The Wages of Trump HatredHating Donald Trump in the hater’s eyes makes one moral. But in the real world, such pathological fixations usually result in abject immorality and moral decline.
By Victor Davis HansonFebruary 14, 2021
Over the last five years, the pathology of Trump Derangement Syndrome has been widely described. It was more than a chronic disease and was often characterized by an array of rapidly advancing symptoms of deterioration in reasoning, emotional stability, and personal ethics. 
More practically, often the deranged Trump hater found in his odium a cover for all sorts of prior personal intemperance and careerist dissipation. Loudly hating Trump became a passport for excess, private and public, and a sort of preemptive insurance that excused or rather greenlighted smears, slander, and personal misdeeds.
The Anti-Lincoln ProjectFor over a year, the theme of the NeverTrump Lincoln Project was the organizers’ professed superior morality. They had it; most others on the Right did not. Only a select heroic few of the Republican Party would dare to break ranks to end the danger to the country posed by a supposedly morally inferior Donald Trump. 
Forget Trump’s economic, domestic, cultural, and foreign policy record that had belied critics by its successes—despite historic opposition, investigation, denigration, and obstruction. No matter. Character was king. Again, the Lincoln Project had it; Trump followers did not. 
The Lincoln Project’s Band of Brothers—initially four financially strapped, embittered middle-aged white male Washington insiders—lectured the country that those few, those happy few, that band of brothers would fight for us. If only they were adequately funded, they could save us from the moral turpitude of four more years of Trump. 
Their ostensible promise to the Left was that they would hold down their end of the bargain by maintaining the 10-12 percent of Republicans who did not vote for Trump in 2016. In truth, they may have had nothing to do with preserving a bare six percent of Republicans who would again vote against Trump. That was a modest aim, but apparently, every bit of Trump derangement was fundable. Or as the departing, now mansion-buying Steve Schmidt put it, “I really didn’t give a sh-t how many Republicans were voting for Trump or not.”
If one were to believe all the sermonizing of these latter-day Elmer Gantrys, then their inherent paradoxes, hypocrisies, and selfish agendas might magically disappear. 
For example, it was quickly evident that the Lincoln Project luminaries were not just fixated on destroying Trump and derailing the most conservative presidential agenda since Ronald Reagan’s, but also on refuting their own supposedly lifelong commitment to conservative causes by abetting the Biden campaign and the hard-Left interests that drove it. 
When Republicans hired them, they were conservative; when they did not, these buskins were liberal. To ensure their own continued largess, they were not just to be Romneyite rejectionists, not just Bidenites, but abettors of the neo-socialist cause of Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, and the squad.
Money was the prime impetus to the project. Again, we were supposed to forget that some of the Lincoln Project luminaries were flat broke. Who cared that others owed huge sums in back taxes, with no apparent way of repayment—given their own reputations for failed campaigns and expensive, but otherwise mediocre consultancy?
Almost all were eager to set up shadow service companies to siphon off the expected huge sums from rich leftists. The project’s directors eagerly assumed their roles of useful idiocy, their donors that of cynical manipulators. Both conspired to destroy their shared bogeyman, Donald Trump, and with him all obstacles to the new hard progressive future. 
Before November 3, the media was not so much interested in the backgrounds or details of these handy moral preeners. Then suddenly Trump lost the election. Biden was inaugurated. And, again mysteriously, a recalibrated media found the grifters of the Lincoln Project expendable, although not so idiotic—given that they had diverted millions of dollars into their own private coffers in the form of “consulting fees.” 
After November 3, we also learned that co-founder John Weaver was a sexual bird of prey. He had leveraged his newfound Lincoln largess and influence as quid pro quos for his own sexual predations—with little apparent regard for the age of his targeted young male victims. 
This sordid fact was apparently known to many of the pre-election sermonizers at the Lincoln Project. But again, disclosure of that fact, in a cost-to-benefit analysis, was considered secondary to preserving the growing revenue stream from the Left. 
So these moralists lied about their ignorance of their own pederast, and apparently on one occasion at least would-be pedophile, in their midst. 
Only after the election, we learned that Rick Wilson and Weaver in particular were raking in and largely disguising exorbitant fees, in part to pay huge back tax bills. After the election, the project’s legal consultants suddenly were “shocked” by such disclosures, and began leaving the now-discredited project—at precisely the time when it was in dire need of a legal autopsy and full disclosure. 
Rarely has the abyss between the pretense and the lie been so vast: a group subsidized on purported conservative moral principles, and aimed at stopping the cultural damage to the cause by Donald Trump, was funded by left-wingers eager to buy off a few financially imperiled has-beens, who exaggerated their vestigial consulting clout among the Washington swamp. But then again, beggars cannot be choosers.
In turn, the Lincoln Project spent much of its near $100 million on themselves. And the grift sort of worked, as they puffed themselves up about the Biden win, rescued themselves from the IRS, splurged on opulent vacation homes and appurtenances—and declared that ending Trump was the only the lucrative beginning, as they made lists to hound and denigrate his former appointees.
But the con sputtered out, as they ended up accusing each other of improprieties. Rodent-like they scrambled overboard from the now rotting, putrid, and sinking ship. 
The loudest of the moralists, Steven Schmidt, epitomized the absurdity of the project when he contextualized his silence about the free-wheeling Weaver. Schmidt, you see, was a victim himself, as he related a long ago purported childhood abuse trauma. And in racialist and chauvinist fashion, as Schmidt left he announced that he wanted a non-white male to replace him in the almost all-white male partnership. 
Think of the condescending absurdity: Mostly all-white male swamp creatures were happy to rake in millions. But when their own moral lapses and depravities destroyed their grift, they quit—and only then invited in more women or people of color to sort out the mess they left in their wake.
The only mystery in this entire moral putridity was who deserved the most censure: the cynical rich leftists who funded the charade hoping to manipulate pseudo-conservatives to serve their hard-Left needs—or these two-timing, born-again charlatans who masqueraded as conservatives to shake down millions from those who could afford to so indulge themselves. 
The common denominator, again, was Trump hatred. And so that noble aim excused every sordid means to enhance it. 
Gubernatorial LethalityNew York Governor Andrew Cuomo should have become a political pariah by summer 2020. His handling of the COVID-19 virus was all in all the worst in the country. At first, like most politicians, Cuomo had downplayed the chance of a pandemic. Then, like most politicians, he blamed other politicians for downplaying it as he had, once the coronavirus swept his state. 
Where were the ventilators, the hospitals, and the beds, once the virus struck? 
For a brief moment, Cuomo praised Trump, who had sent a hospital ship to Manhattan that went unused, who gave him a plethora of ventilators that were stockpiled, and who sent an entire tent hospital to the Javits Center that mostly stayed empty. But as the death toll mounted, and as the 2020 election heated up, and as Trump’s popularity dipped in the polls, Cuomo pivoted.
Abruptly, he now blasted Trump as negligent, derelict, a veritable killer of the innocent. He appeared on his brother’s CNN show, as they yucked it up to showcase his pandemic competency—and always the federal government’s purported sudden laxity. 
His self-serving daily press conferences amplified his bombast and snark. And ostensibly they won Cuomo an Emmy for his televised theatrics. Hollywood’s subtext was that by weaponizing the epidemic against the now candidate Trump, the useful idiot Cuomo at least deserved some sort of acting award.
As with the grifters of the Lincoln Project, as long as Donald Trump was on the ballot, Cuomo was deified. He wrote his own hagiography about the arts of dealing with a pandemic. He, not COVID-19 and its victims, was the story. He bantered, strutted, and cajoled on national television—always eying either the 2020 vice-presidential nomination or at least the attorney generalship in the Biden Administration. 
Cuomo may have had the second-worst record of any governor in the United States, in terms of deaths per million from the virus (currently 2,361 per million New York residents, second to next-door New Jersey). He may have shut down his state, drove out millions to seek refuge elsewhere, ruined New York’s economy, and yet suffered more deaths and inflicted more damage on his own than a similarly sized, open, and economically rebounding Florida and Texas. Still, Cuomo had one advantage those red-state governors lacked: a large left-wing media platform to blast the hated Trump. 
Now, again mysteriously, after the inauguration of Joe Biden, we learn the sordid details about Cuomo, in the fashion revelations that appear daily and simultaneously about the Lincoln Project. It was known long ago that Cuomo, in a panic about the epidemic, had shuttled infected patients into the state’s extended care homes—and by executive fiat—where they proved mobile Petri dishes, infecting vulnerable residents, who began dying en masse. 
Cuomo might have stopped the awful practice. He might have announced the accurate number of the dead to highlight the need to end immediately the lunatic diversions. Instead, we now learn he ordered his aides to hide the lethality figures. If he was blasted for 8,000 rest home deaths, then what, he feared, would be the public reaction at the true figure of 15,000 dead?
Would the president whom he demagogued now demagogue him? So Cuomo lied. He hid the grim data from a media all too eager before November 3 to comply. He lied to the New York state legislature. He lied to the U.S. Department of Justice. He lied to the public. And he assumed these were all “noble lies”—necessary for the good cause of ending Donald Trump. 
Clipping His Twitter WingsBefore November 3, Silicon Valley—especially the $4 trillion quartet of Apple, Facebook, Google, and Twitter—had become unhinged by Donald Trump. They had no idea what to do with his 70 million Twitter followers, the legions of his Facebook fans, and the Gmail millions who adored him.
The Left became irate at Big Tech. What good did it do for the obsequious traditional media to slant the news, to offer 90 percent negative television and print coverage of Trump, to smother the achievements of his presidency when he circumvented the putdowns through Twitter and Facebook?
Who cared whether they check marked, or temporarily deplatformed or for a while canceled or shut down Trump and thousands of his Trumper followers—when he still stirred up millions through the technological gadgetry and hard-won capital of Silicon Valley’s progressive anointed? After all, when the Obamas go public in their demand to expel Trump from social media, who can resist their speaking truth to power?
The January 6 Capitol riot, at last, gave Big Tech the long-awaited and long-planned opportunity. And they seized it in night-of-the-long-knives fashion. Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook, again mysteriously in concert, banned the president from its collective platforms of communication—for life. 
For the first time in his own political life, Donald Trump went silent, inert, mute. The media continued its nonstop invective, but now Trump had no detours around them. 
Trump, they alleged, had used their product to incite violence, perhaps in the very manner, Antifa and Black Lives Matter had used their platforms to plan demonstrations that characteristically ended in rioting, arson, and looting. 
But could not Trump reroute to the conservative alternative, the upstart non-Silicon Valley Parler?
Big Tech had considered that, too. So on January 11, 2021, in the same manner of the collisional nocturnal action of Twitter and Facebook, so too Apple, Amazon, and Google, again mysteriously, in the wee hours eliminated everyone’s access to Parler, a sort of neutron bombing of a rising competitor. 
In hours, it was clear that they had effectively strangled Parler in its crib to preempt a Trump and MAGA mass exodus from Twitter and Facebook, and thus inadvertently transmogrify the ban into a Parler bonanza. 
In the old days, these leftists of the Stanford-Silicon Valley corridor might have called such collusion market “rigging,” “fixing,” and “scheming.” Their lopsided market shares might have earned the muckraking ire of independent journalists aghast at such open monopolies, boastful cartels, and unapologetic trusts. 
But the masters of the universe now owned the news media and the means of most Americans both to access information and to communicate over email and social media. Besides, Trump was widely hated by Big Tech, Wall Street, the media, academia, entertainment, professional sports, foundations, and the corporate boardrooms. So who would object to their roles as our 21st-century versions of Jay Gould and Diamond Jim Fiske?
Hatred of Donald Trump became the wealthy agnostic’s version of medieval indulgence. One’s collective sins can be washed away and a once marred soul can still make its way to tech heaven—if the offender can purchase a contracted exemption. 
Hating Donald Trump and doing something about that venom are just those indulgences. And they can excuse past, present, and future sin. Bar, cancel, and end a social-media Trump, and all the wrongs of monopoly, market fixing, cartelizing, and trust creation are washed away, in the eyes of the progressive supreme deity Reason.
So our cartels are beloved for colluding and fixing their markets to ban not just Trump but any future access to their competitors. 
Trump is free to tweet and post whenever and wherever he wants, but there will be nowhere else to tweet and post. So spoke the liberal descendants of the old Jim Crow racists who insisted they were free to deny service to anyone they wished, even when there were no alternative motels or lunch counters to be found.
Hating Donald Trump in the hater’s eyes makes one moral. But in the real world, such pathological fixations usually result in abject immorality and moral decline, as the hater becomes far worse than what he hates.

Rip McIntosh

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

Alone it is Bishop Gracida against Francis in the Greatest Church Crisis in History & the Historic Gracida Open Letter 

February 16, 2021

We are in the greatest crisis in the history of the Church because leftist Francis and his inner circle, who make the immoral Borgia popes and their inner circles look like choir boys, are creating Francis-like cardinals in an attempt to make a permanent homosexual leftist church.

As a priest recently said even if we can get the Church or state to remove all the bad men, Francis is only going to replace them with worse men.

Of course, we must continue to work for the removal of Francis’s immoral pro-gay bishops network, but the only way we are going to begin a real restoration of the Church is to remove Francis as well as all his controllers and collaborators.

There is only one bishop in the Church actively working toward the removal of Francis.

He is Bishop Rene Henry Gracida.

Whether he acknowledges it or not, Bishop Gracida is our St. Athanasius.

Athanasius virtually alone, except for the faithful laity, lead the resistance against the Arian heresy in the fourth century even when the Pope excommunicated him.

They said it was Athanasius against the world. Now, it is Gracida against the world.

The Bishop became like Athanasius when he explicitly said Amoris Laetitia is in error and to resist sacrilege Communions.

On December 2, 2017, Bishop Gracida became the only bishop to resist the Amoris Letitia sacrilege on his official website declaring Francis is teaching error:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

We have a humble yet heroic man to lead us in the resistance against heterodoxy and those who have created the greatest crisis in the history of the Church.

Bishop Gracida was a courageous WWII airman, monk, friend of Pope John Paul II and the “Savior of EWTN” as Raymond Arroyo called him in his book (see post below) who at 96 looks like his is in his 70’s, is mentally sharper than most men 40 years younger than him and looks by a large margin younger than Pope Benedict XVI or Francis.
[https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2016/01/11/airman-monk-priest-bishop-an-interview-with-bp-rene-henry-gracida/]

We have leading us in Gracida a real life hero who makes every other living bishop in the whole world look like a midget by comparison.

We have a 96 year old retired bishop with the heart of a lion leading us: Rene the Lionhearted.

I’ll say it again:

They said it was Athanasius against the world. Now, it is Gracida against the world.

I know he will not be happy that I said this. He told me by email that it would be prideful to think of himself as a Athanasius.

But for better or worst that appears to be the role God has given him in this crisis.

Since most of the clergy apparently have abandoned us, what can we the faithful laity do to assist Bishop Gracida against the world?

First pray for him.

Then please read, pray and share the following open letter with cardinals, bishops, clergy, canon lawyers and the laity so clarity and the action that is within God’s will can result from the letter.

The laity need to force people like Cardinal Raymond Burke and others to answer the theologically sound, clear and precise arguments put forward and either clearly and precisely counter them or put into action the needed canonical procedures to remove Francis if he was “never validly elected” the pope or else remove him from the Petrine office for heterodoxy.

If Burke and others do not act they are putting their immortal souls in danger because they are denying the Petrine office of Pope John Paul II who made binding law for the 2013 conclave in Universi Dominici Gregis.

The open letter of Bishop Gracida is a analysis of Pope John Paul Il’s Universi Dominici Gregis which appears to establish the “legal conclusion that Monsignor Bergoglio was never validly elected Roman Pontiff”  and calls the Cardinals to “Address… [the] probable invalidity”:

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CARDINALS OF THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND OTHER CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN FAITHFUL IN COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CARDINALS OF THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND OTHER CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN FAITHFUL IN COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE

Posted on July 30, 2018  by abyssum

AN OPEN LETTERTO THE CARDINALS OF THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCHAND OTHER CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN FAITHFULIN COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE

Recently many educated Catholic observers, including bishops and priests, have decried the confusion in doctrinal statements about faith or morals made from the Apostolic See at Rome and by the putative Bishop of Rome, Pope Francis. Some devout, faithful and thoughtful Catholics have even suggested that he be set aside as a heretic, a dangerous purveyor of error, as recently mentioned in a number of reports.
Claiming heresy on the part of a man who is a supposed Pope, charging material error in statements about faith or morals by a putative Roman Pontiff, suggests and presents an intervening prior question about his authenticity in that August office of Successor of Peter as Chief of The Apostles, i.e., was this man the subject of a valid election by an authentic Conclave of The Holy Roman Church?  This is so because each Successor of Saint Peter enjoys the Gift of Infallibility. 
So, before one even begins to talk about excommunicating such a prelate, one must logically examine whether this person exhibits the uniformly good and safe fruit of Infallibility.  If he seems repeatedly to engage in material error, that first raises the question of the validity of his election because one expects an authentically-elected Roman Pontiff miraculously and uniformly to be entirely incapable of stating error in matters of faith or morals.  So to what do we look to discern the invalidity of such an election?  
His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, within His massive legacy to the Church and to the World, left us with the answer to this question.  The Catholic faithful must look back for an answer to a point from where we have come—to what occurred in and around the Sistine Chapel in March 2013 and how the fruits of those events have generated such widespread concern among those people of magisterial orthodoxy about confusing and, or, erroneous doctrinal statements which emanate from The Holy See.  
His Apostolic Constitution (Universi Dominici Gregis) which governed the supposed Conclave in March 2013 contains quite clear and specific language about the invalidating effect of departures from its norms.  For example, Paragraph 76 states:  “Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected.”  
From this, many believe that there is probable cause to believe that Monsignor Jorge Mario Bergoglio was never validly elected as the Bishop of Rome and Successor of Saint Peter—he never rightly took over the office of Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and therefore he does not enjoy the charism of Infallibility.  If this is true, then the situation is dire because supposed papal acts may not be valid or such acts are clearly invalid, including supposed appointments to the college of electors itself.
Only valid cardinals can rectify our critical situation through privately (secretly) recognizing the reality of an ongoing interregnum and preparing for an opportunity to put the process aright by obedience to the legislation of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, in that Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis.  While thousands of the Catholic faithful do understand that only the cardinals who participated in the events of March 2013 within the Sistine Chapel have all the information necessary to evaluate the issue of election validity, there was public evidence sufficient for astute lay faithful to surmise with moral certainty that the March 2013 action by the College was an invalid conclave, an utter nullity.
What makes this understanding of Universi Dominici Gregis particularly cogent and plausible is the clear Promulgation Clause at the end of this Apostolic Constitution and its usage of the word “scienter” (“knowingly”).  The Papal Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis thus concludes definitively with these words:  “.   .   .   knowingly or unknowingly, in any way contrary to this Constitution.”  (“.   .   .   scienter vel inscienter contra hanc Constitutionem fuerint excogitata.”)  [Note that His Holiness, Pope Paul VI, had a somewhat similar promulgation clause at the end of his corresponding, now abrogated, Apostolic Constitution, Romano Pontifici Eligendo, but his does not use “scienter”, but rather uses “sciens” instead.  This similar term of sciens in the earlier abrogated Constitution has an entirely different legal significance than scienter.]
This word, “scienter”, is a legal term of art in Roman law, and in canon law, and in Anglo-American common law, and in each system, scienter has substantially the same significance, i.e., “guilty knowledge” or willfully knowing, criminal intent.  Thus, it clearly appears that Pope John Paul II anticipated the possibility of criminal activity in the nature of a sacrilege against a process which He intended to be purely pious, private, sacramental, secret and deeply spiritual, if not miraculous, in its nature. This contextual reality reinforced in the Promulgation Clause, combined with:  (1) the tenor of the whole document; (2) some other provisions of the document, e.g., Paragraph 76; (3) general provisions of canon law relating to interpretation, e.g., Canons 10 & 17; and, (4) the obvious manifest intention of the Legislator, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, tends to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the legal conclusion that Monsignor Bergoglio was never validly elected Roman Pontiff.
 This is so because:
1.  Communication of any kind with the outside world, e.g., communication did occur between the inside of the Sistine Chapel and anyone outside, including a television audience, before, during or even immediately after the Conclave;
2.   Any political commitment to “a candidate” and any “course of action” planned for The Church or a future pontificate, such as the extensive decade-long “pastoral” plans conceived by the Sankt Gallen hierarchs; and,
3.  Any departure from the required procedures of the conclave voting process as prescribed and known by a cardinal to have occurred:each was made an invalidating act, and if scienter (guilty knowledge) was present, also even a crime on the part of any cardinal or other actor, but, whether criminal or not, any such act or conduct violating the norms operated absolutely, definitively and entirely against the validity of all of the supposed Conclave proceedings.
Quite apart from the apparent notorious violations of the prohibition on a cardinal promising his vote, e.g., commitments given and obtained by cardinals associated with the so-called “Sankt Gallen Mafia,” other acts destructive of conclave validity occurred.  Keeping in mind that Pope John Paul II specifically focused Universi Dominici Gregis on “the seclusion and resulting concentration which an act so vital to the whole Church requires of the electors” such that “the electors can more easily dispose themselves to accept the interior movements of the Holy Spirit,” even certain openly public media broadcasting breached this seclusion by electronic broadcasts outlawed by Universi Dominici Gregis.  
These prohibitions include direct declarative statements outlawing any use of television before, during or after a conclave in any area associated with the proceedings, e.g.:  “I further confirm, by my apostolic authority, the duty of maintaining the strictest secrecy with regard to everything that directly or indirectly concerns the election process itself.”
Viewed in light of this introductory preambulary language of Universi Dominici Gregis and in light of the legislative text itself, even the EWTN camera situated far inside the Sistine Chapel was an immediately obvious non-compliant  act which became an open and notorious invalidating violation by the time when this audio-visual equipment was used to broadcast to the world the preaching after the “Extra Omnes”.  While these blatant public violations of Chapter IV of Universi Dominici Gregis actuate the invalidity and nullity of the proceedings themselves, nonetheless in His great wisdom, the Legislator did not disqualify automatically those cardinals who failed to recognize these particular offenses against sacred secrecy, or even those who, with scienter, having recognized the offenses and having had some power or voice in these matters, failed or refused to act or to object against them:  “Should any infraction whatsoever of this norm occur and be discovered, those responsible should know that they will be subject to grave penalties according to the judgment of the future Pope.”  [Universi Dominici Gregis, ¶55]   
No Pope apparently having been produced in March 2013, those otherwise valid cardinals who failed with scienter to act on violations of Chapter IV, on that account alone would nonetheless remain voting members of the College unless and until a new real Pope is elected and adjudges them.  Thus, those otherwise valid cardinals who may have been compromised by violations of secrecy can still participate validly in the “clean-up of the mess” while addressing any such secrecy violations with an eventual new Pontiff.  In contrast, the automatic excommunication of those who politicized the sacred conclave process, by obtaining illegally, commitments from cardinals to vote for a particular man, or to follow a certain course of action (even long before the vacancy of the Chair of Peter as Vicar of Christ), is established not only by the word, “scienter,” in the final enacting clause, but by a specific exception, in this case, to the general statement of invalidity which therefore reinforces the clarity of intention by Legislator that those who apply the law must interpret the general rule as truly binding. 
 Derived directly from Roman law, canonical jurisprudence provides this principle for construing or interpreting legislation such as this Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis.  Expressed in Latin, this canon of interpretation is:   “Exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis.”  (The exception proves the rule in cases not excepted.)  In this case, an exception from invalidity for acts of simony reinforces the binding force of the general principle of nullity in cases of other violations.
Therefore, by exclusion from nullity and invalidity legislated in the case of simony:   “If — God forbid — in the election of the Roman Pontiff the crime of simony were to be perpetrated, I decree and declare that all those guilty thereof shall incur excommunication latae sententiae.  At the same time I remove the nullity or invalidity of the same simoniacal provision, in order that — as was already established by my Predecessors — the validity of the election of the Roman Pontiff may not for this reason be challenged.”  His Holiness made an exception for simony.  Exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis. 
 The clear exception from nullity and invalidity for simony proves the general rule that other violations of the sacred process certainly do and did result in the nullity and invalidity of the entire conclave.
While it is not necessary to look outside Universi Dominici Gregis in order to construe or to interpret its plain meaning, the first source to which one would look is the immediately prior constitution which Universi Dominici Gregis abrogated or replaced.  Pope John Paul II replaced entirely what Pope Paul VI had legislated in the immediately previous Constitution on conclaves, Romano Pontfici Eligendo, but in so doing, Pope John Paul II used Romano Pontfici Eligendo as the format or pattern for His new constitution on conclaves.  Making obvious changes, nonetheless, Pope John Paul II utilized the content and structure of his predecessor’s constitution to organize and outline Universi Dominici Gregis.  Therefore, while it is not legally necessary to look outside Universi Dominici Gregis, the primary reference to an extraneous source of construction would entail an examination of Romano Pontfici Eligendo, and that exercise (bolsterd by the use of the key word “scienter” in the Promulgation Clause) would reinforce the broad principle of invalidity. 

Comparing what Pope John Paul II wrote in His Constitution on conclaves with the Constitution which His replaced, you can see that, with the exception of simony, invalidity became universal. In the corresponding paragraph of what Pope Paul VI wrote, he specifically confined the provision declaring conclave invalidity to three (3) circumstances described in previous paragraphs within His constitution, Romano Pontfici Eligendo.  No such limitation exists in Universi Dominici Gregis.  See the comparison both in English and Latin below:
Romano Pontfici Eligendo, 77. Should the election be conducted in a manner different from the three procedures described above (cf. no. 63 ff.) or without the conditions laid down for each of the same, it is for this very reason null and void (cf. no. 62), without the need for any declaration, and gives no right to him who has been thus elected. [Romano Pontfici Eligendo, 77:  “Quodsi electio aliter celebrata fuerit, quam uno e tribus modis, qui supra sunt dicti (cfr. nn. 63 sqq.), aut non servatis condicionibus pro unoquoque illorum praescriptis, electio eo ipso est nulla et invalida (cfr. n. 62) absque ulla declaratione, et ita electo nullum ius tribuit .”] as compared with:Universi Dominici Gregis, 76:  “Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected.”  [Universi Dominici Gregis, 76:  “Quodsi electio aliter celebrata fuerit, quam haec Constitutio statuit, aut non servatis condicionibus pariter hic praescriptis, electio eo ipso est nulla et invalida absque ulla declaratione, ideoque electo nullum ius tribuit.”]        
Of course, this is not the only feature of the Constitution or aspect of the matter which tends to establish the breadth of invalidity.  Faithful must hope and pray that only those cardinals whose status as a valid member of the College remains intact will ascertain the identity of each other and move with the utmost charity and discretion in order to effectuate The Divine Will in these matters. The valid cardinals, then, must act according to that clear, manifest, obvious and unambiguous mind and intention of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, so evident in Universi Dominici Gregis, a law which finally established binding and self-actuating conditions of validity on the College for any papal conclave, a reality now made so apparent by the bad fruit of doctrinal confusion and plain error.

        It would seem then that praying and working in a discreet and prudent manner to encourage only those true cardinals inclined to accept a reality of conclave invalidity, would be a most charitable and logical course of action in the light of Universi Dominici Gregis, and out of our high personal regard for the clear and obvious intention of its Legislator, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II.  Even a relatively small number of valid cardinals could act decisively and work to restore a functioning Apostolic See through the declaration of an interregnum government.  The need is clear for the College to convene a General Congregation in order to declare, to administer, and soon to end the Interregnum which has persisted since March 2013.
Finally, it is important to understand that the sheer number of putative counterfeit cardinals will eventually, sooner or later, result in a situation in which The Church will have no normal means validly ever again to elect a Vicar of Christ.  After that time, it will become even more difficult, if not humanly impossible, for the College of Cardinals to rectify the current disastrous situation and conduct a proper and valid Conclave such that The Church may once again both have the benefit of a real Supreme Pontiff, and enjoy the great gift of a truly infallible Vicar of Christ.  It seems that some good cardinals know that the conclave was invalid, but really cannot envision what to do about it; we must pray, if it is the Will of God, that they see declaring the invalidity and administering an Interregnum through a new valid conclave is what they must do. Without such action or without a great miracle, The Church is in a perilous situation. 
 Once the last validly appointed cardinal reaches age 80, or before that age, dies, the process for electing a real Pope ends with no apparent legal means to replace it. Absent a miracle then, The Church would no longer have an infallible Successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ.  Roman Catholics would be no different than Orthodox Christians.
In this regard, all of the true cardinals may wish to consider what Holy Mother Church teaches in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, ¶675, ¶676 and ¶677 about “The Church’s Ultimate Trial”.  But, the fact that “The Church .   .   .  will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection” does not justify inaction by the good cardinals, even if there are only a minimal number sufficient to carry out Chapter II of Universi Dominici Gregis and operate the Interregnum.This Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis, which was clearly applicable to the acts and conduct of the College of Cardinals in March 2013, is manifestly and obviously among those “invalidating” laws “which expressly establish that an act is null or that a person is effected” as stated in Canon 10 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law.  And, there is nothing remotely “doubtful or obscure” (Canon 17) about this Apostolic Constitution as clearly promulgated by Pope John Paul II.  The tenor of the whole document expressly establishes that the issue of invalidity was always at stake. 
 This Apostolic Constitution conclusively establishes, through its Promulgation Clause [which makes “anything done (i.e., any act or conduct) by any person  .   .   .   in any way contrary to this Constitution,”]  the invalidity of the entire supposed Conclave, rendering it “completely null and void”.So, what happens if a group of Cardinals who undoubtedly did not knowingly and wilfully initiate or intentionally participate in any acts of disobedience against Universi Dominici Gregis were to meet, confer and declare that, pursuant to Universi Dominici Gregis, Monsignor Bergoglio is most certainly not a valid Roman Pontiff.  Like any action on this matter, including the initial finding of invalidity, that would be left to the valid members of the college of cardinals. 
 They could declare the Chair of Peter vacant and proceed to a new and proper conclave.  They could meet with His Holiness, Benedict XVI, and discern whether His resignation and retirement was made under duress, or based on some mistake or fraud, or otherwise not done in a legally effective manner, which could invalidate that resignation.  Given the demeanor of His Holiness, Benedict XVI, and the tenor of His few public statements since his departure from the Chair of Peter, this recognition of validity in Benedict XVI seems unlikely.
In fact, even before a righteous group of good and authentic cardinals might decide on the validity of the March 2013 supposed conclave, they must face what may be an even more complicated discernment and decide which men are most likely not valid cardinals.  If a man was made a cardinal by the supposed Pope who is, in fact, not a Pope (but merely Monsignor Bergoglio), no such man is in reality a true member of the College of Cardinals.  In addition, those men appointed by Pope John Paul II or by Pope Benedict XVI as cardinals, but who openly violated Universi Dominici Gregis by illegal acts or conduct causing the invalidation of the last attempted conclave, would no longer have voting rights in the College of Cardinals either.  (Thus, the actual valid members in the College of Cardinals may be quite smaller in number than those on the current official Vatican list of supposed cardinals.)
In any event, the entire problem is above the level of anyone else in Holy Mother Church who is below the rank of Cardinal.  So, we must pray that The Divine Will of The Most Holy Trinity, through the intercession of Our Lady as Mediatrix of All Graces and Saint Michael, Prince of Mercy, very soon rectifies the confusion in Holy Mother Church through action by those valid Cardinals who still comprise an authentic College of Electors.  Only certainly valid Cardinals can address the open and notorious evidence which points to the probable invalidity of the last supposed conclave and only those cardinals can definitively answer the questions posed here.  May only the good Cardinals unite and if they recognize an ongoing Interregnum, albeit dormant, may they end this Interregnum by activating perfectly a functioning Interregnum government of The Holy See and a renewed process for a true Conclave, one which is purely pious, private, sacramental, secret and deeply spiritual.  If we do not have a real Pontiff, then may the good Cardinals, doing their appointed work “in view of the sacredness of the act of election”  “accept the interior movements of the Holy Spirit” and provide Holy Mother Church with a real Vicar of Christ as the Successor of Saint Peter.  May these thoughts comport with the synderetic considerations of those who read them and may their presentation here please both Our Immaculate Virgin Mother, Mary, Queen of the Apostles, and The Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.N. de Plume

Un ami des Pape

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes:  

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1 – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020: 
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1 What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”: 
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1] 
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it. 

Fred Martinez 

Biden Targets the Second AmendmentHe dubiously calls for “commonsense” gun control to effectively gut Americans’ firearms rights.  By: THOMAS GALLATIN American ThinkerFebruary 17, 2021 This past Sunday, Joe Biden did what we knew was coming — he officially announced his intention to launch an assault against Americans’ Second Amendment rights. Using the anniversary of the Parkland school massacre and shamelessly exploiting those dead children, Biden dubiously couched his affront against the Constitution as “commonsense.” He listed several “gun law reforms” he wants Congress to pass. Notably, none of them would do anything to stop criminals from acting criminally, and at least some of them would make criminals of law-abiding citizens. Biden’s “reforms” include “requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufactures who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets.” As we have repeatedly noted over the years, none of these “reforms” deal with the actual root problems of crime. Rather, they only work to further infringe on Americans’ Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense and as a check against government tyranny. Being an elitist Democrat, Joe “Buy a Shotgun” Biden clearly believes in neither. In his push to “finally” deal with “gun violence” (as far as we know, there’s never been an incident in which a firearm, acting on its own volition, shot someone), Biden did not rule out the possibility of issuing an executive order to assault the Second Amendment. On Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki was asked if Biden would consider using an executive order. “The president has a range of actions at this disposal,” she responded. “He hasn’t ruled out either of those options.” Leftists in developed nations around the globe have long targeted citizens’ right to bear arms as a primary hurdle to their agendas.  Recall how quickly New Zealand’s prime minister unilaterally acted to strip Kiwis of their gun rights in the wake of the 2019 mosque attack in Christchurch, all in the name of “commonsense” action. Moreover, according to The Hill, “Canada is expected to pass sweeping gun reform legislation, including a measure that allows municipalities to ban handguns [emphasis added]. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the new measures on Tuesday, a sweeping package that builds on a ban of more than 1,500 assault-style firearms. Trudeau said at a news conference on Tuesday that the country would move forward with a buyback program ‘in the coming months.’” Trudeau ridiculously asserted, “You can’t fight gun violence for any violence on just one front. You can’t fight it without addressing its root causes.” Well, it’s clear that his administration is more interested in blaming inanimate tools rather than actually digging into the root human causes of violence and crime. But we don’t need to go to other countries to see how anti-gun leftists are determined to do everything in their power to limit gun rights. That much is demonstrated by Democrat Representative Sheila Jackson Lee’s bill HR 127 that would, among other things, create a mandatory registry of gun owners and the number of firearms they own. Kevin Hasset, president of the Retired Police Association of the State of New York, noted, “This is very dangerous, especially for retirees. Things have gone so downhill with this level of hostility towards cops and we are out there with the label that we are no longer cops. Retired cops don’t have partners or backup. We are out there on our own.”  The same can be said of millions of other American citizens. Hasset further warned, “This bill will go after all the lawful gun owners. If you are ever interested in robbing my house, you can look me up and know where my guns are stored.” Biden has made his intentions clear: He aims to assault our Second Amendment rights. And given his penchant for signing executive orders, this threat is no malarky.

Biden Targets the Second AmendmentHe dubiously calls for “commonsense” gun control to effectively gut Americans’ firearms rights.  By: THOMAS GALLATIN American ThinkerFebruary 17, 2021 This past Sunday, Joe Biden did what we knew was coming — he officially announced his intention to launch an assault against Americans’ Second Amendment rights. Using the anniversary of the Parkland school massacre and shamelessly exploiting those dead children, Biden dubiously couched his affront against the Constitution as “commonsense.” He listed several “gun law reforms” he wants Congress to pass. Notably, none of them would do anything to stop criminals from acting criminally, and at least some of them would make criminals of law-abiding citizens. Biden’s “reforms” include “requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufactures who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets.” As we have repeatedly noted over the years, none of these “reforms” deal with the actual root problems of crime. Rather, they only work to further infringe on Americans’ Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense and as a check against government tyranny. Being an elitist Democrat, Joe “Buy a Shotgun” Biden clearly believes in neither. In his push to “finally” deal with “gun violence” (as far as we know, there’s never been an incident in which a firearm, acting on its own volition, shot someone), Biden did not rule out the possibility of issuing an executive order to assault the Second Amendment. On Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki was asked if Biden would consider using an executive order. “The president has a range of actions at this disposal,” she responded. “He hasn’t ruled out either of those options.” Leftists in developed nations around the globe have long targeted citizens’ right to bear arms as a primary hurdle to their agendas.  Recall how quickly New Zealand’s prime minister unilaterally acted to strip Kiwis of their gun rights in the wake of the 2019 mosque attack in Christchurch, all in the name of “commonsense” action. Moreover, according to The Hill, “Canada is expected to pass sweeping gun reform legislation, including a measure that allows municipalities to ban handguns [emphasis added]. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the new measures on Tuesday, a sweeping package that builds on a ban of more than 1,500 assault-style firearms. Trudeau said at a news conference on Tuesday that the country would move forward with a buyback program ‘in the coming months.’” Trudeau ridiculously asserted, “You can’t fight gun violence for any violence on just one front. You can’t fight it without addressing its root causes.” Well, it’s clear that his administration is more interested in blaming inanimate tools rather than actually digging into the root human causes of violence and crime. But we don’t need to go to other countries to see how anti-gun leftists are determined to do everything in their power to limit gun rights. That much is demonstrated by Democrat Representative Sheila Jackson Lee’s bill HR 127 that would, among other things, create a mandatory registry of gun owners and the number of firearms they own. Kevin Hasset, president of the Retired Police Association of the State of New York, noted, “This is very dangerous, especially for retirees. Things have gone so downhill with this level of hostility towards cops and we are out there with the label that we are no longer cops. Retired cops don’t have partners or backup. We are out there on our own.”  The same can be said of millions of other American citizens. Hasset further warned, “This bill will go after all the lawful gun owners. If you are ever interested in robbing my house, you can look me up and know where my guns are stored.” Biden has made his intentions clear: He aims to assault our Second Amendment rights. And given his penchant for signing executive orders, this threat is no malarky. RIP MACINTOSH

JOE BIDEN-WHAT ME WORRY?  By:  Hal MorrisFebruary 19, 2021 As a presidential candidate, I thought that Joe Biden made many stupid comments and promises during his campaign. I attributed his promises to just plain natural MAD magazine stupidity, but now after his election and tirade of executive orders, as the saying goes, “He’s not naturally stupid he has to really work hard at it.” What else can explain his strong desire to obliterate our present state of energy independence, lead us down the path to energy dependence, and quickly destroy our successful economic advancements? His first move, probably written by either Bernie Sanders or one of Sanders’s advisors, was to issue an executive order stopping construction of the Keystone pipeline. Why? President Biden’s motives can only be logically understood if you believe that fossil fuels’ burning is the cause of our planet’s Earth’s death. Green advocates postulate the thesis that the burning of fossil fuels is killing our planet despite a growing body of scientific analysis that disproves their conclusions about climate change. Still, in reality, the crisis they have created is not to address climate but as a tool to secure political and economic changes in countries worldwide.  President Biden’s antagonistic moves on his first day in the office is also probably his foolish way of attempting to destroy “Anything Trump.” How nice to send a message that there is a new sheriff in town. His goal is “To Kill Fossil Fuels.” His executive order immediately stopping the Keystone pipeline will not kill fossil fuels but increase the cost of transporting crude oil to refineries, thus increasing the cost of heating oil, gasoline, plastics, and other products made from oil. Woe to the consumer, especially those who are considered low socio-economic earners. It has accomplished killing the livelihoods of over 11,000 skilled workers and, even more harmful, the jobs and small businesses in many small towns across the pipeline route. Of course, his energy czar, “let them eat cake,” John Kerry helps these unemployed workers by offering them retraining and jobs building solar panels and wind turbines! Never mind that about 90% of these jobs are located in China and Asia, where their raw materials are located. God forbid that Biden and his advisors would even attempt to examine the false pronouncements or scientific data behind the “kill fossil fuels” movement, nor examine the implications if his goals come to fruition. Not satisfied with his first reckless move, he suspends new fossil fuel leases and drilling permits on Federal lands and waters. This move is then followed up by his announcement declaring a further ban on all oil and gas leases in the United States. An examination of these bans’ impact will not kill fossil fuels because the objective is to increase the price of oil, gasoline, and natural gas so high that the “green” energy sources such as solar and wind become favorably aligned and not overly expensive as they are now. The result for Biden and his mentor Bernie Sanders is more use of “green energy.” A recent article by Shawn Regan, “The Cost of Not Drilling,” points out that the ban on oil and gas leasing will ‘inflict significant harm’ on many states that rely on revenues from such activities. The article points out that revenues from energy leases are a major federal income source, second only to taxes.  This income is then distributed to states. It is a major source of funds allotted to Native tribes and the primary source for distributing popular federal and state programs from education to conservation to health care and public safety. Before the pandemic, nearly $12 billion was distributed. No mention of how the Democrats/Socialists are going to replace these funds. (Shawn Regan, The Cost of not Drilling, The National Review, 2/22/21.)  As the President says, “Come on man,” the landmark conservation bill, the Great American Outdoors Act, passed last year, is funded entirely by federal energy revenues. Regan’s article in itself is a blockbuster. Evidently, his ability to research the President’s hasty’s action and the resulting impact, without thought, is far more thoughtful than Biden and his staff did before issuing his executive orders  Certainly last, the February 18, 2021 editorial in the Wall Street Journal points out that the electric grid that “… depends upon on subsidized but unreliable wind and solar needs baseload power to weather surges in demand.” The editorial quickly destroys the “Climate Change” advocate’s excuses to explain the current Texas electric grid failure as the fault of gas, coal, and nuclear power. Politicians and green power advocates don’t want to address this because they have been clamoring to take coal and nuclear power plants off the grids for years. Now they also want to reduce natural gas production, one of the cleanest sources of power available. As it has done in the past, the major media outlets either don’t tell the truth or distort reality to fit their progressive leftist attitudes. All of us suffer because the biased media doesn’t have the honesty necessary to explain and expose the charade being perpetrated upon the American people and the world.  Where are the investigative reporters and journalists? They are busy quashing Hunter Biden news or quashing the Governor Cuomo disaster in New York COID Nursing home deaths.  What needs to be done is to continually confront the false information on fossil fuels and force Green proponents to defend their positions with facts and verified scientific data. If we don’t then, we will suffer the consequences of the destruction of our free enterprise system and the world’s strongest economy. RIP MACINTOSH

NEWS

MSGR. GRACIDA CALLS GLORIA.TV ACCUSATION OF SEDEVACANTISM A “HIT PIECE”

FEBRUARY 18, 2021EDITOR6 COMMENTS

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Yesterday, the En.NEWS feed of Gloria.TV published an article entitled “Retired Bishop Openly Supports Sedevacantism”, causing an international sensation among Catholics.

The article opened with a statement of fact kind of assertion:

Retired Corpus Christi Bishop René Gracida, 97, Texas, believes that Francis is “not a bishop, not a Catholic and not a Pope” (Abyssum.org, January 13).

Gracida now openly embraces sedevacantism, the theory that Pius XII (+1958) was the last pope implying that after him the Church ended. For Gracida, John XXIII started a “false church,” and he and all his successors were impostors.

The problem with the article is that its claim could not be more false.

Bishop Gracida is an ardent and life long opponent of Sedevacantism.

I asked Bishop Gracida personally to comment on the article by Gloria.TV. Here are his exact words:

I consider it a hit piece. Anything you can publish which will assert the fact that you and I are in agreement with regard to the invalidity of Pope Benedict ‘resignation” and that I am certainly not a sedevancantist.

Understand “I give permission to”, before “Anything”.

Evidently the author of the article at Gloria.TV cannot even read, because the article at Bishop Gracida’s blog, entitled, “Jorge Bergoglio: 3 things he is not” — which En.News did not even link to, was the reprint of a letter recounting the argument of Sedevacantists, by 3rd  parties and was not written by Bishop Gracida, but bore the name and email address of Jason Fabaz — an Insurance Agent at St. Mary’s Kansas, and former Marketing Director of the Romanitas Magazine published by the SSPX —  as was evident from the fact that his email was printed clearly printed twice at the top of the letter (as is commonly had in email formatting), as the source and recipient of the letter. (You can read the letter at archive.org).

Bishop Gracida, to those who know of his blog, reprints articles by others, he rarely writes his own. In the style of the great Scholastics, Saint Thomas Aquinas and St. Bonaventure of Bagnoregio, he does not omit to put in discussion matters with which he does not agree. All who know of his blog, know this.

Because of his poor eyesight, he also often posts on his blog articles he wants to keep or archive, since in his browser he can expand the type face to make the letters visible. Readers of his blog know of this, if they are attentive and constant.

The letter in question is not even a complete argument, but the summation of points of Church teaching which might be used to sustain the entitled thesis. The argumentation is not even in the style of Bishop Gracida, but is clearly taken from other sources of those schooled in Sedevacantism.

If as En.News at Gloria.TV supposes, any republication of error is conscious assent or support of error, then we would have to class St. Thomas Aquinas as a Muslim on account of his refutation of the religion of Muhammad, if he had ever happened to take notes from the Koran and share them in correspondence.

But the real reason Gloria.TV attacks Bishop Gracida is that he is the only Bishop in the Church who has unflinchingly sustained for 8 years that the renunciation of Pope Benedict XVI was doubtful, whereas Gloria.TV sustains the opposition position, seeing that the Ordinary of the priest who founded Gloria.TV himself holds that Bergoglio is the Pope.

Many users at Gloria.TV hold the unsustainable position rebutted by all Catholics and sedevacantists, that a pertinacious heretic can hold an office in the Church. Indeed, the Code of Canon Law of 1983, promulgated by Pope John Paul II, in Canon 1364 in fact teaches that heretics are excommunicated ipso facto . But Catholics differ from Sedevacantists, in two things: our founder was not a pedophile, and we do not hold that private individuals can arrogate to themselves the right of emitting juridical judgements in the Church. Indeed, in the Catholic Church, heretics are publicly declared outside of the Church after reproof, and only when ordinary or extraordinary authority intervenes, that is by their ordinary bishop, or by the Pope, or by local or general councils. — However, this does not mean that in grave matters, that private individuals in public can not denounce others as heretics, for heresy. Such charges should be well founded to avoid the sins of calumny and defamation and the civil and canonical crime of damaging the reputation of another. — But obviously, such private denunciations do not make someone outside of the Church in a juridical sense. Only Bishops, Pope and councils can do that.

Holding that Benedict XVI is the one true valid pope, is not sedevacantism nor does it lead to sedevantist positions. Sedevacantists hold that there is no valid pope.

Rather those who hold that the renunciation of Benedict is valid and that Bergoglio was validly or not validly elected are the ones who are arriving at sedevacantist positions, because they hold that Bergoglio on account of his public manifest heresies has lost his office.

FromRome.Info has reached out to Mr. Fabaz for comment, and he has confirmed that the contents of the letter were penned by himself.

CREDITS: A photo of Bishop Gracida with Mel Gibson, who met with Bishop Gracida after attending a conference with him. Like a man of God should in the footsteps of Christ Our Lord, Bishop Gracida meets with sinners of all kinds, who seek his counsel. Only Pharisees called our Lord a sinner and unclean for doing so. This photo is copyrighted and used with permission by FromRome.Info.

SHARE THIS:

• https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.6e189c4f2b6d88c453045806323cdcf3.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Ffromrome.info%2F2021%2F02%2F18%2Fmsgr-gracida-calls-gloria-tv-accusation-of-sedevacantism-a-hit-piece%2F&related=wordpressdotcom&size=m&text=Msgr.%20Gracida%20calls%20Gloria.TV%20accusation%20of%20Sedevacantism%20a%20%22hit%20piece%22&time=1613684895531&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffromrome.info%2F2021%2F02%2F18%2Fmsgr-gracida-calls-gloria-tv-accusation-of-sedevacantism-a-hit-piece%2F
• https://www.facebook.com/v2.3/plugins/share_button.php?app_id=249643311490&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df25b6362d55a7bc%26domain%3Dfromrome.info%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Ffromrome.info%252Ff1b180a50f20c36%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&href=https%3A%2F%2Ffromrome.info%2F2021%2F02%2F18%2Fmsgr-gracida-calls-gloria-tv-accusation-of-sedevacantism-a-hit-piece%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey
• Print
• Save
• Share
• https://widgets.getpocket.com/v1/button?label=pocket&count=horizontal&v=1&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffromrome.info%2F2021%2F02%2F18%2Fmsgr-gracida-calls-gloria-tv-accusation-of-sedevacantism-a-hit-piece%2F&title=Msgr.%20Gracida%20calls%20Gloria.TV%20accusation%20of%20Sedevacantism%20a%20%E2%80%9Chit%20piece%E2%80%9D%20%7C%20FromRome.Info&src=https%3A%2F%2Ffromrome.info%2F2021%2F02%2F18%2Fmsgr-gracida-calls-gloria-tv-accusation-of-sedevacantism-a-hit-piece%2F&r=0.431806744323912
• https://www.reddit.com/static/button/button1.html?newwindow=true&width=120&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffromrome.info%2F2021%2F02%2F18%2Fmsgr-gracida-calls-gloria-tv-accusation-of-sedevacantism-a-hit-piece%2F&title=Msgr.%20Gracida%20calls%20Gloria.TV%20accusation%20of%20Sedevacantism%20a%20%22hit%20piece%22
• https://embed.tumblr.com/widgets/share/button?canonicalUrl=https%3A%2F%2Ffromrome.info%2F2021%2F02%2F18%2Fmsgr-gracida-calls-gloria-tv-accusation-of-sedevacantism-a-hit-piece%2F&postcontent%5Btitle%5D=Msgr.%20Gracida%20calls%20Gloria.TV%20accusation%20of%20Sedevacantism%20a%20&postcontent%5Bcontent%5D=https%3A%2F%2Ffromrome.info%2F2021%2F02%2F18%2Fmsgr-gracida-calls-gloria-tv-accusation-of-sedevacantism-a-hit-piece%2F
• Email
• WhatsApp
• Telegram

https://widgets.wp.com/likes/index.html?ver=20200826#blog_id=57452816&post_id=27624&origin=fromrome.wordpress.com&obj_id=57452816-27624-602ee09e573ca&domain=fromrome.info

RELATED

Bishop Schneider & Dr. Taylor Marshall, 2 proven dishonest Liars

In “Faith”

Bishop Gracida joins Archbishop Lenga in denying Bergoglio is the pope

In “News”

5 Questions for Bishop Schneider & Dr. Taylor Marshall

In “Faith”

Post navigation

PREVIOUS POSTSchool district cancels classes after Vaxx makes too many teachers sickNEXT POSTAJ Baalman: Alternative Platforms have worse censorship

6 THOUGHTS ON “MSGR. GRACIDA CALLS GLORIA.TV ACCUSATION OF SEDEVACANTISM A “HIT PIECE””

1. Ordo Militaris RadioFEBRUARY 18, 2021 AT 10:59 AMOh wow, this has nothing to do with the report, but in your comments Br. Alexis on Private Joseph Plumb Martin’s diary, Mel should get it and make a movie from it. Maybe have Bishop Gracida know to hand the idea off to Mel. Second, now on the report, good for him hitting back, I know I’ve been called that for defending Benedict as Pope and so has a lot of people, and I usual begin to hit them back with, “do you really want the guy who worshiped idols and says and does Anti-Catholic things?” That usually gets them to think and then I share your posts proving Benedict is still Pope.Liked by 1 personREPLY
2. MariaFEBRUARY 18, 2021 AT 2:39 PMThis post includes a stunning denunciation of FrancisChurch: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/02/alone-it-is-bishop-gracida-against.htmlLikeREPLY
3. Christopher Paul BenischekFEBRUARY 18, 2021 AT 3:02 PMFeast of St Bernadette
   18th February 2021 A. D. The venerable Bishop Gracida and valiant Archbishop John Paul Lenga are the foremost if not only Catholic bishops in the world today. Precisely because they are the only two who fear not public opinion and proclaim the truth that Benedict is Pope. And further these two men alone among the hierarchy fearlessly declare there is no way Francis the Apostate can be pope, now or at any time. Which fact is plain to the dumb sheep in the pew, who know the voice of the Shepherd, if not to bespectacled intellectuals like DeMattei. Viva il Papa. Viva Papa Benedetto!Liked by 1 personREPLY
4. JKEFEBRUARY 18, 2021 AT 5:46 PMPopes must be Catholic.
   Francis is not Catholic.
   Thus Francis is not pope.LikeREPLY
5. Pingback: Réné Gracida, un prélat conciliaire devenu sédévacantiste ? – Le Fide Post
6. Pingback: Canon212 Update: Faithless FrancisThugs Are Inventing Garbage and Expecting Us To Believe It – The Stumbling Block

NEWS

MSGR. GRACIDA CALLS GLORIA.TV ACCUSATION OF SEDEVACANTISM A “HIT PIECE”

FEBRUARY 18, 2021EDITOR6 COMMENTS

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Yesterday, the En.NEWS feed of Gloria.TV published an article entitled “Retired Bishop Openly Supports Sedevacantism”, causing an international sensation among Catholics.

The article opened with a statement of fact kind of assertion:

Retired Corpus Christi Bishop René Gracida, 97, Texas, believes that Francis is “not a bishop, not a Catholic and not a Pope” (Abyssum.org, January 13).

Gracida now openly embraces sedevacantism, the theory that Pius XII (+1958) was the last pope implying that after him the Church ended. For Gracida, John XXIII started a “false church,” and he and all his successors were impostors.

The problem with the article is that its claim could not be more false.

Bishop Gracida is an ardent and life long opponent of Sedevacantism.

I asked Bishop Gracida personally to comment on the article by Gloria.TV. Here are his exact words:

I consider it a hit piece. Anything you can publish which will assert the fact that you and I are in agreement with regard to the invalidity of Pope Benedict ‘resignation” and that I am certainly not a sedevancantist.

Understand “I give permission to”, before “Anything”.

Evidently the author of the article at Gloria.TV cannot even read, because the article at Bishop Gracida’s blog, entitled, “Jorge Bergoglio: 3 things he is not” — which En.News did not even link to, was the reprint of a letter recounting the argument of Sedevacantists, by 3rd  parties and was not written by Bishop Gracida, but bore the name and email address of Jason Fabaz — an Insurance Agent at St. Mary’s Kansas, and former Marketing Director of the Romanitas Magazine published by the SSPX —  as was evident from the fact that his email was printed clearly printed twice at the top of the letter (as is commonly had in email formatting), as the source and recipient of the letter. (You can read the letter at archive.org).

Bishop Gracida, to those who know of his blog, reprints articles by others, he rarely writes his own. In the style of the great Scholastics, Saint Thomas Aquinas and St. Bonaventure of Bagnoregio, he does not omit to put in discussion matters with which he does not agree. All who know of his blog, know this.

Because of his poor eyesight, he also often posts on his blog articles he wants to keep or archive, since in his browser he can expand the type face to make the letters visible. Readers of his blog know of this, if they are attentive and constant.

The letter in question is not even a complete argument, but the summation of points of Church teaching which might be used to sustain the entitled thesis. The argumentation is not even in the style of Bishop Gracida, but is clearly taken from other sources of those schooled in Sedevacantism.

If as En.News at Gloria.TV supposes, any republication of error is conscious assent or support of error, then we would have to class St. Thomas Aquinas as a Muslim on account of his refutation of the religion of Muhammad, if he had ever happened to take notes from the Koran and share them in correspondence.

But the real reason Gloria.TV attacks Bishop Gracida is that he is the only Bishop in the Church who has unflinchingly sustained for 8 years that the renunciation of Pope Benedict XVI was doubtful, whereas Gloria.TV sustains the opposition position, seeing that the Ordinary of the priest who founded Gloria.TV himself holds that Bergoglio is the Pope.

Many users at Gloria.TV hold the unsustainable position rebutted by all Catholics and sedevacantists, that a pertinacious heretic can hold an office in the Church. Indeed, the Code of Canon Law of 1983, promulgated by Pope John Paul II, in Canon 1364 in fact teaches that heretics are excommunicated ipso facto . But Catholics differ from Sedevacantists, in two things: our founder was not a pedophile, and we do not hold that private individuals can arrogate to themselves the right of emitting juridical judgements in the Church. Indeed, in the Catholic Church, heretics are publicly declared outside of the Church after reproof, and only when ordinary or extraordinary authority intervenes, that is by their ordinary bishop, or by the Pope, or by local or general councils. — However, this does not mean that in grave matters, that private individuals in public can not denounce others as heretics, for heresy. Such charges should be well founded to avoid the sins of calumny and defamation and the civil and canonical crime of damaging the reputation of another. — But obviously, such private denunciations do not make someone outside of the Church in a juridical sense. Only Bishops, Pope and councils can do that.

Holding that Benedict XVI is the one true valid pope, is not sedevacantism nor does it lead to sedevantist positions. Sedevacantists hold that there is no valid pope.

Rather those who hold that the renunciation of Benedict is valid and that Bergoglio was validly or not validly elected are the ones who are arriving at sedevacantist positions, because they hold that Bergoglio on account of his public manifest heresies has lost his office.

FromRome.Info has reached out to Mr. Fabaz for comment, and he has confirmed that the contents of the letter were penned by himself.

CREDITS: A photo of Bishop Gracida with Mel Gibson, who met with Bishop Gracida after attending a conference with him. Like a man of God should in the footsteps of Christ Our Lord, Bishop Gracida meets with sinners of all kinds, who seek his counsel. Only Pharisees called our Lord a sinner and unclean for doing so. This photo is copyrighted and used with permission by FromRome.Info.

RELATED

Sen. Joe Manchin Pushes Biden to Rescind Keystone XL Pipeline Order174Share Now4745TelegramFacebookTweetEmailMeWeLinkedInRedditCopy Link

Aitkin County sheriffs arrest “water protectors” during a protest at the construction site of the line 3 oil pipeline near Palisade, Minn., on Jan. 9, 2021. (Kerem Yucel/AFP via Getty Images)US NEWS

Texas Power Crisis Puts Keystone XL Cancelation in Perspective

BY TERRI WU February 18, 2021 Updated: February 18, 2021biggersmallerPrint

Rolling blackouts in Texas have put the importance of oil pipelines into perspective, according to business executives.

Ryan Palazzo, a former chief operating officer of a pipeline construction company and a resident of Houston, Texas, received text messages on Feb. 15 about rolling blackouts to protect the electricity grid which was strained by record low temperatures. Millions have been affected since.

“It’s not because there’s not enough natural gas. It’s because of the switch to renewables. They’re not able to, in the short term, keep the grid stable. It’s unfortunate, but energy is essential to everything that we do,” said Palazzo, who was laid off in November, right after the election.

Following the cancellation of the Atlantic Coast natural gas pipeline in July 2020, the owner of his company had a strong sense that the Keystone XL(KXL) project would be canceled as well and decided to downsize, according to Palazzo.

Biden’s executive order revoking the KXL permit was “obviously targeting a certain industry without real basis,” he said. “In fact, a political rather than a logical move, contrary to life here in America.”

Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) data show that Texas has consistently increased electricity generation by wind farms, from 3 percent of total electricity capacity in 2007 to 25 percent in January 2021. 2020 was the first year that renewable sources generated more electricity than coal in Texas.

In a statement calling for energy conservation on Feb. 14, the Public Utility Commission of Texas quoted Commissioner Arthur D’Andrea, “This record cold is not only compelling customers to increase their power usage to stay warm; it’s also icing wind turbines and straining our natural-gas powered resources.”

There is no magic or silver bullet when it comes to energy, said Palazzo. Renewable energy, in particular wind and solar, is intermittent. A solar power plant uses 100 times of land as a traditional power plant, while a wind power plant takes up to 1,000 times.  They also need rare earth metal components, which take a significant amount of mining. “The [pipeline] spills are very, very, very rare. I think the public has just not been educated and honestly, haven’t taken the time to learn the facts about the renewables and what we do in the oil and gas.”

In addition to KXL, pipelines line 5 and line 3 also face protests and lawsuits. Canadian company Enbridge operates both. Line 5 passes the Straits of Mackinac, connecting Lake Michigan and Lake Huron. Environmental organizations are urging the Biden administration to cancel line 3, arguing that it is another KXL. Both KXL and line 3 are oil sand pipelines.

“Line 5 in Michigan doesn’t just deliver products from Canada to Canada through Michigan. Also, 65 [percent] of the propane in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan comes from line 5. Texas is having a cold wave. Imagine what it feels like in Michigan today. So, it’s a very serious issue,” said Maryscott Greenwood, CEO of the Canadian American Business Council, at a forum organized by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute on Feb. 16.

No Benefits in Sight

The current time is challenging for Josh Williams, a pipeliner with 20 years in the industry. Union pipeliners have to keep working hours at a certain level to qualify for the benefits package, including health insurance and retirement 401(k) accounts. “I lost my insurance six months ago,” he told The Epoch Times.

He said that his local union 798 has a first-in and first-out job coordination system. Williams shared a union document showing that as of Feb. 12, 2021, 1,768 welders, 257 journeymen, and 1,990 helpers are “on the wheel,” meaning this many people are currently out of a job and looking for one. If a person is 1,001 on the list, he will need to wait for the first 1,000 to get jobs before it’s his turn. Therefore, fulfilling the working hours to regain the union health, dental insurance, and pension credit looks bleak.

Some jobs require pipeliners to foot the travel cost to the job site before they start earning an income. Williams said that he also knew friends who had to choose between getting their kids a nice Christmas versus spending the money to travel to a job. Some decided to stay home to get their kids a nice Christmas; some chose to sacrifice Christmas to get to another job.

Union Representation Questioned

Josh Williams is disappointed at the United Association (UA), the parent labor union of which his local 798 is an affiliate. He said that UA endorsed candidate Joe Biden during the election and sent members letters urging them to vote for Biden. “You can’t vote for somebody that’s going to shut your work down. You just can’t do that. Nobody in their right minds will do that.”

For some, the reality didn’t set in until the first week of the Biden administration, according to Williams. He said that some were confused by mixed messages on the Keystone XL pipeline and fracking during the election and thought President Biden was supposed to back unions because unions donate a lot of money to his campaign.

On Feb. 16, Gary Doer, former Canadian ambassador to the United States, said at a forum organized by the Ottawa-based Macdonald-Laurier Institute that Biden committed to canceling KXL trying to secure the nomination during the primary. In response to a question by The Epoch Times, he added, “I do think it’s unfortunate that the building trade delegates in the Democratic Party weren’t able to have as much power at the time in May of last year than the environmental lobbyists, particularly with the threat of [Sen. Bernie] Sanders still staying in the race.” He said Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau should focus on protecting line 5 and line 3 now.

Williams said that they started a local political action committee (PAC) to get signatures to petition governors and organizations. He said that the local PAC worked but not as much as it should have.

On Feb. 8, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt signed an executive order citing “the federal overreach and dismissal of Oklahoma’s constitutional ability to properly determine how to best develop its own natural resources.”

As a resident of Poteau, Oklahoma, Williams welcomed his governor’s action: “The governor’s executive order pretty much told the administration: you stay out of Oklahoma’s gas and oil industry business. It supports thousands and thousands of families just in Oklahoma.”

Way of Life Attacked

“He [Biden] was attacking our profession, our industry, our lives, everything,” Williams told The Epoch Times.

“The big thing for me is the camaraderie, the family atmosphere, the brothers. It’s a brotherhood; it’s a sisterhood. The big thing on every job is when you’re away from your family, your immediate family, this is our family away from home. You build a lot of relationships; you get to meet new people. When I go to these jobs and projects, I try to find these guys’ names and become friends with them. And we all have the same interests at heart, every one of us.” Not having this is taking away his way of life, said Williams.

Palazzo has started with another pipeline construction company. Over the years he was with the previous company until November, he had overseen 3,500 miles of various pipelines, including oil from coast to coast. He often visited job sites. He said the pipeliners had a demanding job, often working 60 hours a week. Yet, they found time to help local charities. “A lot of times, they don’t even ask the corporate. They would take care of it themselves.”

He recalled that in Ohio when the COVID just hit, pipeliners organized food drives for the elderly. They donated N95 masks to local medical facilities. They made real burgers for the local first responders and medical personnel to stop by and pick up, all on the pipeliners’ own initiative. “The goal is always when you go in and do a project, you want to be a good neighbor, you respect the community and try to make it a better place while you are there.”

Our Descent Into Collective MadnessThe most elite in America are the most likely to damn the privilege of those who lack it.
BY: VICTOR DAVIS HANSONFebruary 18, 2021(emphasis added)
These are crazy times. A pandemic led to national quarantine; to self-induced recession; to riot, arson, and looting; to a contested election; and to a riot at the U.S. Capitol.
In response, are we focusing solely on upping the daily vaccination rate? Getting the country back to work? Opening the schools as the virus attenuates? Ensuring safety in the streets?
Or are we descending into a sort of madness?
It might have been understandable that trillions of dollars had to be borrowed to keep a suffocating economy breathing.
But it makes little sense to keep borrowing $2 trillion a year to prime an economy now set to roar back with herd-like immunity on the horizon.
Trillions of dollars in stimulus are already priming the economy.
Cabin-feverish Americans are poised to get out of their homes to travel, eat out and socialize as never before.
Meanwhile, the United States will have to start paying down nearly $30 trillion in debt. But we seem more fixated on raising rather than reducing that astronomical obligation.
We are told man-made, worldwide climate change — as in the now-discarded term “global warming” — can best be addressed by massive dislocations in the U.S. economy.
The Biden administration plans to shut down coal plants. It will halt even nearly completed new gas and oil pipelines. It will cut back on fracking to embrace the multitrillion-dollar “Green New Deal.”
Americans should pause and examine the utter disaster that unfolded recently in Texas and its environs.
Parts of the American Southwest were covered in ice and snow for days. Nighttime temperatures crashed to near zero in some places.
The state, under pressure, had been transitioning from its near-limitless and cheap reservoirs of natural gas and other fossil fuels to generating power through wind and solar.
But what happens to millions of Texans when wind turbines freeze up while storm clouds extinguish solar power?
We are witnessing the answer in oil- and gas-rich but energy-poor Texas that is all but shut down.
Millions are shivering without electricity and affordable heating. Some may die or become ill by this self-induced disaster — one fueled by man-made ideological rigidity.
Texas’ use of natural gas in power generation has helped the United States curb carbon emissions. Ignoring it for unreliable wind and solar alternatives was bound to have catastrophic consequences whenever a politically incorrect nature did not follow the global warming script.
In 2019, a special counsel wrapped up a 22-month, $35 million investigation into then-President Donald Trump’s alleged “collusion” with Russia in the 2016 election. Robert Mueller and his team searched long and hard for a crime and came up empty.
Then, Trump was impeached in December 2019 and acquitted in the Senate in early 2020. His purported crime was warning the Ukrainians about the Biden family’s quid pro quo racketeering.
After the revelations concerning Hunter Biden’s shenanigans not only in Ukraine but also in Kazakhstan and China, Trump’s admonitions now seem prescient rather than impeachable.
Trump had been threatened with removal from office under the 25th Amendment. He was accused of violating the Logan Act and the Constitution’s emoluments clause. His executive orders were often declared unconstitutional if not seditious.
All these oppositional measures predictably failed to receive either public or congressional support.
Finally, an exasperated left decided to flog the presidential corpse of now private citizen Trump. It did so without a Supreme Court chief justice to oversee an impeachment trial in the Senate. The targeted president was no longer president.
There was no special prosecutor, little debate, and even less cross-examination. In the end, the second impeachment was sillier than the first. But, like the first, the show trial wasted precious time and resources in the midst of a pandemic.
But the height of our collective madness is the current cancel culture. Its subtexts are “unearned white privilege” and “white supremacy.”
In the name of those abominations, mobs tear down statues, destroy careers, censor speech, require veritable oaths and conduct reeducation training.
Stranger still, those alleging “white privilege” are usually themselves quite wealthy, liberal — and white. These elites count on their incestuous networking, silver-spoon upbringings, and tony degrees to leverage status, influence, and money in a way undreamed of by the white working class.
Affluent and privileged minorities likewise join the chorus to call for everything from reparations to “reprogramming” Trump voters.
The most elite in America are the most likely to damn the privilege of those who lack it. Perhaps this illogic squares the psychological circle of feeling guilty about things they never have any intention of giving up.
If blaming those without advantages does not satisfy the unhappy liberal elite, then there is always warring against the mute dead: changing their eponymous names, destroying their statues, slandering their memories, and denying their achievements.
The common denominator with all these absurdities? An ungracious and neurotic elite whose judgment is bankrupt and whose privilege is paid for by those who don’t have it.

RIP MCINTOS

FromRome.Info

SearchSKIP TO CONTENT

• AN INDEX TO POPE BENEDICT’S RENUNCIATION
• CANON LAW
• CHRONOLOGY OF REPORTS ON “TEAM BERGOGLIO”

NEWS

THE PHARISEEISM OF THE SEDEVACANTIST

FEBRUARY 18, 2021EDITOR

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Sedevacantism is an ideology developed by a pedophile who was expelled from Seminary but ended up justifying his illicit ordination as a priest and bishop.

It consists in claiming that the popes since Pius XII — a known CIA and Fascist collaborator — are not true popes.

But its chief method is deploy an intellectual trick, called a shell game, to get Catholics to fall for their cult.

This trick consists in shifting the boundaries of the term, “heretic” so as to justify that anyone they accuse is a heretic.

A heretic is someone who denies a truth of faith. Precisely defined, it is a person who after baptism denies a truth which he knows God has revealed. If God has revealed this truth to him a lone, then he is a heretic before God. If God has revealed this truth to the Church then one speaks of a heretic, simply.

But to be a heretic, you need first to be baptized. In a historical sense, you could extend the term to those Jews who denied the revelation in the Old Testament, as the Saducees of old it.

Heresy, however, is any verbal expression which contradicts a revealed truth. It can be written or spoken or even thought of.

A heresy spoken, written or thought of does not a heretic make the speaker, writer or thinker.  To be a heretic there has to be the intention to deny a revealed truth. And thus there cannot be ignorance of the revealed truth nor ignorance that it is revealed.

But sedes — the popular nick name for sedevacantists — us this trick. They claim that the mere expression of heresy makes you a material heretic. And the intention to express it as true makes you a formal heretic. They omit the part about intentionally denying a truth known to be revealed by God.

So they search the writings of any superior they want to dethrone, and they find a passage which they claim is an error. They call this claimed error a heresy, and name the person who said or wrote it a material heretic. And then they claim this person, by the mere fact that he sustained this error, is a formal heretic, outside of the Church, and thus they impose excommunication upon him, without any need for judgement or declaration by the Church — a thing which they do not seek to obtain, since they judge no one superior to themselves.

This is a very convenient intellectual position for those who were kicked out of seminary for pedophilia or sexual abuse and would never be allowed to be come clergy otherwise. For once you dispose of the authority and legitimacy of those who refuse you orders, you can justify getting them in some illicit manner.

To better understand the mind of a sede, using this trick, let us use an example.

There is the material drunkard, and the formal drunk.

The material drunkard keeps liquor in his house and drinks it.

The sede comes to know this and calls the inhabitants of the house material drunkards, and insists that since they kept liquor for years that they were drunkards and formally such.

Then they pronounce them to be shunned by everyone in town and say that all the legal acts they are involved in at the local court or city hall are null and void.

This is how absurd and dishonest Sedes are.

They are the new Pharisees and are quintessential puritans.

Just do not bring up with them that their ideology was cooked up by a pedophile. They get nasty if you do.

The Catholic on the other hand rebukes those in error and calls upon the Church to reprove those in error. He also recognizes that formal heretics do not hold office, but he is careful to avoid naming someone merely involved in error a heretic, especially when the person shows ignorance of many truths necessary to understand his error as an error.

CREDITS: The Featured image is Jesus in the house of the Pharisee by Tintoretto.

How Equality Lost to ‘Equity’Redefining words is one of the ways leftists exercise control over the citizenry. By: LEWIS MORRISThe Patriot PostFebruary 18, 2021(emphasis added) Leftists love to manipulate language. Just like Beelzebub himself, they use language to trick people into giving them what they want without even realizing the damage people are doing to themselves, their freedoms, and their society. Take the latest buzzword “equity,” for example. Until fairly recently, equity was a concept attached to real estate and property ownership. But, in case you hadn’t noticed, it has become an oft-repeated word regarding race, virtually replacing the word “equality” altogether. No one on the Left is talking about equality anymore. Instead, they’re talking about equity. When did equity slip into the lexicon and become so pervasive and penetrating a concept? Equity is a byproduct of Critical Race Theory,the belief that race is not a biological construct but a weapon wielded by whites to create a society that is inherently and deliberately racist from top to bottom. It perpetuates tribal concepts that divide Americans into groups based on their skin color, and it pushes an anti-American, anti-Western mindset that sees all our institutions as systemically racist. According to CRT, even concepts like achievement, hard work, and discipline are tricks of whites to oppress blacks. CRT is utter hogwash, and former President Donald Trump did his best to squelch it by preventing it from being used in federal “diversity” training programs. But President Joe Biden is all about equity, and he reversed this stance upon taking office. His administration has assured us that every agency of the federal government will now be getting into the “diversity” business. “We need to make the issue of racial equity not just an issue for any one department of government,” Biden said. “It has to be the business of the whole of government.” Yikes. Tracing equity’s origins is not as difficult as trying to define the concept itself. Equity is a nebulous term with a meaning that can change at the whim of whoever is embracing it. And that is perfect for the Left, where moving goalposts has become something of an art. “Equity is a term that has no meaning,” explains Shelby Steele, senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, “but it’s one that gives blacks power and leverage in American life. We can throw it around at any time, and wherever it lands, it carries this stigma that somebody’s a bigot.” Equality as a concept fell out of favor with leftists in large part because it is quantifiable, and they didn’t like what it was measuring. Equality can be measured in terms of the economic viability of blacks, how many college degrees they have earned, the type of jobs they hold, and so forth. This is good until it is discovered that the lack of equality between whites and blacks doesn’t necessarily indicate racism. “Inequality may be the result of blacks not standing up to the challenges that they face, not taking advantage of the equality that has been bestowed on them,” explains Steele. He points out that affirmative action and diversity did not do the work they were intended to do, noting that blacks now have lower measures compared to whites in education, income, marriage, and so forth than they did before the civil rights movement. For this reason, equality no longer works for the race hustlers. In their quest to deconstruct America by blaming everything on the so-called “white power” structure, leftists cannot accept that some of the reasons for blacks not achieving equality may rest with blacks themselves. So, rather than ditch outdated and unfair concepts like racial quotas and preferences, the whole idea of equality has to go. In its place comes equity, which means literally whatever the Left wants it to mean in any given situation. Equity will not solve racial differences any better than affirmative action or racial quotas. All equity can do, all it was designed to do, is stir more racial animosity and white guilt. So be especially wary if someone comes to you in search of equity. As Steele said, “If you hear me using the word ‘equity,’ I’m shaking you down.” Rip McIntosh