Monday, September 24, 2018

Sodomy Street

 If anyone doesn't think there is an agenda being pushed by the media, the Vatican II sect, and the elitists in power to normalize deviant behavior, think again. An online magazine for sodomites, Queerty, published an interview with one Mark Saltzman, who was a scriptwriter and songwriter for the children's educational TV show Sesame Street beginning from 1981 to 1990. During the interview, Saltzman declared that two puppets (often referred to as "muppets"), Bert and Ernie, were homosexual lovers. Saltzman said he was writing them as a couple and basing their interactions on his own experiences with his sodomite lover, Andrew Glassman, who died in 2003.

The producers of Sesame Street put out the following statement in response: "As we have always said, Bert and Ernie are best friends. They were created to teach preschoolers that people can be good friends with those who are very different from themselves. Even though they are identified as male characters and possess many human traits and characteristics (as most Sesame Street Muppets do), they remain puppets, and do not have a sexual orientation." (See  Immediately, there was a backlash against the producers, accusing them of being "homophobic." Check out the following:

  • "Yes, aspects of this conversation are ridiculous. ‘Are Muppets sexual?’ is just one unhelpful question doing the rounds this week that conflates gayness with hypersexuality. This isn’t about the representation of sex (gay or otherwise) in a children’s TV show, but loving relationships. That’s a conversation worth having...Of course, Bert and Ernie’s fellow Muppets Miss Piggy and Kermit are allowed to be a couple. Nobody addresses the weirdness of a frog and a pig going at it, because the male-female arrangement enforces heterosexist (sic) ideals." (See
  • "Gay loneliness is an epidemic and leaving queer kids to work out their lives with no authentic frame of reference is a disservice, and one we have to change" (See
  • The New Yorker magazine of July 2013, shows Bert and Ernie as snuggling while they watch the U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA); a clear implication they were "gay" that started a few years ago. This was used by some as "proof" that the producers were lying and the puppets were intended to be "a gay couple."
  • One of the puppets creators, Frank Oz, declared his creation was not "gay" and was blasted on Twitter for "homophobia" and hatred. The producers had to redact their original statement for a more politically correct one 

 Who really cares about the alleged sexuality of puppets, and why am I writing about something that seems so ridiculous? This isn't about puppets but about something far more sinister: The push by the forces of evil to have homosexuality and the entire "LGBT" perversion accepted, and they are targeting your children. A quick background is in order. Sesame Street debuted in 1969, showing colorful characters and puppets designed to teach basics, such as the ABC's, and also emphasize character education on topics including such things as the importance of being nice to your friends and sharing. I watched the show myself as a small child in the early 1970s. Two of the most famous of the puppets were "Bert and Ernie" meant to be best friends. Saltzman did not write for the show until the 1980s, which gives the lie to his contention that the puppets were modeled after his sodomite lifestyle. A 1996 survey found that 95% of all American preschoolers had watched the show by the time they were three years old. In 2008, it was estimated that 77 million Americans had watched the series as children.

This post will focus on what the empirical evidence reveals about homosexuality, and how this evidence is in perfect accord with Church teaching. You will see why homosexuality is one of the Four Sins That Scream to Heaven for Vengeance, and what the demonic forces are trying (very successfully) to get you and your children to accept. Lastly, I will give some suggestions on how to turn the tide. WARNING!! This post contains material that is extremely graphic, and may be found very disturbing. Reader discretion is advised.  

Homosexuality and Violence

The top six American male serial killers were all homosexual:

  • Donald Harvey claimed 37 victims in Kentucky
  • John Wayne Gacy raped and killed 33 boys in Chicago, burying them under his house and in his yard
  • Patrick Kearney accounted for 32, cutting his victims into small pieces after sex and leaving them in trash bags along the Los Angeles freeways
  • Bruce Davis molested and killed 27 young men and boys in Illinois
  • A gay sex-murder-torture ring (Corll-Henley-Brooks) sent 27 Texas men and boys to their grave; and Juan Corona was convicted of murdering 25 migrant workers (he had sex with their corpses--"necrophilia").

The pathology of eating one’s sexual victims also characterized Milwaukee’s Jeffrey Dahmer in 1992. He not only killed 17 young men and boys, but cooked and ate their body parts. The association between serial murder and homosexuality isn’t recent. Two gays compete for the spot of “world’s worst murderer.” During the Nazi reign of terror, Auschwitz executioner Ludwig Tiene strangled, crushed, and gnawed boys and young men to death while he raped them. Though his grand total is uncertain, he often murdered as many as 100 a day. Gilles de Rais (Bluebeard) brutally destroyed the lives of 800 boys. Each lad was lured to his home, bathed and fed. Just as the poor boy thought "this is my lucky day," he was raped, then killed by being ripped or cut apart and either burned or eaten. Even if the "10% of the population" is homosexual/bisexual were true, murder is disproportionately high among sodomites. 

A study of 518 sexually-tinged mass murders in the U.S. from 1966 to 1983 determined that 350 (68%) of the victims were killed by those who practiced homosexuality and that 19 (44%) of the 43 murderers were bisexuals or homosexuals (See Cameron, Dr. Paul,  [1983] "Is homosexuality disproportionately associated with murder?" Paper presented at Midwestern Psychological Assn Chicago.) Lesbian Aileen Wuornos laid claim in 1992 to "worst female killer" with at least 7 middle-aged male victims. She single-handedly topped the lesbian nurse team of Catherine Wood and Gwen Graham, who had killed 6 convalescent patients in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Jim Warren, who worked as a counselor at the Washington State Corrections Center, did the intake interview for almost all the younger murderers (i.e., under age 36) in the state of Washington from 1971-82 (during the growth of the so-called "gay rights movement"). He was "probably the only one who examined the entirety of each of their case files." Warren testified that he was struck with how frequently homosexuality turned up in the cases (See Warren, J,  [1989] Testimony before the Law and Justice Committee of the Washington State Senate December 15).

The data supports that most violence comes from within the sodomite lifestyle and gets exported. It does not come mostly from the outside against them. Homosexuals are a danger to society, not the other way around. The FBI reported 431 hate crimes against homosexuals for the U.S. in all of 1991. Only one was "confirmed" for Washington, D.C. — yet D.C. gay activists claimed 397 incidents! When pressed, they admitted that at least 366 of these "crimes" consisted of "verbal harassment." (See Washington Blade (1993) "FBI releases stats on hate crimes." January 1, pg.1). 

Homosexuality and Child Molestation
  • Over 90% of child molesters are male
  • 25-40% of molestations are same-sex, far in excess of the percentage of homosexuals
  • 43% of sex between teachers and pupils is homosexual
  • 50% of sex between foster parents and foster children is homosexual
  • In a study of 21 "group home" sex scandals — 71% were homosexual
  • Of those who commit incest: Homosexual parents — 18%; Heterosexual parents — 0.6%
(See Freund K, Watson RJ (1992) "The proportions of heterosexual and homosexual pedophiles among sex offenders against children: an exploratory study." Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy 18:34-43). 

Homosexuality and Promiscuity
  • 28% of homosexual men had more than 1000 partners:  "Bell and Weinberg reported evidence of widespread sexual compulsion among homosexual men. 83% of the homosexual men surveyed estimated they had had sex with 50 or more partners in their lifetime, 43% estimated they had sex with 500 or more partners; 28% with 1,000 or more partners. Bell and Weinberg p 308." 
  • 79% of homosexual men say over half of sex partners are strangers: "The survey showed 79% of the respondents saying that over half of their sexual partners were strangers. Seventy percent said that over half of their sexual partners were people with whom they had sex only once. Bell and Weinberg pp.308-309."  
  • Modal range for homosexual sex partners 101-500: "In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101–500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners. Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354."  

Homosexuality and Mortality Rate
A study was conducted in Vancouver British Columbia and published in 1997 in the International Journal of Epidemiology (Vol. 26, 657-61:

 Pro-sodomite researchers actually tried to debunk the assertion that homosexuality is infested with disease and shortens the life expectancy of both male sodomites and lesbians. Despite their attempts to downplay the practical consequences of their research, it is difficult to ignore that the study concluded with the statement that "under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre [Vancouver, BC] are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871." Much to their chagrin, the study revealed "life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men." 

Homosexuality and the Vatican II sect
According to the book The Changing Face of the Priesthood by Vatican II sect "priest" Donald  Cozzens (published by The Liturgical Press in the year 2000), sociologist James G. Wolf's research concludes 48.5% of priests and 55.1% of seminarians were homosexuals. The percentage is highest among "priests" under age 40, which in Wolf's research (published in 1989), would mean those born in and after 1950, with "ordinations" taking place in/after 1974 after the Modernists opened the floodgates to admit sodomites. Cozzens reports the number of sexually active homosexuals in the Vatican II "priesthood" was a full-fledged "network" of perverts. This is all the more alarming, as Cozzens is sympathetic to the sodomites.

Homosexual Practices
  • Anal sex (sodomy properly so-called) is practiced by 80% of homosexuals. Tearing or bruising of the anal wall is common, and opens the body to reception of germs through the rectum.  According to J.R. Daling, et. al, "Correlates of Homosexual Behavior and the Incidence of Anal Cancer," Journal of the American Medical Association 247, no. 14 (April 9, 1982) the risk of anal cancer soars by 4000% among those who engage in anal intercourse. Anal sex also raises the risk of rectal prolapse, perforation that can go septic, chlamydia, cryptosporidiosis, genital herpes, gonorrhea, viral hepatitis B and C, as well as syphilis
  • Rimming is the practice of licking and stimulating the anus of another. The amount of fecal matter consumed, and exposure to disease is significant over time 
  • Golden showers is the practice of urinating on the other person. About 20% of sodomites regularly drink and bathe in their partner's urine
  • Fisting is the practice of inserting the hand (and sometimes the arm up to the elbow, or further) into the partner's rectum. Many sodomites have the sphincter muscles so weakened they soil themselves. (See Darling cited above).
  • Scat Sports involves ingesting your partner's feces and/or rubbing it all over the face and body
  • Toys is the term used for inserting objects into the rectum. Most commonly used are gerbils, placed in plastic and inserted in the rectum until the animal suffocates and dies. The thrashing of the poor creature gives the sodomite his perverse pleasure. 
Homosexual Recruitment of Children
All areas of society are advocating the normalization of homosexuality, and even encouraging it, among children.

In education: 
  • Pro-sodomite books such as Daddy's Roommate, and Heather has Two Mommies are part of many curricula and attempt to portray unnatural relationships as "normal"
  • The pro-sodomite curricula in  The Safe Space Kit advises that, during casual conversations and classroom time, one should “make sure the language you are using is inclusive of all people. When referring to people in general, try using words like ‘partner’ instead of ‘boyfriend/girlfriend’ or ‘husband/wife’, and avoid gendered pronouns, using ‘they’ instead of ‘he/she’. What’s wrong with referring to a man as “he” and to a woman as “she”? Well, the glossary helps us to understand the definition of gender as “a social construct based on a group of emotional, behavioral and cultural characteristics attached to a person’s assigned biological sex” (See

In the media and pop culture:
  • TV programs that portray positive sodomite "role models" include, but are not limited to: Glee, Modern Family, and South Park
  • Superheroes are portrayed in film as "gay" such as LEGO Batman, and Power Rangers (2017)
  • Degenerate pop singer Katy Perry had a hit song in 2008 entitled I Kissed A Girl, about a lesbian encounter. It is sickening beyond description to see the parents of young girls (aged 10-15) at Perry's concerts singing along to that perverted garbage with their kids; I have to wonder about their fitness as parents
  • The equally degenerate pop star Lady Gaga has two songs dedicated to sodomites; Alejandro (2010), and Born This Way (2011)
  • Now, Bert and Ernie are alleged to be sodomite lovers
Conclusion: We Must Turn the Tide or Society Will Collapse

 Without reference to God's Law (or even Natural Law), the homosexual lifestyle has been shown by empirical evidence to be unhealthy physically and emotionally. Homosexuals are disproportionately violent, child molesters, disease-ridden with shortened life spans, and counterproductive to society. Furthermore, they want your children to join in their wicked ways. Those who oppose them are "homophobic" (implying a mental disorder for being moral and/or Christian) and are subjected to harassment, social ostracism, loss of job, and discrimination charges.

In my opinion, the United States (and all countries) should adopt the proposed anti-sodomy legislation introduced in Uganda four years ago. First, we need a Constitutional amendment declaring marriage to be a union of one man and one woman, and declaring homosexual conduct as criminal conduct that may be proscribed by law. (This would overturn all U. S. Supreme Court decisions to the contrary, beginning in 2003). 

Next, criminalize homosexual acts by statute as it used to be. Define and proscribe all homosexual activity. 
As in the Ugandan statute, there should be two classes of criminal acts, both felonies; "the offence of homosexuality" and "the offense of  aggravated homosexuality."  "Aggravated homosexuality" is defined to include a homosexual act committed (1) with a person under the age of 18 by a person over the age of 18; (2) committed by a person who is HIV-positive; (3) committed by a parent or guardian of the person with whom the act is committed; (4) committed by a person in authority over the person with whom the act is committed; (5) committed with a disabled person;(6) committed by a serial offender; or (7) committed by a person who administers any drug, matter, or thing with the intent to stupefy or overpower another person to enable a same-sex act to be committed. A person charged with "aggravated homosexuality" is forced to undergo an HIV test and if convicted will be imprisoned for life without possibility of parole, or executed, depending on the circumstances to be decided by the jury. 

All other homosexual acts constitute "the offense of homosexuality," and if convicted will bring a mandatory seven years in prison. The APA will once more recognize homosexuality as a personality disorder, and conversion therapy will not only be permitted, but mandated for those who profess same sex attraction. Lastly, all public promotion of homosexuality by a corporation or educational institution shall be subjected to large fines. Sound draconian? Not if you realize the very foundation of our civilization is at stake. The Vatican II sect aids and abets the sodomite agenda. Of course, the ultimate answer is the restoration of the Church and Catholic countries as existed prior to Vatican II. While we pray and try to convert others, we must use whatever secular means we have at our disposal to sway public opinion and elect anti-sodomite, pro-family politicians.  If we don't, you shouldn't be surprised when you see a child holding pink Bert and Ernie dolls, while singing, "Can you tell me how to to get to Sodomy Street?" 

Monday, September 17, 2018

When Can We Say "Habemus Papam" Again?

 Every day we hear more and more clamoring for "Pope" Francis to resign from his alleged "papacy" over the homosexual abuse and cover-ups by his clergy, with evidence that even Bergoglio himself was involved in covering up for sodomites. Traditionalists know that even if Bergoglio "resigns," we merely wind up with another false "pope," because heretics (and at this point, apostates) cannot become pope. On October 9, 2018, it will be exactly sixty (60) years since the last true pope, His Holiness Pope Pius XII died, leaving us without a Vicar of Christ on Earth. We know the rest of the story. False pope and usurper Angelo Roncalli (John XXIII) and his equally bogus Robber Council, Vatican II, set up a false religion using formerly Catholic buildings and pretending to be the Catholic Church. As theologian Berry wrote:

"The prophesies of the Apocalypse show that Satan will imitate the Church of Christ to deceive mankind; he will set up a church of Satan in opposition of the Church of Christ. Antichrist will assume the role of Messias; his prophet will act the part of pope, and there will be imitations of the Sacraments of the Church. There will also be lying wonders in imitation of the miracles wrought in the Church...there seems to be no reason why a false Church might not become universal, even more universal than the true one, at least for a time." (See Berry,  The Church of Christ: An Apologetic and Dogmatic Treatise , [1927], pg.119, 155; Emphasis in original). With the Church "driven underground" so to speak, the world has become just as bad (and perhaps even worse) than Sodom and Gomorrah. 

The question naturally arises, "How will we ever get another pope again?" This post will explore the false popes of the so-called Conclavists, those who believe (wrongly) that they can hold a conclave to elect a pope after the apostasy and/or death of all legitimate cardinals. There are also those who believe that they were chosen by Divine Intervention. While not Conclavists, properly so called, I will consider those as well. (It is not my intention to cover all of these so-called "popes," but I will give an example of each. In so doing, I hope that the error of  "make-a-pope" [with total disregard for Catholic theology] may be exposed). Finally, I will give a run down of what the Church teaches regarding electing a true pope, and refute the most common objection of those who follow Conclavists, as well as those who wrongly assert that the Church does not possess the Mark of Visibility in a state of prolonged sedevacantism. 

False Conclave = False Pope
David Bawden, aka "Pope" Michael, living with his mother on his Kansas farmhouse.

 David Bawden aka "Pope" Michael (b. 1959). A former Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) seminarian, David Bawden was expelled after approximately two years of study in 1978. Theresa Benns, a Home Aloner and self-professed "theologian," decided to "call a conclave." Bawden allegedly contacted all Traditionalists to attend his conclave, which was held on July 16, 1990. How someone could claim to have attempted to contact all Traditionalists in an age before computers is baffling. As a result, six people attended near his parents' Kansas farmhouse; Bawden's mother and father, two nice neighbors who were husband and wife, Theresa Benns, and Bawden himself. In 2011, Bawden claims to have been ordained a priest and consecrated a bishop by "Bp." Bob Biarnesen. The validity of "Bp. Bob" is certainly questionable, and the reason he allegedly "ordained and consecrated" Bawden remains a mystery. Why didn't he stay with his "pope," and become a "cardinal"? 

According to various sources, Bawden is believed to have anywhere from 30 to 100 followers worldwide. He has never held a real job, and resides on the farm with his aged mother. Benns abandoned and denounced the very "pope" she helped to "elect," and is back Home Alone. You can watch a documentary on his life at 

Earl (Lucien) Pulvermacher aka "Pope" Pius XIII (d. 2009). Born in Wisconsin in 1918, Pulvermacher came from a large and devout Catholic family. He was ordained a Capuchin priest in 1946. Three of his brothers also became priests, one of whom (Fr. Carl Pulvermacher) joined the SSPX and was editor of its magazine The Angelus. Pulvermacher chose the religious name of Fr. Lucien, and was a missionary in Japan. After Vatican II, he left to reside in Australia and was affiliated with the SSPX for a time, but he left, unlike his brother. He offered the True Mass and sacraments for small groups of Traditionalists in the United States.

In the mid-1990s, he became a sedevacantist. (His brother, Fr. Carl, remained with the SSPX and his other two priest-brothers were always in union with Modernist Rome after Vatican II). After talking with some lay and clerical sedevacantists, they decided to hold a "conclave." About 30 or so people "elected" Pulvermacher (some voting via telephone) on October 24, 1998, and he took the name "Pope" Pius XIII. He appointed one of his followers, the Australian-born Gordon Bateman, as a "cardinal" in his "True Catholic Church." Bateman was a layman, but Pulvermacher concocted a novel way to obtain a hierarchy. Using an obscure passage from theologian Ott, he decided that as "pope," he could give himself the special authority to ordain Bateman a priest and consecrate him a bishop, while he was only a simple priest.  Then as "bishop," Bateman consecrated Pulvermacher a "bishop." 

 He had a (now defunct) website, and an small number of followers. Things went south for Pulvermacher when "Cardinal" Bateman discovered that Pius XIII had engaged in the occult practice of divination when in seminary. Bateman declared his "election" invalid and was subsequently "excommunicated." Pulvermacher had almost no followers left when he died in 2009 at 91 years old. 

"Mystical Popes"
Clemente Dominguez, aka, "Pope" Gregory XVII, during an "ecstasy" having a "vision"--even though he (literally) had no eyes. He had lost them in a car accident. 

There are false popes who claim they were Divinely appointed. I will only name the most infamous, Clemente Dominguez (d. 2005) who called himself "Pope" Gregory XVI. On March 30, 1968, a group in Palmar de Troya, Spain began claiming supernatural revelations from apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

The apparitions involved four pre-teen girls – Ana Aguilera, Ana García, Rafaela Gordo and Josefa Guzmán – who said they saw Mary while picking flowers one day. The locals went to the spot of the miracle where all kinds of strange phenomena were claimed to have taken place. These involved occurrences  such as a local woman seeming to glow from within, a man running around on his knees at an incredible speed, hosts materializing on people’s tongues, and miraculous healings.

The Blessed Virgin was supposedly giving messages regarding the Antichrist, and a man named Clemente Dominguez became the "official seer" of Palmar de Troya. He claimed to have received the "stigmata" (Wounds of Christ), but one only needs to look at the photos to see it looks like he squirted himself with ketchup. He attracted quite a following, including some rather wealthy people who contributed large sums of money. He contacted Archbishop Peter Thuc, who fell for the story, and in January 1976, Abp. Thuc ordained and then consecrated Dominguez and four of his friends as priests and bishops using the Traditional Rite of the Church. Abp. Thuc was "excommunicated" by Montini (Paul VI) and then reconciled, before breaking away to ordain some sane men as Traditionalist bishops in this time of near Universal Apostasy.

Dominguez didn't understand Latin and had no formal training, so "Mary" conveniently said that Spanish was God's favorite language after Latin, and Spanish could be used in the Mass and sacraments. Dominguez lost both his eyes in a car crash, and it was told to him that when Montini died, he would be the next pope as "Gregory XVII."  God would publicly restore his sight after he became "pope" on TV so all would know he was the true pontiff. He then said "Mary" revealed what some have called the "crooked ears theory." Montini was a good and holy pope, but had been drugged and locked up in a closet shortly after his election by Masons. They had one of their own replace him by using plastic surgery to look like him, and that's how Vatican II was promulgated. If you look at photos before and after 1964, you will supposedly notice that post January 1964 photos show him with crooked ears--an imperfection that the Masons overlooked and "proof" of this goofball story.

 After Montini died, Dominguez was "mystically crowned pope" by Christ Himself, and called the First Palmarian Ecumenical Council. Things got super-weird at this point. Every priest in his sect (now an actual cult) was also a bishop. Since Dominguez had no training and attempted to translate the rites into Spanish, his ordinations and consecrations are dubious at best. He declared that Palmar de Troya and not Rome, would now be the seat of the Church (the pope must always be bishop of Rome--this is heretical). His "Palmarian Creed" declared Mary the "Irredeemed," for She who is without sin had no need of redemption (Pure heresy. Pope Pius IX, in his infallible declaration on the Immaculate Conception Ineffabilis Deus, declared that Mary was redeemed "in view of the merits of Jesus Christ"--in a unique manner prior to His death, which God knew with certainty would happen). There have been three "popes" since his death, each picked by their predecessor before he died. The sect can truly be called a cult that isolates itself from the world. Despite admitted affairs with his "nuns" Dominguez was "canonized" as "Pope St. Gergory XVII the Very Great" by his chosen successor. The cult has an estimated following of 1,500 people worldwide. 

The Teaching of the Church
It should hopefully be obvious to all as to what is wrong with the "popes" mentioned above. A "conclave" is not made up of your mommy, daddy, two nice neighbors and a female "theologian." Nor is some wacky fraud with heretical teachings and fake "miracles" (replete with conspiracy theories galore), a "divinely appointed pope." Our Lord said, " By their fruits thou shalt know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" (St. Matthew 7:16). If Bawden were truly pope, after almost 30 years, God would restore His Church, and not have him feeding the chickens on his mother's farm with about 100 followers. Yet, lest someone say that's just my opinion, there is a better reason to reject him and the other papal pretenders: they don't comport with Church teaching. 

There are three possibilities to get back a pope; (1) an imperfect general council, (2) sedeprivationism, and (3) Divine Intervention. Each will be examined.

An Imperfect General Council. According to theologian Bellarmine,"If there were no pontifical constitution in force concerning the election of the sovereign pontiff, or if by some mishap all the legally designated electors, i.e. all the cardinals, perished together, the right of election would belong to the neighboring bishops and the Roman clergy, but with a certain dependence on a general council of bishops." (Bellarmine: De Clericis, Lib. X, cap. x) An imperfect general council is called "imperfect" because no council is fully ecumenical ("universal") in the absence of the pope, and they meet because the designated electors of the pope--as well as the pontiff himself--are all deceased or heretics/apostates who lost office. The basis of this solution is that, in the absence of the pope, the bishops are the highest authority in the Church.The Roman clergy are invoked because with no cardinals, the remaining clergy of Rome become competent to elect their bishop, who, in virtue of being bishop of Rome, will be pope.

Problems. We can see that in the absence of elector-cardinals, the Roman clergy and/or bishops have the right of election, not the laity. First, who are the bishops? With various lineages not recognizing each other (Lefebvre, Mendez, Thuc) is it sufficient to get a simple majority together? How do we determine exactly all the Traditionalist bishops? Do the rules for a regular conclave apply? To what extent? 

Sedeprivationism. This is the thesis advanced by the late theologian Bp. Guerard Des Lauriers that the "seat is deprived" of a valid pope. He reasons as follows:

  • The Eastern Orthodox have valid sacraments, which includes valid bishops. However, they do not have formal apostolic succession, only material secession. That is, they occupy the place of bishops(material)but lack all jurisdiction and authority (formal). They have no legitimate right to the authority of the office of bishop, since they were designated by those who were legally excluded from the Church.
  • Sedevacantists put the V2 "popes" in the same boat as the Greek Orthodox, they succeed materially and without formal, legitimate designation. Sedeprivationists say the Vatican II sect cardinals and "pope" also succeed materially, but they DO have legitimate designation. Both sides agree they lack all authority and jurisdiction and are, therefore, false popes.
  •  Designation to power is different from the power to rule. The president-elect of the United States is recognized as having the potential to rule, but he is not the president and not to be obeyed.
  • Someone can have a legal status (de jure) different from their actual status (de facto). A person can murder someone and be in fact a murderer, but if and until convicted, he does not have legal recognition as such. The converse is also true. Someone my be wrongly convicted of murder and have the legal status of a convicted killer, even though he remains innocent de facto
  • Since the profession of heresy by the hierarchy during Vatican II, the clerics lost all power to rule, but they retain the right to designate the ruler, since the Church never took that right away from the cardinals before the Great Apostasy. By Divine Law, heresy removes all power to rule, but not the power to designate the ruler
  • The chosen heretic is pope-elect, but not the pope, because his profession of heresy prevents the authority from vesting. He has material succession, not formal, and holds the office of pope de jure, not de facto. In like manner, the president-elect cannot receive the power to rule unless and until he takes the oath of office
  • The false pope retains the ability to designate men who will, in turn, designate a material pope. In this way the succession of St. Peter continues materially until a material pope publicly abjures his heresy, rejects and condemns Vatican II, and publicly professes the Catholic Faith. He then becomes a true, formal pope and needs to be ordained and consecrated in the traditional rite by a Traditionalist Bishop
(I credit Bishop Donald Sanborn, who wrote a magnificent article on sedeprivationism with the above explanation which I put into condensed form). 

Problems.  There is no discussion of such a solution pre-Vatican II. The great theologian Fr. (later Bp.) Michel-Louis Guerard des Lauriers was one of the greatest pre-V2 approved theologians, so his theory certainly carries much weight as he lived through the Great Apostasy, and was one of the few who rejected Vatican II and its "popes" from the beginning. He was consecrated a bishop by Abp. Thuc in 1981, and died in 1988 at the age of 89. His illustrious career included being professor at the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome, and he was personal theological adviser to Pope Pius XII. Pope Pius asked him to draft the Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus, which infallibly declared the Assumption of Mary, body and soul, into the glory of Heaven. Fr. Guerard des Lauriers was the confessor of Pope Pius XII, until 1955 when he was replaced by the closet Modernist, Fr. Bea. He helped author the famous Ottaviani Intervention in 1969, which condemned the Novus Bogus "mass." In 1970, when Montini (Paul VI) began purging his newly founded sect of Anti-Modernists, Fr.Guerard des Laurier was one of the first to be removed from his teaching post. Unfortunately, he is the only theologian to come up with this solution to having no pope and elector-cardinals. It is plausible and logical, but the only way to know if it's true is to "wait and pray for a miracle of conversion." If it's not the solution, it will prevent some bishops from joining in an imperfect general council.

Divine Intervention. Could God, by a miracle, directly appoint a man as pope? Theoretically, yes, because Christ is the Invisible Head of the Church and He chose St. Peter as the first pope. However, mere logical possibility alone does not suffice. Clemente Domiguez and the "mystical" so-called popes fall into this category of claiming Christ directly appointed them pope. 

Problems. How do you authenticate such claims? If it were witnessed by thousands of people, such as the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, a possible case could be made. Dominguez was "crowned Pope by Christ" when Paul VI died, an event with no witnesses. A few saints discussed the possibility of such a miraculous, public appointment, but they were not theologians proposing solutions to an extended interregnum. With nothing to go on but the word of some person, or small group of people, with no obvious miraculous proof, such an "appointment" is dubious at best. According to theologian O'Reilley, "A doubtful pope may be really invested with the requisite power; but he has not practically in relation to the Church the same right as a certain pope - He is not entitled to be acknowledged as Head of the Church." (The Relations of the Church to Society - Theological Essays, [1882], p. 287).

Objections Answered
The following are common objections from those who accept Conclavist "popes," as well as "Recognize and Resistors" who claim that Sedevacantism destroys the visibility of the Church, so sedevacantism must be an error.

Objection: The Church teaches that if an imperfect general council, or the Roman clergy are all heretics/dead, etc, the right to elect falls upon the Church as a whole. This was the case, and that's why (Bawden, Pulvermacher, etc) was validly elected pope.

Answer: The church does indeed teach that principle. According to theologian Cajetan, "In case of doubt, however (e.g. when it is unknown if someone be a true cardinal or when the pope is dead or uncertain, as seems to have happened at the time of the Great Schism which began under Urban VI), it is to be affirmed that the power to apply the papacy to a person (the due requirements having been complied with) resides in the Church of God. And then by way of devolution it is seen that this power descends to the universal Church, since the electors determined by the pope do not exist." (Tract.1 de auctoritate Papae et Concilii, c.13). The Vatican Council infallibly declared:

"Therefore,if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the Lord Himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole church; or that the Roman pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacylet him be anathema." (Emphasis mine). The pope must be the bishop of Rome, and this by the Divine positive law.

Theologian Van Noort teaches: "...most probable opinion holds that not even the pope himself, nor an ecumenical council together with the pope, could effect such a separation, but that the connection of the primacy with the see of Rome is absolutely indissoluble…[the] more common opinion holds that the connection between the primacy and the see of Rome does not stem merely from the bare will of Peter… rather it holds that in some way or other this set-up is by divine decree." (See Dogmatic Theology, [1957], 2:274-275; Emphasis in original). All approved pre-Vatican II theologians admit the inseparability between Rome and the papacy. 

The case of Bawden is manifestly absurd on several counts:
1. He never even claimed to include Roman clergy or valid bishops.
2. The fact that such bishops will not hold an imperfect council does not allow the election to devolve to the Universal Church, it's when such is not possible--this is how something "devolves." If the College of Cardinals refused to elect a successor to Pope Pius XI, that does not give the bishops the right to an imperfect general council. There is no authority that supports such a contention. 
3. Does anyone think Bawden, his mommy, his daddy, two nice neighbors, and Theresa Benns represent the "Universal Church" ?
4. How is the "Universal Church" to be represented?
5. By what authority did Benns and Bawden "call a conclave"? They sent out invitations to the Kansas farmhouse, they (allegedly) reached everyone in an age before computers, they were free to disregard any bishops and/or Roman clergy who didn't attend, and those six people constitute the "electors" of the Universal Church?

The same is true of all Conclavists, to one degree or another. Dominguez ("mystically chosen 'pope'") actually "transferred the papacy" from Rome to Palmar de Troya, and taught manifest heresy.

Objection: If sedevacantism is true, the Church has been without a visible Head for 60 years, and lacks the Mark of Visibility required of the One True Church.

Answer: First, some preliminary remarks about the papacy are in order. According to theologian Dorsch, "The Church therefore is a society that is essentially monarchical. But this does not prevent the Church, for a short time after the death of a pope, OR EVEN FOR MANY YEARS, from remaining deprived of her head. [vel etiam per plures annos capite suo destituta manet]. Her monarchical form also remains intact in this state.…
Thus the Church is then indeed a headless body.… Her monarchical form of government remains, though then in a different way — that is, it remains incomplete and to be completed. The ordering of the whole to submission to her Primate is present, even though actual submission is not…

For this reason, the See of Rome is rightly said to remain after the person sitting in it has died — for the See of Rome consists essentially in the rights of the Primate.

These rights are an essential and necessary element of the Church. With them, moreover, the Primacy then continues, at least morally. The perennial physical presence of the person of the head, however, [perennitas autem physica personis principis] is not so strictly necessary." (de Ecclesia 2:196–7; Emphasis mine)

 Second, according to theologian Salaverri, instead of being a "primary foundation… without which the Church could not exist," the pope is a "secondary foundation," "ministerial," who exercises his power as someone else’s (Christ’s) representative. (See De Ecclesia 1:448)

Moreover, there was a de facto interregnum for 51 years during the Great Western Schism from 1378 until 1429, when Pope Martin V became the universally recognized pontiff. Prior to this, there were up to three claimants to the papal throne, all with arguments for their legitimacy. Only one (or none) could be the true pope. Which one was it? Mutual excommunications, appointing bishops and cardinals; to whom do you submit? Was the Church a "three headed monster" during this time? If you chose wrongly (in an age of limited education with no Internet or daily papers) are you "schismatic" and damned to Hell? There was no discernible pope, so according to the pope= visibility theory, the Church would have defected--an impossibility. That the Church is Indefectible is a dogma of the Faith. 

I once again quote theologian O'Reilley: The real nail in the coffin was delivered by him; one of the most orthodox and erudite theologians of the 19th century. He wrote his theology book in 1882 (a scant twelve years after the Vatican Council), entitled The Relations of the Church to Society — Theological Essays. On page 287, he writes in reference to the Great Western Schism:

"There had been anti-popes before from time to time, but never for such a continuance... nor ever with such a following...
The great schism of the West suggests to me a reflection which I take the liberty of expressing here. If this schism had not occurred, the hypothesis of such a thing happening would appear to many chimerical. They would say it could not be; God would not permit the Church to come into so unhappy a situation. Heresies might spring up and spread and last painfully long, through the fault and to the perdition of their authors and abettors, to the great distress too of the faithful, increased by actual persecution in many places where the heretics were dominant. But that the true Church should remain between thirty and forty years without a thoroughly ascertained Head, and representative of Christ on earth, this would not be. Yet it has been; and we have no guarantee that it will not be again, though we may fervently hope otherwise. What I would infer is, that we must not be too ready to pronounce on what God may permit. We know with absolute certainty that He will fulfill His promises; not allow anything to occur at variance with them; that He will sustain His Church and enable her to triumph over all enemies and difficulties; that He will give to each of the faithful those graces which are needed for each one’s service of Him and attainment of salvation, as He did during the great schism we have been considering, and in all the sufferings and trials which the Church has passed through from the beginning. We may also trust He will do a great deal more than what He has bound Himself to by His promises. We may look forward with a cheering probability to exemption for the future from some of the troubles and misfortunes that have befallen in the past. But we, or our successors in future generations of Christians, shall perhaps see stranger evils than have yet been experienced, even before the immediate approach of that great winding up of all things on earth that will precede the day of judgment. I am not setting up for a prophet, nor pretending to see unhappy wonders, of which I have no knowledge whatever. All I mean to convey is that contingencies regarding the Church, not excluded by the Divine promises, cannot be regarded as practically impossible, just because they would be terrible and distressing in a very high degree." (pg. 287; Emphasis mine). 

Lastly, according to canonist Wernz-Vidal, "... [the] visibility of the Church consists in the fact that she possesses such signs and identifying marks that, when moral diligence is used, she can be recognized and discerned..." (See Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, pg. 454; Emphasis mine). The Church does not, strictly speaking, need an actual living pope to be a visible society, the Mystical Body of Christ. 

When can we say "Habemus Papam" (We have a pope)? Unfortunately, I have no answer. We may be in the last days, and Christ returns making Pope Pius XII the last pope of all time. "When the Son of Man returns will He find faith on Earth?" (St. Luke 18:8). Hopefully, R&R clergy will recognize the vacancy,and then Traditionalist bishops can put aside their differences and work together for a real imperfect general council to elect a successor of Pope Pius XII. Perhaps sedeprivationism may prove true at some point in time. Perhaps God will intervene for the first time since choosing St. Peter as His first pope. It is also taught by the theologians that it would be exceedingly rash to set any prejudged limits as to what God will be prepared to allow to happen to the Holy See, except for that which would be contrary to Divine Law (such as a "heretical pope"--an oxymoron)

I'm going to conclude this post with a personal story of my time spent with my spiritual father, the great canonist Fr. Gommar DePauw. Back in the late 1980s, Father told me of a most interesting event that took place in his fascinating life as founder of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement. The year was 1966, the Robber Council had just ended, and he was flying around the United States giving talks to large crowds of people urging them to stay away from "the reformed Conciliar establishment" and its Novus Bogus "mass." He was trying to convince people to give his literature to every priest they knew and hold on to the True Faith and Mass with priests who rejected the reforms.

He was in Chicago, and had just finished giving such a talk in a large hotel room. He always ended with a question and answer session, but refused to see people individually, as most just wanted to argue with him and call him "disobedient." He made one exception: he would never refuse to talk to a priest who wanted to speak with him in private hoping that the priest wanted to join him, or could be convinced to do so. The hotel manager informed Father that a priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago wanted to see him in the lobby, and he told the manager he would go and talk to him. [I have redacted the names of those involved in this story, as I don't think Father wanted them made public---Introibo]

In the lobby, Father DePauw was greeted by "Fr. X," about 60 years old at the time. Standing with the priest was a very modestly dressed and attractive woman in her mid-forties, whom I'll call "Mrs. Y." The woman introduced herself to Fr. DePauw and told him that Fr. X was her confessor and spiritual advisor. "That's very nice," Fr. DePauw said. "But why are you here with Fr. X?" Fr. DePauw wasn't prepared for what she said next. "I have visions and get messages from the Blessed Virgin Mary." Stunned, as she didn't appear to be unstable, Father looked at Fr. X who was shaking his head in agreement. "Yes, she does Father DePauw."

Father then asked why they were in Chicago telling him instead of at the Vatican or explaining this to Archbishop Cody (Archbishop of Chicago at the time and to be made "cardinal" by Montini in 1967). Father really wan't prepared for what they said next. Fr. X said, "The message is for you personally." "What might that message be?" Father DePauw inquired. Mrs. Y told him, "Paul VI has been stripped of the papacy, and you have been 'mystically anointed' pope in his place, Your Holiness. What shall be your papal name?" Fr. DePauw immediately told them not to call him "Your Holiness" and that he definitely was not the pope.

"Our Lady will not take 'no' for an answer," they told him. Father said he wasn't saying no to the Blessed Virgin, only to their crazy and false story. Certainly, God and His Mother would inform HIM of such an event (which wouldn't happen anyway), and most importantly, he castigated the priest for believing something contrary to Catholic theology. As a priest, he should know better than to believe in "secretly, divinely chosen popes." He then politely asked them to leave him alone. "We will not leave you alone until you announce to the world you are pope," they called after him. "You'll be waiting forever," he answered. For the next ten months Fr. X and Mrs. Y showed up to every public talk Father gave around the U.S., waiting for his "announcement" which, of course, never came.

Father started getting worried about their stalking him. He was going to go and get a restraining order, but he didn't want to get a priest in trouble unnecessarily. He called the chancery in Chicago to tell them about Fr. X's behavior and asked them to order him to stop the stalking or he would take legal action. Eerily, the day before Father called, Fr. X packed his belongings and left his rectory without a trace, leaving only a short note saying he would never be back. Later, it was discovered Mrs. Y and her husband abandoned their house and also were never heard from again. "Can you imagine the damage to the Church I would have caused had I fallen for such a ridiculous story?" Father said to me. "We must know Catholic theology and never abandon it. That's the means by which God preserves us in the One True Faith."

 Let us hold onto the One True Faith of the One True Church. As Fr. DePauw prayed each night: "Lord, you know I've done my best today to keep and spread the faith. It is Thy Church. I'm going to sleep now and I trust in Thee, that Thou shalt ever take care of Her."  

Monday, September 10, 2018

Perversion And Modernism

 You'd have to be an ostrich with your head in the ground not to be aware of the latest homosexual scandals and cover-ups perpetrated by the Vatican II sect hierarchy, and extending up to no less than Bergoglio himself. The entire Vatican II sect is shaken to its rotten core, more so than 2002 when the scandals were brought to light by the Boston Globe.  The reported abuse coming out of Pennsylvania is almost too horrific to type. Sect members will think the crimes and cover-ups are reasons for the "pope" to resign, or they will join a Protestant sect because those Jack Chick tracts were right after all about "Rome being the root of all evil." Still others will blame celibacy, as if normal men who would otherwise make good husbands and fathers became child molesters since they couldn't marry (If you believe that I've got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn real cheap).

The scandal should not be used by Traditionalists to "prove" sedevacantism. Moral corruption does not cause loss of office, only heresy does that. In this case, the moral rot can be traced back to Modernism--loss of faith leading to loss of morals. To be certain, there have always been immoral clergy in the Church who did horrific things. It was a bishop who betrayed Our Lord for money, hanged himself and now burns in Hell. (There were only 12 bishops at the time, or 8.33% were bad). Christ knew Judas Iscariot was evil, but chose him anyway, to prove that His Church will prevail despite evil in the clerical ranks. What is happening now is substantially different. It's not the corruption that was rooted out by St. Francis of Assisi in the 13th century. The institution perpetrating the crimes is not the Catholic Church, but a man-made sect brought about by heresy.

It cannot, therefore, be "corrected" by a "papal resignation," or better reporting requirements. The problem is supernatural, and the world does not want to hear of such. The Church was infiltrated by Her enemies, a false sect set up at Vatican II through heresy, and the moral rot is a logical result of the moral relativism that comes with Modernism--"the synthesis of all heresies"--as Pope St. Pius X called it. This post will demonstrate the link between Modernism and rampant sexual perversion in the Vatican II sect. It will be shown how (a) Christ condemns homosexuality, (b) the Magisterium condemns it, and the Vatican II sect then changes course, leading to perversion's acceptance in society with devastating consequences.

Condemnation by Christ
The story of Sodom, told in Genesis 19, explains how Lot (Abraham's nephew) was met by two strangers at the gate of the city. These men were actually angels in disguise. Lot brings them to his house and, after a meal but before going to bed, the men of Sodom (young and old) surround the house and demand to have sex with them. Lot refuses to allow the gang rape of his guests and (tragically) offers them his virgin daughters instead. The men of Sodom are not interested in the women, only wanting sex with the men. The mob is about to break down the door of the house, when the "men" reveal themselves and save Lot by striking the mob with blindness. Revisionists tell us this is a case of attempted gang rape and  being "inhospitable" to guests, it is not "loving and consensual relations" that God would not condemn.

That Sodom was condemned for unnatural vice (later to be named after the city itself--"sodomy") is made clear by the New Testament, specifically, the epistle of St. Jude 1: 7: "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." (Emphasis mine). Doesn't leave much room for declaring "the sin of Sodom" as being a lack of hospitality.

 Each time Our Lord refers to that immoral city, He refers to its sinfulness and agrees that it stands condemned:

  • St. Matthew 10:15, "Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town." (Clearly implying that on Judgement Day, Sodom and Gomorrah will stand condemned)
  • St. Matthew 11:23-24, "And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to the heavens? No, you will go down to Hell. For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you."
  • St. Luke 10:12, "I assure you, even wicked Sodom will be better off than such a town on judgment day."
  • St. Luke 17:30, "But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from Heaven and destroyed them all."
The inescapable logic:

First, Sodom was destroyed by God for it's "sexual immorality and perversion." (St. Jude 1:7)

Second, this perversion is homosexuality, because Genesis 19 clearly states it was men wanting sex with two angels who appeared as men, and they had no (sexual) use for women.

Third, Our Lord Jesus Christ is recorded referring to Sodom no less than four (4) times, and each time He agrees the city stands condemned for this sin ("sodomy") and calls Sodom "wicked." 

Therefore, Jesus Christ condemned homosexuality. True, He never uses the word "homosexuality," but He never specifically condemned "rape" by name, so are we thereby to blasphemously assume He didn't condemn it?

The Magisterial Pronouncements
In 314, the Council of Ancyra, although not an Ecumenical Council, had great influence upon the Church. Canon 17 condemns those who have "defiled themselves with beasts, being also leprous..." invokes God's wrath on bestiality, and likens homosexuality to leprosy. It further sets forth the penalties for "bestial lusts" in Canon 16:

"Let those who have been or who are guilty of bestial lusts, if they have sinned while under twenty years of age, be prostrators fifteen years, and afterwards communicate in prayers; then, having passed five years in this communion, let them have a share in the oblation. But let their life as prostrators be examined, and so let them receive indulgence; and if any have been insatiable in their crimes, then let their time of prostration be prolonged. And if any who have passed this age and had wives, have fallen into this sin, let them be prostrators twenty-five years, and then communicate in prayers; and, after they have been five years in the communion of prayers, let them share the oblation. And if any married men of more than fifty years of age have so sinned, let them be admitted to communion only at the point of death." (See

The Council of Elvira, approximately 305–6 A.D. was one of three councils, together with the Council of Arles (314) and the Council of Ancyra, that first approached the character of an Ecumenical Council and prepared the way for Nicea in 325. Eighty-one canons are recorded. Of interest are numbers 18 and 71.

Canon 18: Bishops, presbyters, and deacons, once they have taken their place in the ministry, shall not be given communion even at the time of death if they are guilty of sexual immorality [in particular homosexuality].  Such scandal is a serious offense.

Canon 71: Those who sexually abuse boys may not commune [receive Holy Communion] even when death approaches.
(See; Commentary in brackets mine).

The Third Lateran Ecumenical Council 1179 A.D. 

Canon 11: "...Let all who are found guilty of that unnatural vice for which the wrath of God came down upon the sons of disobedience and destroyed the five cities with fire, if they are clerics be expelled from the clergy or confined in monasteries to do penance; if they are laymen they are to incur excommunication and be completely separated from the society of the faithful..." (See 

Pope St Pius V:

Cum Primum  April 1, 1566:

"Having determined to do away with everything that may in some way offend the Divine Majesty, we resolve to punish, above all and without indulgence, those things which, by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures or by most grievous examples, are more repugnant to God than any others and raise His wrath: that is, negligence in divine worship, ruinous simony, the crime of blasphemy, and the execrable libidinous vice against nature. For such faults peoples and nations are scourged by God Who, according to His just condemnation, sends catastrophes, wars, famine, and pestilence ... and if he is a cleric, he will be subject to the same punishment after having been stripped of all his degrees [of ecclesiastical dignity]." (Emphasis mine).

Horrendum Illud Scelus August 30, 1568:

P I U S , B I S H O P

Servant of the Servants of God: For perpetual memory. That horrendous crime, for which polluted and filthy
cities were burned by the frightful judgment of God, pains Us most bitterly, and gravely stirs our soul, so
that, insofar as it is possible, we might strive to crush it.

I. It is reasonably established in the [Third] Lateran Council that any Clerics who are discovered in that act
of incontinence that is against nature, because of which the wrath of God came upon the children of unbelief, should be expelled from the clergy, or be cast into monasteries for the purpose of doing penance.

2. However, lest the contagion of such a disgrace, from the hope of impunity – which is the greatest incentive to sin – strengthen in boldness, we have decided that the clerics who are guilty of this nefarious crime are to be more gravely punished, so that the avenger of the civil laws, the secular sword, might certainly deter those who do not fear the death of the soul.

3. And therefore, seeking to more completely and forcefully pursue what We already decreed regarding this matter at the beginning of our Pontificate, any and all priests and other secular and regular Clergy of whatever grade and dignity who practice such a dire sin We deprive of every clerical privilege, and of every
Ecclesiastical office, dignity, and benefit, by the authority of the present canon. So that, having been degraded by Ecclesiastical Judgment, they may be handed over to the secular power, which may exact from them that same punishment that is received by laity who have fallen into this ruin, which is found to be constituted in legitimate ordinances....

Given at St. Peter’s in Rome, in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1568, on the third Kalends of September (August 30), in the third year of Our Pontificate.

1917 Code of Canon Law

Canon 2357: section 1:  Lay persons who have been legally found guilty of a crime of sexual immorality committed with a minor under 16 years of age or rape, sodomy, incest, pandering, are ipso facto infamous, besides being subject to other penalties which the Ordinary may deem proper to inflict.

Canon 2359: section 2: Deprives clerics (guilty of the same crimes enumerated above) of "any office, benefice, dignity, or position which they may have and in more serious cases be deposed."
(See Canonist Bouscaren Canon Law: A Text and Commentary (1951), pgs. 931-932).

Vatican II: Finding Virtue in Vice
When the Vatican II sect was created by the Modernists, they sought to conform Christ to the world. Modernism is the polar opposite of Catholicism. By introducing false principles by which theology should be guided, they lead the way to acceptance of unnatural behavior. The "Constitution on the Church in the Modern World" (Gaudium et Spes) begins the moral decay:

Para. #54:  "The circumstances of the life of modern man have been so profoundly changed in their social and cultural aspects, that we can speak of a new age of human history.New ways are open, therefore, for the perfection and the further extension of culture. These ways have been prepared by the enormous growth of natural, human and social sciences, by technical progress, and advances in developing and organizing means whereby men can communicate with one another. Hence the culture of today possesses particular characteristics: sciences which are called exact greatly develop critical judgment; the more recent psychological studies more profoundly explain human activity; ..." (Emphasis mine). 

Para. #62: "In pastoral care, sufficient use must be made not only of theological principles, but also of the findings of the secular sciences, especially of psychology and sociology, so that the faithful may be brought to a more adequate and mature life of faith." (Emphasis mine). 

The pagan aspects of psychology and sociology were thereby introduced. Vatican II joins modern psychology in the heretical teaching of humanity's "intrinsic self-worth." In Gaudium et Spes, para. 24 states, "...if man is the only creature on earth God has wanted for its own sake, man can fully discover his true self only in a sincere giving of himself," as if people possesses such value in themselves that it would cause God to create them.  In the Catholic meaning, the self-worth or "dignity of man" cannot be considered as a characteristic in people's very nature that imposes respect for all choices, because this dignity depends on right will turned toward the Good and is therefore a relative and not an absolute value. 

The stage was set for a series of "declarations" that would weaken and collapse traditional morality in sexual matters. In 1975, the Modernist Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (sic) promulgated a Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics.  The declaration, approved by Montini (Paul VI), reverses the presumption of guilt on the part of those who commit sexual sins. Paragraph # 10 states: "It is true that in sins of the sexual order, in view of their kind and their causes, it more easily happens that free consent is not fully given; this is a fact which calls for caution in all judgment as to the subject's responsibility." (In sins of serious matter, it is presumed that free consent of the will is present, unless the Confessor finds out otherwise. One would--logically and naturally--presume that those engaging in sodomical acts are not coerced or unaware of what they are doing. Here, the declaration adopts erroneous principles of modern psychology that people are "born" homosexuals with desires they "can't help" and act upon them with less than full consent of the will). 

On October 1, 1986, the same Modernist Congregation, headed by Ratzinger at this time, released the Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic (sic) Church On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. This 'letter" (or "declaration") states in para. #7: "Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of  themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent." Here, those who engage in unnatural vice are often "generous and giving" of themselves. Couldn't you say the same of all serious sinners, such as thieves and wife beaters? 

In paragraph #10, we are treated to this gem: "It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law." While I don't advocate violence against anyone, the State has the right to imprison such persons; and what, exactly, constitutes "violent malice in speech"? 

I guess Pope St. Gregory the Great was guilty of "violent malice in speech" when he said, "Brimstone calls to mind the foul odors of the flesh, as Sacred Scripture itself confirms when it speaks of the rain of fire and brimstone poured by the Lord upon Sodom.  He had decided to punish in it the crimes of the flesh, and the very type of punishment emphasized the shame of that crime, since brimstone exhales stench and fire burns. It was, therefore, just that the sodomites, burning with perverse desires that originated from the foul odor of flesh, should perish at the same time by fire and brimstone so that through this just chastisement they might realize the evil perpetrated under the impulse of a perverse desire." (St. Gregory the Great, Commento morale a Giobbe, XIV, 23, vol. II, p. 371). 

In the 1986 U.S. Supreme Court Case Bowers v. Hardwick,478 U.S. 186, the right of the government to criminalize homosexual sodomy was upheld 5 to 4. It was decided the same year as Ratzinger's letter. The Protestant Chief Justice had more wisdom than Ratzinger. Writing a concurring opinion, Chief Justice Warren Burger stated: 

"I join the Court's opinion, but I write separately to underscore my view that, in constitutional terms, there is no such thing as a fundamental right to commit homosexual sodomy.

As the Court notes, ante at 192, the proscriptions against sodomy have very "ancient roots." Decisions of individuals relating to homosexual conduct have been subject to state intervention throughout the history of Western civilization. Condemnation of those practices is firmly rooted in Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards. Homosexual sodomy was a capital crime under Roman law. See Code Theod. 9.7.6; Code Just. 9.9.31. See also D. Bailey, Homosexuality [p197] and the Western Christian Tradition 70-81 (1975). During the English Reformation, when powers of the ecclesiastical courts were transferred to the King's Courts, the first English statute criminalizing sodomy was passed. 25 Hen. VIII, ch. 6. Blackstone described "the infamous crime against nature" as an offense of "deeper malignity" than rape, a heinous act "the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature," and "a crime not fit to be named." 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries 215. The common law of England, including its prohibition of sodomy, became the received law of Georgia and the other Colonies. In 1816, the Georgia Legislature passed the statute at issue here, and that statute has been continuously in force in one form or another since that time. To hold that the act of homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right would be to cast aside millennia of moral teaching."

Seventeen years later, in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), the Supreme Court reversed its decision in Bowers using the same reasoning as Ratzinger. The majority opinion declared, "It suffices for us to acknowledge that adults may choose to enter upon this [homosexual] relationship in the confines of their homes and their own private lives and still retain their dignity as free persons. When sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring. The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to make this choice." (Emphasis mine) The author of the opinion? Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, a member of the Vatican II sect. In 2015, Kennedy would author the decision declaring "same sex marriage" a Constitutional "right."

MAPing A Course of Destruction
The Modernist views that the individual, and not God or Magisterium, as determining what is true. Hence, Bergoglio saying, "Who am I to judge?" and telling a sodomite, Juan Carlos Cruz, that "God made you that way." According to one report, "The new remarks appear to go much further in embracing homosexuality as a sexual orientation that is designed and bestowed by God. It suggests that Francis does not believe that individuals choose to be gay or lesbian, as some religious conservatives argue." (See 

There is no eternal and unalterable moral law, except on paper, as far as the Vatican II sect is concerned. Now added to the alphabet soup of perversion--"LGBTQQIA"--we have "MAPs" or "Minor Attracted Persons," i.e., pedophiles. (See e.g., Some say the idea of "MAPs" is a hoax. It's no hoax that there is evidence, withheld and covered up by the psychology establishment and the media, that links homosexuals with disproportionately high levels of pedophilia. According to researcher Muir (1993),  Homosexuals and the 10% fallacy; Wall Street J March 31, study after nationwide study has yielded estimates of male homosexuality that range between 1% and 3%, so overall, perhaps 2% of adults regularly indulge in homosexuality. Yet they account for between 20% to 40% of all molestation of children. 

  It began with taking out the Anti-Modernists from positions of power. My spiritual father, Fr. Gommar A. DePauw, was in charge of admissions to St Mary's Major Seminary for the Archdiocese of Baltimore. When Archbishop Keough died in 1961, Roncalli replaced him with Modernist Lawrence Shehan, whose first act was to remove Fr. DePauw and replace him with a priest who was "pastoral" to those "attracted to men." 

As the sodomites entered the ranks of the hierarchy, they were able to gain access to their perverse desires while hiding behind a Roman collar. As the scandal broke after years of covering up for each other, they cast a cloud over the real Catholics--Traditionalists--since the world recognizes the Vatican II sect as the Catholic Church. The Vatican II sect has "retreats" for sodomite "couples," "Cardinal" Marx of Germany endorsing blessing "homosexual unions," "gay pride" so-called "masses," and the list of abominations rolls on with an admitted "gay mafia" inside the Modernist Vatican itself. 

 Modernism breeds both doctrinal and moral relativism. There is no absolute standard of right and wrong--"who are we to judge?" The Modernists not only pervert doctrine, they are themselves perverted and perverting--using an incremental approach to "normalize" homosexuality and pederasty. We have "Uncle Ted" McCarrick sleeping with seminarians and priests, huge numbers of pedophiles and "bishops" who cover up for them, including Bergoglio himself. It's not celibacy, it's not failure to implement more stringent reporting measures that's to blame. To borrow and revise a 1992 U.S. presidential campaign slogan; "It's the heresy, stupid!" 

Monday, September 3, 2018

Singing For Satan---Part 14

This week I continue my once-per-month series of posts regarding an informal study I undertook in the early 1990s regarding rock and pop music. The purpose of my study (and the background to it) can be read in the first installment of August 7, 2017. If you have not read that post, I strongly encourage you to do so before reading this installment. I will only repeat here the seven (7) evil elements that pervade today's music:

1. Violence/Murder/Suicide
2. Nihilism/Despair
3. Drug and alcohol glorification
4. Adultery/ Fornication and sexual perversion
5. The occult
6. Rebellion against lawful superiors
7. Blasphemy against God, Jesus Christ in particular, and the Church

 The exposing of the bands/artists continues.

Prince Rogers Nelson (1958-2016), was a singing sensation better known simply by his first name "Prince"--much like the late Elvis Presley was called "Elvis"--and for a while was known by a symbol with no pronunciation (he called it the "love symbol"), during which time he referred to himself as "The Artist Formerly Known As Prince" or "TAFKAP." Born and raised in Minnesota, Prince was a musical prodigy and a guitar virtuoso, who wrote his first song in 1965 at age 7. He signed a recording contract with Warner Bros. Records at the age of 17, and released his debut album For You in 1978 which was met with critical acclaim but not commercial success. That would change with the release of his sophomore album Prince in 1979, which went platinum. He then produced an album per year for the next three years, Dirty Mind (1980), Controversy (1981), and 1999 (1982), each of which was enormously successful.

Prince looked androgynous, and had an unusual affinity for the color purple. In 1984, his autobiographical movie was released, entitled Purple Rain, and the soundtrack was his most successful recording, selling over 20 million copies worldwide.That album is ranked 72nd in Rolling Stone magazine's "500 Greatest Albums of All Time,"  and it is also included on the list of Time magazine's "All-Time 100 Albums." In 2000, he dropped the "love symbol" and returned to calling himself Prince. He would produce 39 albums in total by the time of his death in 2016. He won eight (8) Grammy Awards, six (6) American Music Awards, a Golden Globe Award, and an Academy Award for the movie Purple Rain. He was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2004.

On April 21, 2016, Prince died in his Minnesota home less than two months before his 58th birthday. His death was determined to be the result of a drug overdose accompanied by flu-like symptoms. Prince was a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses ("JW") sect pretending to believe in Christ (JW's believe that Christ is inferior to God the Father --"Jehovah"--and deny the dogma of the Trinity). The JW's looked the other way as this cretin gave them money while doing everything against their moral code. In fact, Prince was obsessed with God and sex, and his songs would blasphemously associate both. His lyrics and lifestyle were perverse to the extreme.

What really angered me was how Prince was lionized in the media as some "hero." I hadn't seem anything like what followed his death since the creep John Lennon was murdered by Mark David Chapman in 1980, and the world treated Lennon as some ersatz "martyr." In less than two weeks after Prince died, cities across the United States lit up their buildings, bridges, and towers in purple lights because of his obsession with that color. (Purple was also used by sodomites in the early days when they would lobby politicians for "gay rights," earning them the moniker "The Lavender Lobby.") Prince's record sales spiked 42,000%  with 2.82 million songs being downloaded between April 15 and April 24. Obama, who couldn't attend Associate Justice Scalia's funeral when he died in February of 2016 (or even show up properly attired when speaking of his death), gushed over how great Prince was, and the Republican-led U.S. Senate passed a Resolution honoring him. The Washington Post even describes him as a "conservative Christian!"

His music was included in the playlist for the U.S. visits of "Pope" Benedict (2008) and "Pope" Francis (2015).  Even the Modernist Vatican lauded him; "Cardinal" Ravasi praised him for his musical talent. He tweeted: “Sometimes, sometimes I wish that life was never ending, / All good things they say, never last.” The song was first performed in the film Under the Cherry Moon, in which Prince played a gigolo, Christopher Tracy, who swindles wealthy French women."  (See; Emphasis mine).

Fake News and the Real Prince
The "love symbol" of Prince is really an ankh, an ancient Egyptian pagan symbol for fertility and reincarnation. The second cross beam just above the pointed "devil tail" is known as the "inverted cross," used by occultists to deny and mock the sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ. 

Prince was raised in the Seventh Day Adventist sect, and became a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses sect in 2001.  The Washington Post's "religion reporter," Michelle Boorstein, wrote an article entitled, "Raunchy Prince was actually a conservative Christian who opposed gay marriage." This article is so fraught with errors and cherry-picked quotes, I'm surprised Ms. Boorstein ever graduated high school, let alone college. (See

The Watchtower Society (i.e., Jehovah's Witnesses, headquartered in Brooklyn, NYC) is not "Christian" even under the most broad and loose notion of the word. Their novel doctrines include: denial of the Holy Trinity, teaching Jesus Christ is really St. Michael the Archangel, imposing their own purposefully distorted version of the Bible (New World Translation) which supports their views, denial of the human soul, denial of Hell, and salvation through belonging to the Watchtower Society. The "Jesus" of the Watchtower Society is a false "Jesus" (See 2 Corinthians 11:3-4, "But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.  For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough."). 

His alleged opposition to sodomite marriage stems from his adherence to the Watchtower Society sect. He is alleged to have said in an interview with New Yorker magazine, " God came to earth and saw people sticking it wherever and doing it with whatever, and he just cleared it all out," he told the magazine. "He was, like, 'Enough.'" However, the duplicitous, androgynous Prince came out with the following "clarification" in Rolling Stone magazine: "Prince is reportedly 'very angry' after the New Yorker accused him of making anti-gay marriage comments, with the Purple One alleging that the magazine misquoted him in a recent interview. According to the article, 'When asked about his perspective on social issues — gay marriage, abortion — Prince tapped his Bible and said, 'God came to earth and saw people sticking it wherever and doing it with whatever, and he just cleared it all out.' However, a Prince source tells Perez Hilton, "What His Purpleness (sic) actually did was gesture to the Bible and said he follows what it teaches, referring mainly to the parts about loving everyone and refraining from judgment."  
(See; Emphasis mine. Also note that Perez Hilton is himself a sodomite.)  In other words, "Who am I to judge?" Sound familiar, Mr. Bergoglio? 

Prince was born with epilepsy and was slight of stature. In a 2009 interview with People magazine, he claimed to have contact with an "angel." He said, "My mother told me one day I walked in to her and said, 'Mom, I'm not going to be sick anymore,' and she said, 'Why?' and I said 'Because an angel told me so.'" Prince intertwines religion and sex, and wants sex to be part of the way "God" is worshiped! The lavender color of the sodomite movement is a form of purple. His album Purple Rain can be interpreted as "Lavender Reign," the victory of the "gay rights" movement, with the androgynous one telling everyone it's OK to "stick it wherever" as long as you "love everyone and refrain from judgement." The only angel with whom Prince had contact with was a fallen one, as his life bears witness to demonic activity.  

Music from the Prince of This World

 Ms. Boorstein's article in the Washington Post does a good job cherry-picking lyrics to make Prince seem religious. For example, she quotes the lyrics from the song Controversy where he intones the words from the Protestant version of the Our Father: Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name, Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven, Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses, As we forgive those who trespass against us, Lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil, For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever and ever, Controversy, Controversy, Controversy, Controversy, Love him, love him baby.

Conveniently left out are the rest of the lyrics: I just can't believe, All the things people say, controversy, Am I black or white? Am I straight or gay? Controversy...Listen, people call me rude, I wish we all were nude, I wish there was no black and white, I wish there were no rules...Do I believe in God? Do I believe in me? Let me tell ya, Some people wanna die So they can be free, I said life is just a game, We're all just the same, Don't ya wanna play? (Emphasis mine). This can't seriously be called "Christian," Ms. Boorstein.

Boorstein attempts to justify his admitted "raunchiness" by quoting from his 2013 biography entitled, I Would Die 4 U; Why Prince became An Icon, "Prince intended sexuality to be linked to the worship of God, and he filled his music with classic Christian messages." What Prince promotes is some pagan notion of orgy like the Roman Empire of old. Catholic theology in no way supports linking the worship of God with sex (nor do Protestants). The theology he spouts doesn't even hold up to that taught by the Watchtower Society, but he was never "disfellowshipped" (the Watchtower version of excommunication) because of his stature and his big bucks donations. 

According to Rolling Stone magazine (1/17/85, pg. 33) in reference to a Prince concert in Detroit, "He [Prince] stripped and climbed into a bathtub. He pounded his pelvis into the floor time and time again." The article then relates how he stroked the neck of his guitar until liquid squirted out simulating an ejaculation. According to the Record of January 1985, during a concert Prince led the audience through a Sunday School hymn and "our anti-hero went through a Jekyll and Hyde bit at the keyboard, became possessed by devilish sexual temptation and asked God if He'd like to take a bath with him. At which point he ascended a staircase, stripped to his cabellero pants, slid into his tub for a neon green shower..."(Emphasis mine).

His song Sister is about incest. My sister never made love with anyone but me. Incest is everything it's said to be...Motherf***er can't you understand? (Vulgarity censored by me).

The song Head is about his seduction of a virgin bride, whom he gets to give him oral sex ('head") on her wedding day; I remember when I met u, baby, You were on your way to be wed, You were such a sexy thing, I loved the way you walked, The things you said, And I was so nonchalant, I didn't want you to be mis-led, But I've gotta have u, baby, I got to have you in my bed, And you said, 'But I'm just a virgin, And I'm on my way to be wed, But you're such a hunk, So full of spunk, I'll give you Head.

In the movie Purple Rain he slaps, threatens, pushes, and has sex with his object of desire, Apollonia. The song from that movie, When Doves Cry, discusses his excuses for verbal, physical, and sexual abuse of a woman:

How can you just leave me standing
Alone in a world that's so cold?
Maybe I'm just too demanding
Maybe I'm just like my father: too bold
Maybe you're just like my mother
She's never satisfied
Why do we scream at each other?
This is what it sounds like
When doves cry
When doves cry (when doves cry)
When doves cry (when doves cry)
When doves cry
When doves cry
When doves cry

Please note that the dove is a Traditional Catholic symbol for the Holy Ghost, which the song represents as "crying" or "screaming"--a blasphemy that the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity "sounds like" this vile and reprehensible behavior which is pure evil.

The song Darling Nikki is about a nymphomaniac, I knew a girl named Nikki, I guess you could say she was a sex fiend, I met her in a hotel lobby, Masturbating with a magazine, She said how'd you like to waste some time, And I could not resist when I saw little Nikki grind.

The adulation of Prince Rodger Nelson is just another example of how the world doesn't know what true Christianity really is, wanting people to believe that anyone who talks about Jesus is thereby "Christian." Remember Christ said, "Not everyone who saith to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of Heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in Heaven." (St. Matthew 7:21). In our pagan culture, the media relishes the opportunity to express in effect, "Christians (sic) are just like the secular world." How the Modernist Vatican could say anything positive about this man is a sick joke. He misused his musical talent to lead souls to Hell. I guess Bergoglio admires that in him.

That all of this evil is being overlooked, and the man praised, is a clear sign the times are more wicked than ever (and will get worse) since the Great Apostasy of Vatican II. In his song When Doves Cry, Prince croons, "Maybe I'm just like my father..." Yes, Mr. Nelson, I think you are. You lived the life of the "Prince of Deception," a spiritual son of the Father of Lies.