Happy Pentecost! Got Zeal?

Originally posted May 23, ARSH 2021 by Ann Barnhardt

The Third Glorious Mystery of the Most Holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Co-Redemptrix, is the descent of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost. The fruit of this mystery is ZEAL – LOVE OF GOD. 🔥

An excellent collection of quotes on the utter necessity of zeal for the salvation of souls.  Remember these quotes when you hear anyone say that proselytism is “solemn nonsense”, or that they have no desire to convert a person or persons to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside of which there is no salvation.

St. James the Apostle: “He must know that he who causeth a sinner to be converted from the error of his way will save his own soul from death and shall cover a multitude of sins” (St. James 5, 19-20).

St. John Chrysostom, (ARSH 347-407), the illustrious Bishop of Constantinople, and Doctor of the Church, tells us: “Zeal for the salvation of souls is of so great a merit before God, that to give up all our goods to the poor, or to spend our whole life in the exercises of all sorts of austerities cannot equal the merit of it. There is no service more agreeable to God than this one. To employ one’s life in this blessed labor is more pleasing to the Divine Majesty than to suffer martyrdom. Would you not feel happy if you could spend large sums of money in corporal works of mercy? But know that he who labors for the salvation of souls does far more; nay, the zeal of souls is of far greater merit before God . . . than the working of miracles.”

Pope St. Gregory the Great (ARSH 590-604): “No sacrifice is more acceptable to God than zeal for souls.”

St. Vincent de Paul (ARSH 1576-1660): That St. Vincent was devoured by zeal for the house of God, his entire life testifies, because that life was employed in combating evil and extending the reign of good; and in this consists true zeal. Listen to some of his instructions to his community: “Let us give ourselves to God, gentlemen, to go to carry His holy Gospel over the entire earth and into whatever part He may lead us; there, let us maintain our part, and continue our duties until such time as His good pleasure will withdraw us. Let no difficulties move us, the glory of the eternal Father and the efficacy of the Word and of the passion of His Son are at stake. The salvation of men and our own are so great that they merit to be obtained at any price.”

St. Rose of Lima, (ARSH 1586-1617). We read that her confessor offered himself to go to the missions, but he feared because of the dangers it would entail. After consulting the saint, he heard these words: “Go Father, and do not fear. Leave all to labor for the conversion of the infidel, and know that the greatest service that man can offer to God is to convert souls, for this is a work proper of the Apostolate. What greater happiness could there be than to baptize, be it only a little Indian child who would enter Heaven through the gates of Baptism?”

St. John de Brebeuf (ARSH 1593-1649), one of the eight North American Martyrs, was heard to say, after pouring the saving waters of Baptism on a dying Indian child, “For this one single occasion I would travel all the way from France; I would cross the great ocean to win one little soul for Our Lord!”

St. Margaret Mary (ARSH 1647-1690): “My divine Savior has given to understand that those who work for the salvation of souls will have a gift of touching the most hardened hearts, and will labor with marvelous success, if they themselves are penetrated with a tender devotion to His Divine Heart.”

St. Anthony Mary Claret (ARSH 1808-1870): “Another thing that spurs me on to preach ceaselessly is the thought of the multitude of souls which fall into the depths of hell, who die in mortal sin, condemned forever and ever… if you were to see a blind man about to fall into a pit or over a precipice, would you not warn him? Behold, I do the same…” “How often I pray with St. Catherine of Siena: O my God, grant me a place by the gates of Hell, that I may stop those who enter there, saying: “Where are you going, unhappy one? Back, go back! Make a good confession. Save your soul. Don’t come here to be lost for all eternity!” St. Anthony resolved never to waste a moment of time, and during his 35 years as a priest, he wrote 144 books and preached some 25,000 sermons. On one trip, besides traveling, he preached 205 sermons in 48 days and 12 in one day.

The motivating force that dominated St. John Bosco’s (ARSH 1815-1888) life is found in a phrase that is typically his: “Give me souls, you take the rest.” “There is nothing more holy in this world than to work for the good of souls, for whose salvation Jesus Christ poured out the last drops of His Blood.” In his writings and conferences, he consistently pointed out that: “Man is successful in this world if he saves his soul and is very knowledgeable if he knows the science of salvation; but he is a total failure if he loses his soul and knows nothing if he is ignorant of those things that can assure him of eternal salvation.” From his book The Life of St. Dominic Savio, St. John Bosco had this to say of St. Dominic Savio (the teenage saint who died in his 15th year): “The thought of saving souls for God was never out of his mind.” St. Dominic Savio, (1842-1856), in a serious conversation with one of his companions, gave several reasons for his apostolic zeal in “saving souls”: 1. My companion’s soul has been redeemed by Jesus Christ. 2. We are all brothers and so we must love each other’s souls. 3. God urges us to help each other. 4. If I manage to save one soul, I also ensure the salvation of my own.

St. Thérèse of Lisieux (ARSH 1873-1897): “We have only short moments of this life to work for God’s glory. The devil knows this and that is why he tries to make us waste time in useless things. O, let us not waste our time! Let us save souls! Souls are falling into hell innumerable as the flakes of snow on a winter day. Jesus weeps! Instead of consoling Him we are brooding over our own sorrows . . . There is only one thing to do during the brief day, or rather, night of this life: Love Jesus with all the strength of your heart and save souls for Him, so that He may be loved!”

St. Padre Pio (ARSH 1887-1968): “Time spent in honor of God and for the salvation of souls is never badly spent.

St. Maximilian Kolbe (ARSH 1894-1941): “We have no right to rest as long as a single soul is Satan’s slave.”

Pope Pius XII (ARSH 1939-1958): “No one is permitted to be idle and lazy while so many evils and dangers impend, and while those who are on the other side are working so hard to destroy the very basis of Catholic religion.“

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

by Karl Denninger

Nobody would ever play with something like this in…… humans.


“A team of scientists in the US have accidentally created overly-aggressive mutant hamsters following a gene-editing experiment. Using the controversial CRISPR technology, researchers at Northwestern University were examining a hormone called vasopressin and its receptor, Avpr1a.”


“The academics found the adorable bundles of fluff turned into mutant rage monsters exhibiting ‘high levels of aggression towards other same-sex individuals’.”

Uh huh.

We’re so smart, right?

We’ll never make a serious mistake playing with genetic reprogramming.

Such a mistake might not show up until a generation has been born and grows up.

Such a mistake could present the worst of Hobson’s choices.

We are not so smart when it comes to both animal and human structure.  We do not understand all the pieces that work together to form the immune system.  Oh, we think we do, and there’s some knowledge to be certain — we’re not completely ignorant.  But anyone who tries to tell you that they have a deterministic — that is, “if A then B” sort of understanding is lying to you.

Nobody does.

Something to think about.

Fairfield update and devotion to the Sacred Heart: “O most sacred Heart of Jesus, fountain of every blessing, I adore you and I love you!”

During this holy month dedicated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the Nuns are praying for you and your intentions in a most special way.Because of their growing numbers, the Nuns are in need of a few items.See the link below if you would like to help!Amazon Wish ListThe Refectory’s roof is well underway:Our construction continues steadily on, but we need all the help we can get!A one-time gift or a monthly contribution goes a long way for us. The interior of the Refectory section needs to be completed by late fall so the Nuns can move in.Once the Nuns are in this section and in the Recreation & Work Rooms building (already completed), they will be living altogether in the same area. Furthermore, because the rest of construction will be on the front side, they will no longer have construction crews occupying and working in their enclosure.


This little stone cottage was first our temporary Chapel, then was sleeping quarters for a few of the Nuns…Now it is the Turn Area and Speak Room for visitors and families.Eventually, this will be guest quarters for visiting priests, bishops, immediate families, and aspirants.

The cottage will remain our Speak Room for the duration of the construction.

Urgent warning: THIS is what happens when men love their wives and raise their sons. THIS is what Antipope Bergoglio and the Antichurch literally want to wipe from the face of the Earth.

Crosspost from AB.

Shut up. I ain’t cryin’. You cryin’.

(In all seriousness, I would strongly encourage my secular and non-Catholic readership to post this. You don’t really need to comment, other than maybe to point out that this is Traditional Latin Mass – not “mainstream” or even “conservative” (shudder) – Catholicism. THIS is what we need to be driving back towards – a grown heterosexual man sobbing in gratitude that his legitimate son will call down and hold the physical and substantial Real Presence of God in his hands, and raise the dead back to life in the Sacrament of Confession as the vicarious representative of Christ, and do it in full piety, not as an infiltrator. This is the ultimate accomplishment for a husband and father. Señor Cortes did good, and he WON. He won BIG.)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on  by Ann Barnhardt.

Hey, kids! Remember that time Pope Benedict told Cardinal Müller that it was literally impossible for a consecrated person to retire?

As you read through this, keep front of mind Dr. Mazza’s research into the novel teaching of Vatican II and Ratzinger himself that the power of Office stems not from ecclesiastical jurisdiction, but rather from the act of consecration itself, without the need for jurisdiction. This is why he thinks, “The Office enters into your very being.” Seen in this way, the power can never be lost. One can never really be retired.

But please keep telling us there is no evidence for this.

Pope Benedict adds more evidence that he doesn’t consider himself retired, nor does he think it possible

Originally posted

The failed partial abdication of Pope Benedict was rendered invalid by Canon 188, due to Benedict’s SUBSTANTIAL ERROR of attempting to establish an “expanded petrine ministry.” This substantial error is grounded in his idea that a pope cannot ever really resign/retire, because the papal coronation indelibly anoints the pontiff in a distinct way, which is different from, and more profound than, the priestly or episcopal ordination/consecration. I will review the proof set of this error in a moment.

Last week, news broke about a new book, a collection of essays, released to mark the 70th birthday of Cardinal Müller. Pope Benedict wrote the Forward to the book in the form of a letter to the cardinal. The whole thing is certainly worth reading HERE, with references to Rahner, von Balthasar, Paul VI, and a lot of words about himself, which if you have any doubt that Benedict was part of the problem all along, it’s on full display here. Then there is one sentence faintly trashing the Novus Ordo. There is also praise for Müller, for having “defended the clear traditions of the faith, but in the spirit of Pope Francis you also sought to understand how they can be lived today.”

Ugh. Yeah.

But there is also a part that addresses the future role of the cardinal in his ministry, which continues on despite the loss of his “office.” Does that sound familiar?

Addressing Müller, Benedict said, “your five-year commission at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has expired, so you do not have a specific office anymorebut a priest and certainly a bishop and cardinal is never simply retired,” which is why he must continue to “publicly serve the faith.” HERE

Here is the full passage in the original German:

Dein Fünf-Jahres-Auftrag für die Glaubenskongregation abgelaufen.
So hast Du zwar kein bestimmtes Amt mehr inne, aber ein
Priester und erst recht ein Bischof und Kardinal ist nie einfach im
Ruhestand. Darum kannst und wirst Du auch in Zukunft aus dem
inneren Wesen Deines priesterlichen Auftrags und Deines theologiGrußwort schen Charismas heraus weiterhin öffentlich dem Glauben dienen. HERE

Francesca Romana over at Rorate renders it this way:

In the meantime, your five-year contract in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith has expired. Thus you no longer have a specific charge, yet a priest and above all a bishop and cardinal, never retires. For this reason you can and will be able to serve the faith publically also in the future, starting from the heart of your sacerdotal mission and theological charism. HERE

The most common translation of the underlined text I can come up with seems to be:

“Thus you no longer have a specific office, but a priest and even more so a bishop and cardinal is never simply retired.”

To which one must ask, in terms of Logical Progression: Pope Benedict, what are your thoughts about EVEN MORE SO A POPE, Your Holiness?

We need to look back at the words of Benedict in his speeches around the time of his failed partial abdication, because his idea of a prelate never really retiring certainly extends to the papacy, in his mind, which is a really big deal. And if a pope thinks he can’t really retire, but there are a bunch of reasons why he needs to appear retired, then he better make up some believable story, while scheming to maintain a portion of the ministry, because his conscience won’t allow him to fully resign.  Obviously, I’ve written quite a lot about this in the past several months. There is a link to a longer essay at the end of this post, but I’m reproducing much of it here.

The real smoking gun was Benedict’s final general audience of 27 February 2013, where he exposes his erroneous notion of the indelible nature of the papacy. In doing so, he directly contradicts previous statements where he claimed he was “renouncing”, “leaving”, and would then be Pontiff “no longer, but a simple pilgrim”.  Remember, at this point he knew his plan had worked; his resignation had been “accepted” by the world, and the conclave had been called. This is the lens through which we must evaluate the entire situation, in order to see the obvious Substantial Error that we have before us: (My emphesis and comments)

Here, allow me to go back once again to 19 April 2005 (Ratzinger’s elevation to the papacy). The real gravity of the decision was also due to the fact that from that moment on I was engaged always and forever by the Lord. Always – anyone who accepts the Petrine ministry no longer has any privacy. He belongs always and completely to everyone, to the whole Church. In a manner of speaking, the private dimension of his life is completely eliminated. I was able to experience, and I experience it even now, that one receives one’s life precisely when one gives it away. Earlier I said that many people who love the Lord also love the Successor of Saint Peter and feel great affection for him; that the Pope truly has brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, throughout the world, and that he feels secure in the embrace of your communion; because he no longer belongs to himself, he belongs to all and all belong to him.

The “always” is also a “for ever” – there can no longer be a return to the private sphere. ( the papal coronation indelibly anoints the pontiff in a distinct way, which is different from, and more profound than, the priestly or episcopal ordination/consecration). My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this. (He can’t make it any more obvious than this. The indelibility of the papal ministry is irrevocable – Benedict thinks he is pope forever, but now exercising only part of the Petrine ministry). I do not return to private life, to a life of travel, meetings, receptions, conferences, and so on. I am not abandoning the cross, but remaining in a new way at the side of the crucified Lord. I no longer bear the power of office for the governance of the Church, but in the service of prayer I remain, so to speak, in the enclosure of Saint Peter. Saint Benedict, whose name I bear as Pope, will be a great example for me in this. He showed us the way for a life which, whether active or passive, is completely given over to the work of God. HERE

In order to read this any other way, you literally have to deny the meaning of the words, “always, forever, does not revoke, remaining in a new way, I remain.”

This interpretation, that Benedict attempted a bifurcated papacy, was confirmed by Abp. Ganswein when he dropped the bombshell of an “Expanded Petrine Ministry.” These were not off the cuff remarks, but rather a formal, well-prepared speech on Benedict’s papacy, given at the Greg in Rome, 20 May 2016:

Archbishop Gänswein…said that Pope Francis and Benedict are not two popes “in competition” with one another, but represent one “expanded” Petrine Office with “an active member” and a “contemplative.”

“Therefore, from 11 February 2013, the papal ministry is not the same as before,” he said. “It is and remains the foundation of the Catholic Church; and yet it is a foundation that Benedict XVI has profoundly and lastingly transformed during his exceptional pontificate.”

He said that “before and after his resignation” Benedict has viewed his task as “participation in such a ‘Petrine ministry’. (Not in its “Office”, the governance of the Church in the world, but in its “essentially spiritual nature”, through prayer and suffering.)

“He left the Papal Throne and yet, with the step he took on 11 February 2013, he has not abandoned this ministry,” Gänswein explained, something “quite impossible after his irrevocable acceptance of the office in April 2005.“ (Do you see how this echoes Benedict’s erroneous idea of the papal coronation being an irreversible event, creating an indelible/irrevocable mark on the recipient forever? It’s exactly the same idea Benedict put forth in his final general audience).

“Therefore he has also not retired to a monastery in isolation but stays within the Vatican — as if he had taken only one step to the side to make room for his successor and a new stage in the history of the papacy.” With that step, he said, he has enriched the papacy with “his prayer and his compassion placed in the Vatican Gardens.” HERE

You can find a more complete rendering of all this HERE.

Now that Antipope Bergoglio has enshrined his blasphemous heresy in the AAS as part of the “Authentic Magisterium,” perhaps a few more people will be looking at the situation with eyes to see. His heresy continues, and continues to worsen, in no small part because he enjoys none of the supernatural protection of a true pontiff. Not that his election is rendered invalid by means of his heresy, but rather that his election never took place, because Benedict’s resignation was invalid.

Already four months ago we found out that this position is amazingly popular, although you would never know it from what’s out in the public domain. A stunning 72% of respondents at the Saint Louis Catholic poll believe Benedict is still pope, with Bergoglio pulling in only 16% HERE. The main reason you don’t hear more people openly supporting this truth is the same reason the bishops and cardinals are almost entirely silent: Fear of losing rank, income, security, readership, donations, etc. It’s foolish fear, because they are risking a far worse fate by keeping silent than any worldly punishment they might receive by speaking up.

The reason only a tiny number of traditional Catholics think Bergoglio is pope is because that’s where the weight of the evidence leads. You will in fact be joining an overwhelming majority when you accept this. Not that you should believe something because it’s popular, on the contrary, popularity has no bearing on truth. But it does help knowing that you’re not alone, you’re not crazy.

Don’t be gaslighted into accepting Antipope Bergoglio any longer.

This is how wars get started

What he’s trying to say is this: “We have the superior ideology, which outweighs your laws and legal structures, which we will change or abolish, to achieve the ends of our superior ideology.”

Let’s have the war, then.

Somehow still not unpopular enough, Biden DOJ files appeal to restore air travel mask mandate

It’s almost as if they want to be hugely unpopular. Or something.

Wed Jun 1, 2022 – 7:44 pm EDT

WASHINGTON, D.C. (LifeSiteNews) – The Biden administration asked the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals Tuesday to reinstate the federal mask mandate for public transportation, claiming that the requirement fell well within the “zone of reasonableness.”

In April, Florida-based federal Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle declared the mandate for planes and public transportation to be unlawful, arguing that “our system does not permit agencies to act unlawfully even in the pursuit of desirable ends.” In response, the Department of Justice (DOJ) quickly filed its notice to appeal, even though within hours of the ruling several airlines had already scrapped their mask mandates.

Now, the Washington Examiner reports that DOJ has filed its appeal to the Eleventh Circuit, claiming the U.S. Supreme Court has previously rejected arguments similar to Mizelle’s on the grounds that “the role of courts in reviewing arbitrary and capricious challenges is to simply ensure that the agency has acted within a zone of reasonableness,” a standard DOJ claims the mandate “plainly meets.”

The appeal further argues that the mandate was within the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention’s (CDC’s) statutory authority, and that the district court “compounded its errors by entering nationwide relief,” rather than confining the ruling to the case’s specific plaintiffs.

In fact, evidence indicates that masking has been largely ineffective at limiting the spread of COVID-19.

Among that evidence is the CDC’s September 2020 acknowledgement that masks cannot be counted on to keep out COVID when spending 15 minutes or longer within six feet of someone, and a May 2020 study published by CDC’s peer-reviewed journal Emerging Infectious Diseases that “did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.”

Last May, another study found that, though mandates effectively increased mask use, that usage did not yield the expected benefits. “Mask mandates and use (were) not associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 spread among U.S. states” from March 2020 to March 2021. In fact, the researchers found the results to be a net negative, with masks increasing “dehydration … headaches and sweating and decreas[ing] cognitive precision,” and interfering with communication, as well as impairing social learning among children. The airline mask mandate applied to everyone aged two and over, meaning children still in diapers were expected to mask during long flights.

The Biden administration’s decision to keep fighting for the mask mandate runs counter to determinations made by other Democrats across the country, who perceive forced masking as a political liability.

The Uvalde Massacre – More To This Than Meets The Eye

Below is a partial cross-post from our friend Janet at Restore DC Catholicism, who has many questions about the many facts that don’t add up. I will add just one thing: Standing protocol in an active shooter situation is that first arriving responders immediately engage the target, even if it is a single responder against multiple shooters. Said protocol has been universal for the past 23 years, implemented in the wake of Columbine. Every LEO in this country knows this. There is no such thing as a tactical commander issuing a stand down order on site. It’s not a done thing, and certainly not for over an hour, as they listened to dozens of gunshots. Something stinks.

The Uvalde Massacre – More To This Than Meets The Eye

So here is the chronology of the situation, as far as I can tell.  First, 18-year-old Salvador Ramos lived with his mother who was, probably still is, a drug addict.  There is absolutely no mention of his father, or any other man who might have been a father-figure to him.  Right there we have a breeding ground for disaster.

He was frequently bullied in school for his economic status and had only a few temporary friendships.  He acted out, causing him to have scuffles with the police.  That is to say that the police were quite familiar with him.   After his relationship with his mother further deteriorated, he lived with his grandmother.

His behavior, which he posted on social media, became increasingly dark, with him dressing all in black and voicing an interest in guns.  His financial status was still poor, with his job at Wendy’s helping only a little.

Then, somehow, he managed to get a hold of two AR-15 rifles and ammunition, all costing about $5,000.00.  How did that happen?  First, why would he not have immediately failed background checks, owing to previous scuffles with the law?  Second, how could this impoverished kid afford it?  I’d ask who gave him the money, but again he would have failed the necessary screening.  Did someone give him the firearms?  If so, why?

On May 24 Tuesday, he shot his grandmother (who survived), then drove towards the school.  Somehow his truck wound up in a ditch.  He got out of the truck and went towards the school, firing his gun at various people along the way.  He walked into an unattended entrance, a door propped open, and eventually barricaded himself into a classroom and there shot and murdered the majority of his victims.  Here’s a million-dollar question: did that open door lead to a classroom?  Is it the same classroom in which Ramos barricaded himself with his victims?

Meanwhile, local police arrived on the scene.  They stood outside the school and did absolutely nothing.  Parents were screaming at the police to do something.  Several of the parents received police ire for their protest.  Now who gave the police orders to essentially stand down and do absolutely nothing while Ramos proceeded to slaughter children?  They could hear the gunfire, and still they sucked thumb and bullied parents.  After an hour or so, it was a lone Border Control agent who finally took Ramos out.  Tucker Carlson asks many of the questions that were posed by Erickson above. 

Carlson appears to believe that these police were incompetent and were trying to save face.  I am not at all certain that it was mere incompetence, especially when one considers the almost magical ease with which a money-strapped kid obtained very expensive firearms.  Who gave Ramos those firearms?  Is there any connection between that and the order to the police to stand down?  Why was the school’s main entrance unattended?  Why were no school police officers present?  Why was that door on the west side propped open?  Remember – this is a school that locked down quite a few times that year owing to human trafficking chases (being on a border town) so it’s not like they didn’t know safety practices.

Earning the most outrage was the behavior of the Uvalde police department.  At one point, they did enter the building, but then exited.  They then waited outside for an hour, while they could hear Ramos firing his gun.  Parents pleaded with them to go in, to no avail.  Some parents tried to take action, only to be put in handcuffs, pepper-sprayed, tackled to the ground.  One mother was arrested but was released.  She broke away from the cops, darted into the building and removed her children.  One off-duty Border Patrol agent, whose wife and daughter were in the school, received a text from his wife while at his barber’s.  He borrowed the barber’s shotgun, hurried to the school and evacuated his family and others from the building.

We are approaching an election cycle.  Certain Democrats would very much appreciate a crisis like this to take the public’s eyes away from the utter mess that Biden et al are making of the country.  Saul Alinsky, in his book “Rules for Radicals”, said “never let a crisis go to waste”.  The Democrats are excellent students of Alinsky, and they would chomp at the bit to exploit such a crisis like Uvalde, perhaps even to the point of contriving one.

Each oddity about this situation, by itself, might raise an eyebrow and not much more.  But when so many oddities are apparent, their combination is much too coincidental:

  • That a cash-strapped kid obtained two rifles, ammunition, body armor, etc
  • That no school police officer was present that day
  • That a door was propped open for Ramos’s entry
  • The strange stand-down behavior by local police
  • The refusal to allow parents near the school

The whole thing stinks…

More: http://restore-dc-catholicism.blogspot.com/2022/05/the-uvalde-massacre-more-to-this-than.html