know and make known where we want to arrive, that is, according to our conscience what a good outcome of the dialogue will be. In our case, it is obviously: “a true religious freedom which not only does not harm but fosters the true good of the nation.”

Will we succeed in this dialogue? Is there a hope of success? Is there even a minimum foundation in the present situation, when the Chinese Communist Party is more powerful and dominating than ever? When both his actions and pronouncements are directed toward a more rigorous control over every religion, but in a special way of the so-called “foreign” religions.

The Communists no longer even feel the need to keep up appearances. Photographs show that it is the State that manages the Catholic Church in China, which is no longer Catholic but Chinese, schismatic. (It is a government official who presides over the [always] joint meeting of the Patriotic Association and the so-called “episcopal conference”). The Popes refrain from using the word “schism” out of compassion for those who find themselves there not of their own volition but under severe pressure.

From what we see, the Holy See is accepting this unacceptable reality. (Is it sure it is doing good to the Church?)

For dialogue to be true, it must start with a position of equality. There is no real dialogue between the jailer and the prisoners, between the victor and the vanquished. But our side seems to begin from a position of weakness. Reliable sources say that the Vatican Delegation could not discuss the case of Bishop Giacomo Su Zhi Min, who has been in the hands of the government for more than twenty years, because they refused to discuss it. It seems to me that our side should have left the negotiating table and come home. Accepting their refusal is like kneeling from the start.

After all, we are not the vanquished. Do our diplomats not know that the faithful of the clandestine community constituted, and perhaps still constitute, the majority? That in various places they have churches and cathedrals? That in the city, where obviously they cannot have churches, they have Masses said in private houses and are undisturbed by the public security authorities who are also aware of everything. Unfortunately, as of February 2018, we can expect a much stricter control by the Government on the activities of our brothers and sisters, also because the Government knows that it now has the Holy See’s consent.

(c) While supporting the need for external dialogue with the government, the Vatican has stifled dialogue within the Church. With a supremely ill-mannered gesture, and without a word, it liquidated the Pontifical Commission for the Church in China established Pope Benedict. They got rid of the only competent Chinese voice in the Vatican, Archbishop Savio, by sending him as nuncio to Greece. “Finding syntheses of truth” indeed!“Discovering God’s plan together” indeed! They are sure they “have considered everything adequately.”


The most repugnant thing I find in the whole interview is the dishonest exploitation of phrases in the Letter of Pope Benedict, making it appear that he was a faithful supporter of the Pope Emeritus, whereas in reality he and the then Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of the Peoples thwarted all of Pope Ratzinger’s efforts to bring the Church in China back to the right path.

At the beginning and end of the interview he cites two quotations, respectively.

    a) In Chapter 4, paragraph 7 Pope Benedict says: “The solution to existing problems cannot be pursued via an ongoing conflict with the legitimate civil authorities; at the same time, though, compliance with those authorities is not acceptable when they interfere unduly in matters regarding the faith and discipline of the Church.”

    b) In Paragraph 6, he had said: (Citing Deus caritas est) “The Church cannot and must not take upon herself the political battle to bring about the most just society possible. She cannot and must not replace the State. Yet at the same time she cannot and must not remain on the sidelines in the fight for justice.”

In both quotes, Parolin took advantage of the first half, leaving out the other half, thus losing the balance of Pope Benedict’s thought.


Given the recent controversies, I cannot fail to clarify my relationship with Pope Francis who, whenever I meet him, fills me with tenderness.

It is true that my revelations of private conversations may have caused him embarrassment. I am sorry for this. But I am still convinced that there is a divide between His Holiness’ way of thinking and the way of thinking of his collaborators, who have a field day taking advantage of the Pope’s optimism to pursue their goals. Until proven otherwise, I am convinced that I have defended the good name of the Pope from responsibility for the erroneous things coming from his collaborators, and of having communicated his encouragement to my brothers and sisters in China who are, as we say in China, “in the burning fire and in deep waters.”

If one day it should happen that a bad agreement is signed with China, obviously with the approval of the Pope, I will withdraw in silence to a “monastic life.” Certainly as a son, even though unworthy, of Don Bosco, I will not make myself the head of a rebellion against the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.

Let us pray for Pope Francis “that the Lord may preserve him, give him strength, make him happy, and save him from the hands of his enemies.”

Translation by Diane Montagna

Sunday, 11 February 2018

Five years ago today

Related image

It was five years ago this very morning. I, like most of you in the eastern time zone, was getting dressed for work, it was the 6AM news. Pope Benedict XVI had renounced the papacy and called for a Conclave to elect a new pope. I was dumbfounded and left in near shock. The next few weeks were filled with uncertainty and fear, but hopeful that with a College that elected him and added to by him, we would emerge with the right man. Could it be Schola? Perhaps even Burke? Naive was I and anesthetized by the illusion and the hopes so falsely raised during that Pontificate. Yet, one thing will stand out and for that, we must be truly thankful, - Summorum Pontificum. This is the one act that has given us the weapon to battle. Bergoglio will not take it, he would not dare.  

A few weeks later, a man walked out on the loggia. I knew something was wrong. It was my view that the Conclave was too fast, it gave me the feeling that it was not sincere, that somehow, they did not listen to the Holy Spirit. As he came out and I watched him, with that cold stare, the silence, the "good evening," I felt the urge to vomit; it lasted for hours. My wife felt the same and I have come to know of hundreds of others with similar reactions. Jorge Mario Bergoglio? Who was he? I did not know who he was, but I knew, it was not good.

What I do know is that Joseph Ratzinger abandoned his children to the wolves. Perhaps we did not pray enough that he would not "flee" for fear of them, but our father abandoned his children and left us to a cruel and vindictive step-father. I loved Joseph Ratzinger, I miss him terribly. Today, I can only look at him with sadness and pity. 

There are too many unanswered questions about Ratzinger's renouncement and Bergoglio's election. Numerous times I have posted the comments by the Freemasons in Italy and Argentina praising his election. Numerous times I have posted the address by Cardinal "Uncle Teddy" McCarrick about his own conspiracy to elect Bergoglio and how he was lobbied by a powerful and influential Roman.

18:20 Just before we went into the general conversations when everybody can talk, a very interesting and influential Italian gentleman came to ask if he could come and see me, so I said “sure.”
He came to see me at the Seminary, at the American College where I was staying; and we sat down. He is a very brilliant man, a very influential man in Rome and we talked about a number of things. He had a favour to ask me when I get back to the United States, but then he asked,
What about Bergoglio?”
I was surprised at the question, I said, “what about him.”
He said, “Does he have a chance?”
I said, “I don’t think so, because no one has mentioned his name, he hasn’t been in anybody’s mind, I don’t think it’s on anybody’s mind to vote for him.”
He said, “He could do it you know.”
I said, “What could he do?”
He said, “He could reform the Church, if we gave him five years, he could put us back on target. “
“Well, he’s 76.”
“Yeah, in five years, if he had five years. The Lord working through Bergoglio in five years could make the Church over again.”
I said, “That’s an interesting thing.”
“I know you’re his friend.”
“Well, I hope I’m his friend.”
He said, Talk him up.
That was the first that I heard from people that Bergoglio would be a possibility in this election.
I hope that the new, that the one who is elected Pope, will be someone who, if he is not himself a Latin American, would at least have a very strong interest in Latin America”. “Was that part of it? Who knows?  What is it my friend said? “Push Bergoglio”?  Did he say it to a lot of people? I don’t know.”

Consider this then.

Gustavo Raffi, Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy

"With the election of Pope Francis nothing will ever be the same again. With Pope Francis, nothing will be more as it was before. It is a clear choice of fraternity for a Church of dialogue, which is not contaminated by the logic and temptations of temporal power"
“A man of the poor far away from the Curia. Fraternity and the desire to dialogue were his first concrete words. Perhaps nothing in the Church will be as it was before. Our hope is that the pontificate of Francis, the Pope who 'comes from the end of the world' can mark the return to the Church-Word instead of the Church-Institution, promoting an open dialogue with the contemporary world, with believers and non-believers, following the springtime of Vatican II." 
"The Jesuit who is close to the least ones of history," Raffi continues, "has the great opportunity to show the world the face of a Church that must recover the announcement of a new humanity, not the weight of an institution that closes itself off in defense of its own privileges. Bergoglio knows real life and will remember the lesson of one of his favorite theologians, Romano Guardini, for whom the truth of love cannot be stopped. 
"The simple cross he wore on his white cassock," concludes the Grand Master of Palazzo Giustiniani, "lets us hope that a Church of the people will re-discover its capacity to dialogue with all men of good will and with Freemasonry, which, as the experience of Latin America teaches us, works for the good and progress of humanity, as shown by Bolivar, Allende and José Martí, to name only a few. This is the 'white smoke' that we expect from the Church of our times."  

Someone knows something. Somewhere, there is a key to this mystery and it will not be hidden forever.

* * *

Dear President Trump:

The campaign slogan “Make America Great Again,” resonated with millions of common Americans and your tenacity in pushing back against many of the most harmful recent trends has been most inspiring. We all look forward to seeing a continued reversal of the collectivist trends of recent decades.

Reversing recent collectivist trends will, by necessity, require a reversal of many of the actions taken by the previous administration.  Among those actions, we believe that there is one that remains cloaked in secrecy.  Specifically, we have reason to believe that a Vatican “regime change” was engineered by the Obama administration.

We were alarmed to discover that, during the third year of the first term of the Obama administration your previous opponent, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and other government officials with whom she associated proposed a Catholic “revolution” in which the final demise of what was left of the Catholic Church in America would be realized.[1]  Approximately a year after this e-mail discussion, which was never intended to be made public, we find that Pope Benedict XVI abdicated under highly unusual circumstances and was replaced by a pope whose apparent mission is to provide a spiritual component to the radical ideological agenda of the international left. [2] The Pontificate of Pope Francis has subsequently called into question its own legitimacy on a multitude of occasions. [3]

During the 2016 presidential campaign, we were astonished to witness Pope Francis actively campaigning against your proposed policies concerning the securing of our borders, and even going so far as to suggest that you are not a Christian [4].  We appreciated your prompt and pointed response to this disgraceful accusation [5].

We remain puzzled by the behaviour of this ideologically charged Pope, whose mission seems to be one of advancing secular agendas of the left rather than guiding the Catholic Church in Her sacred mission.  It is simply not the proper role of a Pope to be involved in politics to the point that he is considered to be the leader of the international left.

While we share your stated goal for America, we believe that the path to “greatness” is for America to be “good” again, to paraphrase de Tocqueville.  We understand that good character cannot be forced on people, but the opportunity to live our lives as good Catholics has been made increasingly difficult by what appears to be a collision between a hostile United States government and a pope who seems to hold as much ill will towards followers of perennial Catholic teachings as he seems to hold toward yourself.

With all of this in mind, and wishing the best for our country as well as for Catholics worldwide, we believe it to be the responsibility of loyal and informed United States Catholics to petition you to authorize an investigation into the following questions:

- To what end was the National Security Agency monitoring the conclave that elected Pope Francis? [6]

-  What other covert operations were carried out by US government operatives concerning the resignation of Pope Benedict or the conclave that elected Pope Francis?

-  Did US government operatives have contact with the “Cardinal Danneels Mafia”?  [7]

-  International monetary transactions with the Vatican were suspended during the last few days prior to the resignation of Pope Benedict.  Were any U.S. Government agencies involved in this? [8]

-  Why were international monetary transactions resumed on February 12, 2013, the day after Benedict XVI announced his resignation? Was this pure coincidence? [9]

-  What actions, if any, were actually taken by John Podesta, Hillary Clinton, and others tied to the Obama administration who were involved in the discussion proposing the fomenting of a “Catholic Spring”?

- What was the purpose and nature of the secret meeting between Vice President Joseph Biden and Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican on or about June 3, 2011?

-   What roles were played by George Soros and other international financiers who may be currently residing in United States territory? [10]

We believe that the very existence of these unanswered questions provides sufficient evidence to warrant this request for an investigation.

Should such an investigation reveal that the U.S. government interfered inappropriately into the affairs of the Catholic Church, we further request the release of the results so that Catholics may request appropriate action from those elements of our hierarchy who remain loyal to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Please understand that we are not requesting an investigation into the Catholic Church; we are simply asking for an investigation into recent activities of the U.S. Government, of which you are now the chief executive.

Thank you again, and be assured of our most sincere prayers.


David L. Sonnier, LTC US ARMY (Retired)
Michael J. Matt, Editor of The Remnant
Christopher A. Ferrara (President of The American Catholic Lawyers Association, Inc.)
Chris Jackson,
Elizabeth Yore, Esq., Founder of Yore Children

Saturday, 10 February 2018

The pressure on Bergoglio is mounting - he cannot run from this

There are two items that are important to read in order to understand fully the situation regarding the Bishop of Rome, his slanderous comments to the victims of sexual perverts in the priesthood, his appointment of Barros, the firing of CDF staff and his playing with the truth.

The second is the detailed and powerful special report by Hilary White at The Remnant.

The depth of the lies and deceit is covering Bergoglio. 

Friday, 9 February 2018

Chilean Abuse Crisis & the Scandal of Bergoglio

I can't print here what I said out loud watching his whiney, lying, hypocritical comments on the aeroplane.

His own CDF advised against Barros!

Is that why the three priests were fired?

Filthy. Stinking. Pervert protector! George Bergoglio lacks more than honesty and dignity. He lacks the grace of office.

And there is a reason for that, isn't there, friends?

Humour and satire speed up before the end

Thursday, 8 February 2018

Why are you discouraged?

It's been a rough start of the year, eh? And it's only February 8.

I won't restate here what has been going on, you all know and if you don't just go over the last twenty or so posts.

It is clear from the comments over the last few weeks that many of you are becoming discouraged and almost in despair over the situation. It is not easy for any of us. I know that, but we were warned, right? Our Lord told us in Scripture. Our Lady told us numerous times, at Quita, La Salette, Fatima and Akita. Saints told us these days were coming. Pope Pius X did and even Benedict XVI.

What none of us can do is to despair. Our Lord Jesus Christ has already won the war. Our job is to remain faithful to Him and His Church in spite of the putrid and vile hirelings who have taken Her over. We don't need to name them, we know who they are.

Now, say a prayer for this blogger and one for yourself and pick up your sword and do battle.

We Are the Crusaders

Tuesday, 6 February 2018

Archbishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo - Stinking Communist agitator. Christ-hating anti Catholic

It is difficult to know where to begin and to hold ones rage, righteous rage, righteous anger at a man so vile, so corrupt, so profoundly evil that to think that he is even a priest, let alone an Archbishop, leaves one to almost sink into despair that such a deceitful man could ever be ordained.

Image result for marcelo sanchez sorondo
It is men such as Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, another Argentine devil; a filthy, stinking old communist who has the ear of Bergoglio and with others, is about to sell out to the Communist government of China, the faithful Catholics, their priests and their bishops.

In a profounding disturbing report in the Catholic Herald, Sorondo praises China as the "best implementer of Catholic social doctrine." It is nearly too much to bear. He has said that the Pope could bind under penalty of sin, the denial of man-caused, global warming or climate change.
We were warned.

In a May 2015 published by C-Fam, he dismissed the primary issue of abortion as a "drama" when there were others of equal "drama," at least in his putrid mind. He praised Jeffrey Sachs and Ban Ki-moon, condemned, "climate change skeptics" and insulted American "tea party" activists. 

(Rome) Archbishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, officially the Grand Chancellor of the Pontifical Academies of Sciences and Social Sciences, is the "political arm" of Pope Francis. He is responsible for a new ambiguity and accommodation in matters of life, culture of death and sterilization as a solution to environmental problems and climate change. The policy had already been laid before the pope's political adviser. He comes from the Argentine upper class. His grandfather was Argentine Interior Minister and his father a well-known political journalist. Even now accusations have been voiced that the pope's political adviser does not live like a priest, since he "never celebrates Holy Mass, and neither does he pray the breviary," says InfoVaticana .

Interesting. When one puts in a search "Archbishop Sorondo celebrates Mass", not one photo comes up with him offering the Holy Sacrifice. His satanic comments and clear globalist and communist leanings reveal that it is quite likely that indeed, "never celebrates Holy Mass, and neither does he pray the breviary.

Sorondo is a devil. 

There was a time, that the Pope would have called in such malefactors as Sorondo, or Marx and demand that they explain themselves and then would promptly strip them of their office.

Sadly, we have a Bishop of Rome who is in league with them.

For more on Sorondo:

Monday, 5 February 2018

Despite denial, Pope got abuse victim's letter - liar, liar cassock on fire

Charity demands that we believe that the Bishop of Rome, "forgot."

Sure he did.


Pope Francis stands in his private library
Pope Francis stands in his private library at the Vatican, Monday, Feb. 5, 2018. (Alessandro Di Meo / Pool photo via AP)
AP Exclusive: Despite denial, Pope got abuse victim's letter

Nicole Winfield and Eva Vergara, The Associated Press
Published Monday, February 5, 2018, 7:55AM EST

VATICAN CITY -- Pope Francis received a victim's letter in 2015 that graphically detailed how a priest sexually abused him and how other Chilean clergy ignored it, contradicting the pope's recent insistence that no victims had come forward to denounce the coverup, the letter's author and members of Francis' own sex- abuse commission have told The Associated Press.

The fact that Francis received the eight-page letter, obtained by the AP, challenges his insistence that he has "zero tolerance" for sex abuse and coverups. It also calls into question his stated empathy with abuse survivors, compounding the most serious crisis of his five-year papacy.

The scandal exploded last month when Francis' trip to South America was marred by protests over his vigorous defence of Bishop Juan Barros, who is accused by victims of covering up the abuse by the Rev. Fernando Karadima. During the trip, Francis callously dismissed accusations against Barros as "slander," seemingly unaware that victims had placed him at the scene of Karadima's crimes.

On the plane home, confronted by an AP reporter, the pope said: "You, in all good will, tell me that there are victims, but I haven't seen any, because they haven't come forward."

But members of the pope's Commission for the Protection of Minors say that in April 2015, they sent a delegation to Rome specifically to hand-deliver a letter to the pope about Barros. The letter from Juan Carlos Cruz detailed the abuse, kissing and fondling he says he suffered at Karadima's hands, which he said Barros and others witnessed and ignored.

Four members of the commission met with Francis' top abuse adviser, Cardinal Sean O'Malley, explained their objections to Francis' recent appointment of Barros as a bishop in southern Chile, and gave him the letter to deliver to Francis.

"When we gave him (O'Malley) the letter for the pope, he assured us he would give it to the pope and speak of the concerns," then-commission member Marie Collins told the AP. "And at a later date, he assured us that that had been done."

Cruz, who now lives and works in Philadelphia, heard the same later that year.

"Cardinal O'Malley called me after the pope's visit here in Philadelphia and he told me, among other things, that he had given the letter to the pope -- in his hands," he said in an interview at his home Sunday.

Neither the Vatican nor O'Malley responded to multiple requests for comment.

While the 2015 summit of Francis' commission was known and publicized at the time, the contents of Cruz's letter -- and a photograph of Collins handing it to O'Malley -- were not disclosed by members. Cruz provided the letter, and Collins provided the photo, after reading an AP story that reported Francis had claimed to have never heard from any Karadima victims about Barros' behaviour.

The Barros affair first caused shockwaves in January 2015 when Francis appointed him bishop of Osorno, Chile, over the objections of the leadership of Chile's bishops' conference and many local priests and laity. They accepted as credible the testimony against Karadima, a prominent Chilean cleric who was sanctioned by the Vatican in 2011 for abusing minors. Barros was a Karadima protege, and according to Cruz and other victims, he witnessed the abuse and did nothing.

"Holy Father, I write you this letter because I'm tired of fighting, of crying and suffering," Cruz wrote in Francis' native Spanish. "Our story is well known and there's no need to repeat it, except to tell you of the horror of having lived this abuse and how I wanted to kill myself."

Cruz and other survivors had for years denounced the coverup of Karadima's crimes, but were dismissed as liars by the Chilean church hierarchy and the Vatican's own ambassador in Santiago, who refused their repeated requests to meet before and after Barros was appointed.

After Francis' comments backing the Chilean hierarchy caused such an outcry in Chile, he was forced last week to do an about-face: The Vatican announced it was sending in its most respected sex-crimes investigator to take testimony from Cruz and others about Barros.

In the letter to the pope, Cruz begs for Francis to listen to him and make good on his pledge of "zero tolerance."

"Holy Father, it's bad enough that we suffered such tremendous pain and anguish from the sexual and psychological abuse, but the terrible mistreatment we received from our pastors is almost worse," he wrote.

Cruz goes on to detail in explicit terms the homo-eroticized nature of the circle of priests and young boys around Karadima, the charismatic preacher whose El Bosque community in the well-to-do Santiago neighbourhood of Providencia produced dozens of priestly vocations and five bishops, including Barros.

He described how Karadima would kiss Barros and fondle his genitals, and do the same with younger priests and teens, and how young priests and seminarians would fight to sit next to Karadima at the table to receive his affections.

"More difficult and tough was when we were in Karadima's room and Juan Barros -- if he wasn't kissing Karadima -- would watch when Karadima would touch us -- the minors -- and make us kiss him, saying: 'Put your mouth near mine and stick out your tongue.' He would stick his out and kiss us with his tongue," Cruz told the pope. "Juan Barros was a witness to all this innumerable times, not just with me but with others as well."

"Juan Barros covered up everything that I have told you," he added.

Barros has repeatedly denied witnessing any abuse or covering it up. "I never knew anything about, nor ever imagined, the serious abuses which that priest committed against the victims," he told the AP recently. "I have never approved of nor participated in such serious, dishonest acts, and I have never been convicted by any tribunal of such things."

For the Osorno faithful who have opposed Barros as their bishop, the issue isn't so much a legal matter requiring proof or evidence, as Barros was a young priest at the time and not in a position of authority over Karadima. It's more that if Barros didn't "see" what was happening around him and doesn't find it problematic for a priest to kiss and fondle young boys, he shouldn't be in charge of a diocese where he is responsible for detecting inappropriate sexual behaviour, reporting it to police and protecting children from pedophiles like his mentor.

Cruz had arrived at Karadima's community in 1980 as a vulnerable teenager, distraught after the recent death of his father. He has said Karadima told him he would be like a spiritual father to him, but instead sexually abused him.

Based on testimony from Cruz and other former members of the parish, the Vatican in 2011 removed Karadima from ministry and sentenced him to a lifetime of "penance and prayer" for his crimes. Now 87, he lives in a home for elderly priests in Santiago; he hasn't commented on the scandal and the home has declined to accept calls or visits from the news media.

The victims also testified to Chilean prosecutors, who opened an investigation into Karadima after they went public with their accusations in 2010. Chilean prosecutors had to drop charges because too much time had passed, but the judge running the case stressed that it wasn't for lack of proof.

While the victims' testimony was deemed credible by both Vatican and Chilean prosecutors, the local church hierarchy clearly didn't believe them, which might have influenced Francis' view. Cardinal Francisco Javier Errazuriz has acknowledged he didn't believe the victims initially and shelved an investigation. He was forced to reopen it after the victims went public.

He is now one of the Argentine pope's key cardinal advisers.

By the time he finally got his letter into the pope's hands in 2015, Cruz had already sent versions to many other people, and had tried for months to get an appointment with the Vatican ambassador. The embassy's Dec. 15, 2014, email to Cruz -- a month before Barros was appointed -- was short and to the point:

"The apostolic nunciature has received the message you emailed Dec. 7 to the apostolic nuncio," it read, "and at the same time communicates that your request has been met with an unfavourable response."

One could argue that Francis didn't pay attention to Cruz's letter, since he receives thousands of letters every day from faithful around the world. He can't possibly read them all, much less remember the contents years later. He might have been tired and confused after a weeklong trip to South America when he told an airborne press conference that victims never came forward to accuse Barros of coverup.

But this was not an ordinary letter, nor were the circumstances under which it arrived in the Vatican.

Francis had named O'Malley, the archbishop of Boston, to head his Commission for the Protection of Minors based on his credibility in having helped clean up the mess in Boston after the U.S. sex abuse scandal exploded there in 2002. The commission gathered outside experts to advise the church on protecting children from pedophiles and educating church personnel about preventing abuse and coverups.
The four commission members who were on a special subcommittee dedicated to survivors had flown to Rome specifically to speak with O'Malley about the Barros appointment and to deliver Cruz's letter. A press release issued after the April 12, 2015, meeting read: "Cardinal O'Malley agreed to present the concerns of the subcommittee to the Holy Father."

Commission member Catherine Bonnet, a French child psychiatrist who took the photo of Collins handing the letter to O'Malley, said the commission members had decided to descend on Rome specifically when O'Malley and other members of the pope's group of nine cardinal advisers were meeting, so that O'Malley could put it directly into the pope's hands.

Marie Collins handing the letter detailing victims’ complaints of a sex abuse cover up in Chile to Cardinal Seán O’Malley on April 12th 2015.

"Cardinal O'Malley promised us when Marie gave to him the letter of Juan Carlos that he will give to Pope Francis," she said.

O'Malley's spokesman in Boston referred requests for comment to the Vatican. Neither the Vatican press office, nor officials at the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, responded to calls and emails seeking comment.

But O'Malley's remarkable response to Francis' defence of Barros and to his dismissal of the victims while he was in Chile, is perhaps now better understood.

In a rare rebuke of a pope by a cardinal, O'Malley issued a statement Jan. 20 in which he said the pope's words were "a source of great pain for survivors of sexual abuse," and that such expressions had the effect of abandoning victims and relegating them to "discredited exile."

A day later, Francis apologized for having demanded "proof" of wrongdoing by Barros, saying he meant merely that he wanted to see "evidence." But he continued to describe the accusations against Barros as "calumny" and insisted he had never heard from any victims.

Even when told in his airborne press conference Jan. 21 that Karadima's victims had indeed placed Barros at the scene of Karadima's abuse, Francis said: "No one has come forward. They haven't provided any evidence for a judgment. This is all a bit vague. It's something that can't be accepted."

He stood by Barros, saying: "I'm certain he's innocent," even while saying that he considered the testimony of victims to be "evidence" in a coverup investigation.

"If anyone can give me evidence, I'll be the first to listen," he said.

Cruz said he felt like he had been slapped when he heard those words.

"I was upset," he said, "and at the same time I couldn't believe that someone so high up like the pope himself could lie about this."

Vergara reported from Santiago, Chile. Yvonne Lee in Philadelphia and Jeffrey Schaeffer in Paris contributed.

Sunday, 4 February 2018

Is the Vatican Tinkering With the Online Catechism to Remove Catholic Teaching

UPDATED by OnePeterFive: 

PLEASE NOTE: This post has been updated (see below). After further digging, it looks like the language we found was from the 1994 Catechism. We’ve updated our story. But why is a 24-year-old version of the Catechism that needed to be updated for theological clarity still on the Vatican servers and publicly accessible?

Justin Trudeau compares Canada's Italian and Greek immigrants to the heathen and barbaric ISIS terrorists!

As a change of pace from the insanity of the Church, we take you to the insanity of Canad where our Dear Leader who admires "China's basic dictatorship" and that those who do not subscribe to the mass killings of babies in the womb are "out of step" has now compared the millions of Italian and Greek immigrants to Canada with the murderous ISIS terrorists whom this man is allowing back in to roam free on our streets.

Here we have Dear Leader congratulating the head of Planned Parenthood, who has blocked me on Twitter because she could not stand the truth of looking at the product of her work.

Image result for justin trudeau cecile richards

Our good Dear Leader has apostasised to Islam and the shahada.

Image result for justin trudeau mosque

Here is the apostate receiving the very Body of Christ from the Archbishop of Montreal. My sources tell me his advance staff were told ahead of time to tell him not to approach but he did anyway and the Archbishop did not want to "make a scene." Sorry, Your Grace, not good enough!

Image result for trudeau communion montreal

May he reflect well on The Last Judgement.

Image result for justin trudeau sistine chapel