I used to admire Ann Barnhardt a great deal, for her cold logic. But as the years have passed, I realized that there was a lot more coldness than logic. Barnhardt showed this the other day with her vicious personal attack on Andrea Cionci, who has ever been the perfect gentleman calling her to give her reasons why she thinks Benedict XVI is the infallible pope but in total error, so obvious that Ann Barnhardt alone, without any knowledge of what is going on in the Vatican, and with no knowledge at all of Pope Benedict XVI’s statements in German — a language which she cannot even read — can see it, and she alone.
I am reminded of the Lollards of medieval England who hated us religious for taking vows and believed that the Catholic notion of just war was bunk. That is, some people pretend to be Catholic, but really advance their own prejudices.
I am also reminded of the words of Ann Barnhardt that those who support Bergoglio cannot respond to the data-set. And I wonder what she sees in the morning when she looks into the mirror of her soul…
Cionci has gathered together a huge data set, which shows that Benedict XVI knows he is the only pope, that he knows there are not two legitimate popes. Barnhardt insists that he, Pope Benedict XVI, believes there are two legitimate popes.
To respond to Cionci’s invitations and open letters by insulting his masculinity is the sign of a true feminist and a fake Catholic. It is also the most vile form of ad hominem from a woman who cannot face the data-set, let alone rationally respond to the evidence that her accusation against the person of the Roman Pontiff is made entirely of the straw of her own prejudice. And evidently it is a deeply seated prejudice against Catholic men.
Ann, you have to recognize some day, that you are not the infallible Popess of the Catholic Church and that if you did convert to our Holy Religion it was not at all valid unless you recognized that you were in error, rather than that you were being enthroned as our Oracle of Truth. — Unless you recognized that you were in error, and thus, that you can err. The grace of being a Catholic does not wipe away that possibility, of being in error.
I therefore wish to publicly distance myself from Barnhardt’s vile comments and perverse spirit of mind, which no Catholic who is honest could ever tolerate. And I call upon Catholics everywhere to publicly remonstrate and denounce her for it.
Nailed it. Ann Barnhardt has an aura of very heightened self-importance; almost as if she thinks she's Pope Barnhardt. The stupid and narcissistic ARSH is a big indicator of that as well.
Someone like her must be avoided at all costs.
7. What’s the deal with your crazy eyes?There were many male saints who would never look a woman in her face
It’s lucidity coupled with ferocious charity. I realize that the glazed stare of total indifference is considered attractive and virtuous these days, but indifference is the opposite of true charity, and thus is a sin. I don’t respect people who can’t or won’t meet and hold my gaze. Especially men. Watch the eyes. ALWAYS watch the eyes.
This part of her FAQ never sat right with me:
There were many male saints who would never look a woman in her face
So it appears as if we already have 3 groups of Bennyvacantists fighting amongst themselves..
But the fact that this argument continues after the death of Ratzinger is utterly absurd. Whatever nuances they disagreed on before, they're all in agreement that Bergoglio is an Antipope (not the Catholic pope). So that shared opinion is all that remains of their former disagreements. And yet the battle continues.
So, my wife was listening to Barnhardt's last podcast, and I would catch parts of it here or there, and her hubris and narcissism are quite striking. No wonder she spends so much time ranting about narcissism. Not only does she posture as having knowledge of Catholic theology and Canon Law ... of which she is entirely bereft, but if anyone ever disagrees with her, even on the slightest point or tiny detail, she ruthlessly excoriates them, and also spread various slanders based on anonymous sources that she accepts as being completely factual. She slurs them by questioning their masculinity (a quality which Ann Barnhardt has much of). Then she has the temerity to accuse them of being mean and nasty ... when her own nastiness against others remains unrivalled (see post cited below from Brother Bugnolo).
She was completely ripping on the "1958 sedevacantists", calling them like тαℓмυdic Jєωs because "they're in and everyone else is out". That's utter hogwash, and a slanderous strawman. No, Ann, they think they're right while you're wrong, just as YOU think you're right (and have THE answer) and they're wrong.
Barnhardt wouldn't last 5 minutes in an actual debate against sedevacantists ... or anyone else really. So she just has her yes-man peanut gallery on there patting her on the back and nodding in agreement with every point she makes, no matter how stupid ... and, trust me, the majority of her comments are downright stupid, if not at times slanderous. She's a total hot mess where it comes to Catholic theology and Canon Law, and yet postures as some kind of Doctress of the Church.
At one point she was ripping on Brother Bugnolo (also a Bennyvacantist) ruthlessly, and so I told my wife, I bet it's because Brother Bugnolo distanced himself from Barnhardt. No sooner did I say this than my wife found this with a Google search on "Bugnolo Barnhardt".
https://www.fromrome.info/2022/06/21/br-bugnolo-i-want-to-distance-myself-entirely-from-ann-barnhardts-horrendus-modus-operandi-which-poses-as-catholic/
Here is Brother Bugnolo's distancing from Ann Barnhardt, the exact word I had used in my speculation against Barnhardt. I happen to agree with every word of this (except his theories about Ratzinger having been the pope). People need to stop supporting Barnhardt, and she needs to be completely silenced.
Oh, before I quote Brother Bugnolo, I have to point out the hubris of coming up with her own replacement for "A.D." or "Anno Domini" for dating. She uses this ridiculous "ARSH". See, the expression "Anno Domini" which has been used throughout Church history, by Fathers, all the Doctors, all the theologians, all Catholics, which appears in every single papal docuмent or decree or publication from the Holy See and every bishop in the world, and was good enough for them ... it is not good enough for the Narcissist Ann Barnhardt, so she has to improve upon it. Reminds me of Wojtyla's improvement upon the Holy Rosary.
So here's Brother Bugnolo --
Here's another one entitled "Barnhard's Thesis of Hate" --
https://www.fromrome.info/2022/06/01/barnhardt-confusing-ganswein-for-benedict-misses-the-point-about-who-is-the-pope/
So the two are arguing about whether Benedict continued to consider himself the only pope (Bugnolo and Conci) whereas Barnhardt holds that he believed in a split (two-man) papacy, thus leading to her absurd "substantial error" theory. She completely misconstrues "substantial error", which is a reference to error of fact, not some alleged theological error by Ratzinger in believing that the papacy could be split between two people.
Patrick Coffin also published a series of posts about the "Myth of Substantial Error" --
https://www.patrickcoffin.media/his-holiness-benedict-xvis-declaratio-and-the-myth-of-substantial-error-part-i/
So it appears as if we already have 3 groups of Bennyvacantists fighting amongst themselves.
But the fact that this argument continues after the death of Ratzinger is utterly absurd. Whatever nuances they disagreed on before, they're all in agreement that Bergoglio is an Antipope (not the Catholic pope). So that shared opinion is all that remains of their former disagreements. And yet the battle continues.
Yes- it bothered me that she said the sede's were filled with hate and held a "na-na-na-na-na-na" stance of "We are in the Church and you're not". It's obvious she needs to smear all sede's so that her audience would be discouraged in investigating the true sede position and how logical and Catholic it is. She treats sedevacantists with disdain like they are Jonestown cult members or something.
It's even hard to believe that she is being "harassed "by sede's. I don't know a sedevacantist that really cares about who Ann Barnhardt is or what she is pushing to bother contacting her.
Your email was civil, but who knows what kind of vitriol her other communications with sedes may or may not have contained.
Here's a screenshot of the nasty sedevacantist e-mail that I sent her ...
(https://i.ibb.co/CHF8DhJ/barnhardt.png)
Your email was civil, but who knows what kind of vitriol her other communications with sedes may or may not have contained.
Yeah, that ARSH thing has rubbed me the wrong way for years now. "Anno Domini" is what the Church has always used.Year of our Lord (Anno Domini).
Year of our Lord (Anno Domini).Anno Reparatae Salutis Humanae (translated: "In the year of the reparation of human salvation."
What does ARsh mean?
Are there any other female personalities that Catholics look to for answers? I can't think of any.
I really can't think of any others, and I think your reference to her (and also most of the males) as "personalities" is really the right term.How many of those "apostolates" out there are actually legit, you think?
While everyone is entitled to opine on the Crisis, I really don't care for all these lay personalities out there, most of whom do not have proper training in Catholic theology, setting up these quasi-"apostolates" ... and it reflects the grave disorder due to the stricken Papacy. In normal times, generally only priests, and generally only priests with advanced degrees or licentiates in theology, would be permitted by Catholic bishops to become "celebrities", i.e.. to have various Youtube shows and podcasts where they're attempting to lead the faithful.
I recall an elderly pre-Vatican-II priest who visited Winona when I was at STAS. He was a very humble man, and the seminarians flocked to him, trying to glean from him a sense for the true spirit of the priesthood, from someone who had been formed in normal times. He complained about all the Traditional PRIESTS who posture as theologians these days, saying that back in the day, the 6-year seminary program was considered enough just to function as an associate pastor, and you would not be considered qualified to pretend to be a theologian or canon lawyer without obtaining advanced degrees (usually in Rome). I couldn't imagine what he'd say about all these lay people who haven't taken even a course in Traditional Catholic logic, philosophy, and theology leading large groups of faithful on these various shows. That phenomenon didn't really exist yet because, when I was at STAS, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the internet consisted of nothing more than a set of mostly static web pages ... and various videos and podcasts were unknown. You had EWTN gradually having more and more lay people hosting various shows, but the internet is what permitted all these things to flourish.
Can laymen attend seminary? Even if they don't go into it trying to be priests?
St. Paul was rightShe does make me think of this verse as well. Then again, there are a lot of us here who post, but I'd like to think it's not nearly the same.
"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence." [1 Timothy 2:12]
She does make me think of this verse as well. Then again, there are a lot of us here who post, but I'd like to think it's not nearly the same.It's not the same thing. This is just open conversation, what Ann is doing is putting herself out there as some NovoCon leader which is what St. Paul condemns. If she were teaching privately, like nuns do, then there's no problem.
It's not the same thing. This is just open conversation, what Ann is doing is putting herself out there as some NovoCon leader which is what St. Paul condemns. If she were teaching privately, like nuns do, then there's no problem.
She is also living proof that lay people should not really do these things.
Regarding Benevacantism, I don't see why it's a big deal that Catholics adhere to the idea. I've never believed that Benedict was still the true Pope, but given the Crisis in the Church, I can understand why some Catholics adhere to the idea. They are just looking for a reasonable explanation, and Benevacantism seems to help with that. In the colorful world of traditionalism, Benevacantism is just another theory. So what if some Catholics adhere to it. It's not the end of the world.
They all peddle the idea that he was liberal in his youth but became "traditional" in his maturity..
That's a blatant lie.
Why they all do this, I don't know.
The problem I have with it is that many Traditional minded Catholics have been deceived by tradcasters to believe that Benedict was a lover of the Church and Tradition.
Of course the reason for this blatant lie is that they want to reject Bergoglio without becoming an evil sedevacantist, and the only way they can think of doing that is by embracing Benedict 16th as their true pope. But they can only do that by pretending he's traditional. There you have it.
So, my wife was listening to Barnhardt's last podcast, and I would catch parts of it here or there, and her hubris and narcissism are quite striking. No wonder she spends so much time ranting about narcissism. Not only does she posture as having knowledge of Catholic theology and Canon Law ... of which she is entirely bereft, but if anyone ever disagrees with her, even on the slightest point or tiny detail, she ruthlessly excoriates them, and also spread various slanders based on anonymous sources that she accepts as being completely factual. She slurs them by questioning their masculinity (a quality which Ann Barnhardt has much of). Then she has the temerity to accuse them of being mean and nasty ... when her own nastiness against others remains unrivalled (see post cited below from Brother Bugnolo).Lad,
She was completely ripping on the "1958 sedevacantists", calling them like тαℓмυdic Jєωs because "they're in and everyone else is out". That's utter hogwash, and a slanderous strawman. No, Ann, they think they're right while you're wrong, just as YOU think you're right (and have THE answer) and they're wrong.
Barnhardt wouldn't last 5 minutes in an actual debate against sedevacantists ... or anyone else really. So she just has her yes-man peanut gallery on there patting her on the back and nodding in agreement with every point she makes, no matter how stupid ... and, trust me, the majority of her comments are downright stupid, if not at times slanderous. She's a total hot mess where it comes to Catholic theology and Canon Law, and yet postures as some kind of Doctress of the Church.
At one point she was ripping on Brother Bugnolo (also a Bennyvacantist) ruthlessly, and so I told my wife, I bet it's because Brother Bugnolo distanced himself from Barnhardt. No sooner did I say this than my wife found this with a Google search on "Bugnolo Barnhardt".
https://www.fromrome.info/2022/06/21/br-bugnolo-i-want-to-distance-myself-entirely-from-ann-barnhardts-horrendus-modus-operandi-which-poses-as-catholic/
Here is Brother Bugnolo's distancing from Ann Barnhardt, the exact word I had used in my speculation against Barnhardt. I happen to agree with every word of this (except his theories about Ratzinger having been the pope). People need to stop supporting Barnhardt, and she needs to be completely silenced.
Oh, before I quote Brother Bugnolo, I have to point out the hubris of coming up with her own replacement for "A.D." or "Anno Domini" for dating. She uses this ridiculous "ARSH". See, the expression "Anno Domini" which has been used throughout Church history, by Fathers, all the Doctors, all the theologians, all Catholics, which appears in every single papal docuмent or decree or publication from the Holy See and every bishop in the world, and was good enough for them ... it is not good enough for the Narcissist Ann Barnhardt, so she has to improve upon it. Reminds me of Wojtyla's improvement upon the Holy Rosary.
So here's Brother Bugnolo --
“Many people have asked why a certain layman masquerading as a “Franciscan friar” is NEVER mentioned on this blog. Welp… now you know. TOTAL GRIFTER. He should literally be in prison for his larcenous schemes. And I don’t care who he thinks the Pope is. The guy is a larcenous fraud – who is now trying to profiteer and GET LADS KILLED AS MERCENARY CANNON FODDER OF THE SODO-Jєω ZELENSKY REGIME IN UKRAINE. Thank God I’ve been able to warn all of the big players – for lack of a better term – off of him, and his damage at the levels of the Church that actually still matter has been totally neutralized.”
“This! this!! this!!! is what they mean by the hermeneutic of continuity. They substantially change the Faith, and disguise the change by superimposing Catholic sensory images over their foulness. The hermeneutic of continuity means a cover up. It's lipstick on the pig.”
Lad,
You've made very good points in this thread. Yet it's important to clarify something, lest Bugnolo seem to be something praiseworthy.
Your opinion is that Barnhardt starting ripping on Bugnolo AFTER he publicly distanced himself from her.
NO!!!!
…and she's also hostile to +Vigano for not particular reason.Trump is the Katechon of Thessalonians! He was stopping the evil of Satan! Vigano said so!
Trump is the Katechon of Thessalonians! He was stopping the evil of Satan! Vigano said so!
Well, I think what touched it off was Barnhardt questioning the masculinity of that one Andrea Cionci, to which Bugnolo took exception. But I might be wrong.Chuckling.....
But this isn't the first or only time that Barnhardt has ruthlessly shredded people just because she didn't like them ... like her obnoxious derogatory comments about sedevacantists, and she's also hostile to +Vigano for not particular reason.
:facepalm: ... this nonsense come from people who have reading comprehension issues. Never did he say that Trump was THE katechon from Scripture. That would be Barnhardt projecting again, as she claims that Ratzinger was THE katechon.
What scenarios await the Catholics of the world if Trump should lose?https://www.remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/5075-interview-by-francesco-boezi-with-archbishop-carlo-maria-vigano
If Trump loses the presidential elections, the final kathèkon [withholder] will fail (2 Thess 2:6-7), that which prevents the “mystery of iniquity” from revealing itself, and the dictatorship of the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr, which has already won Bergoglio over to its cause, will have an ally in the new American President.
The quote in question stems from an interview:
Chuckling.....
She certainly has her ways ...... :smirk:
I'm familiar with the quote. Now try reading what it actually says.
Are there any other female personalities that Catholics look to for answers? I can't think of any.Ann Barnhardt is the "Karen" of the NO sect. If she was a liberal she would be the one yelling at you in the supermarket for not wearing a mask. She is absolutely, positively right at all times. There is no room for another female personality. She takes up the space ( and the oxygen)
Ann Barnhardt is the "Karen" of the NO sect. If she was a liberal she would be the one yelling at you in the supermarket for not wearing a mask. She is absolutely, positively right at all times. There is no room for another female personality. She takes up the space ( and the oxygen)I think that is an accurate assessment.
| luminati (http://www.catholic-saints.net/illuminati/) | Miracles (http://www.doomsdaytube.com/religion-creation.php#Supernatural-Creation-And-Miracles-Proved-Past-And-Present) | Prophecies (http://www.catholic-saints.net/prophecies/) | Scary (http://www.doomsdaytube.com/scary-hell.php#The-Most-Terrifying-Demons-Attack-People-On-Cam-Must-See) | Spanking (http://www.catholic-saints.net/corporal-punishment/) | Vanity (http://www.catholic-saints.net/vanity/) | Vatican II (http://www.catholic-saints.net/vatican-ii/) |
Lad,
You've made very good points in this thread. Yet it's important to clarify something, lest Bugnolo seem to be something praiseworthy.
Your opinion is that Barnhardt starting ripping on Bugnolo AFTER he publicly distanced himself from her.
NO!!!!
She fired the first shot in May of 2022. He did not make his public display of indignation until June, approximately one month after her missile launched.
You can see it all in one of Bugnolo's posts:
https://www.fromrome.info/2022/05/17/ann-barnhardt-admits-to-calumniating-a-certain-franciscan-friar-to-all-the-big-players/
This is what Ann said on her blah-g:
Bugnolo was supremely happy riding on the tails of Ann's bloomers for as long as he could. For she was an indirect source of income, I'll wager. As long as he could claim being on her team - and being in Rome itself - he had a cash cow.
His June post was damage control, and PR, and a new fundraising schema. Though she hulled him and he bled freely, he stayed in Ukraine for a long time, trying to persuade people he is a genuine article of some kind.
His latest ploy is this vile and disgusting conclave three ring circus. It may have been you or another, but someone mentioned that this looks like a money grab.
Absolutely.
Did Ann spot a grifter in Bugnolo? I'd say she spotted a fellow grifter. They have extrasensory ways of identifying each other.
For a time they either played nice for profit, or she ignored him hanging his cowl on her hat rack for cash.
But there came a time when their respective interests diverged; and so much so that she went public on him.
My best guess is that the puppeteers told her to do it. For no one, I repeat, no one can be a bennyvacantist except there is money and power and an agenda behind the scenes.
Did Ann alert her handlers, or did they alert her? She admits she's in the eardrums of important types. And I'm sure they dictate directives back.
How can people overlook such a transparent sham?
Let us never forget that by working hard for Ratzinger, the BV's, of logical necessity, work hard for Bergoglio, et. al..
P.S. Do you know who Bugnolo is now hinting might be elected "pope" by the Roman plebs? This Don Minutella (sp?).
I have no idea who this individual is, but I clicked on the link for his podcast. The show's intro is a nauseating collage of real Saints and V2 hoaxes, like Escriva, Stein, Mother Theresa, JPII. This! this!! this!!! is what they mean by the hermeneutic of continuity. They substantially change the Faith, and disguise the change by superimposing Catholic sensory images over their foulness. The hermeneutic of continuity means a cover up. It's lipstick on the pig. That is the defining and essential characteristic of BXVI's "pontificate." And that's what all BV's, who are made in the image and likeness of Ratzinger, strive to do. They hate Bergoglio only because he goes out without his makeup on!!! They hate him because he is, in a sense, risking everything. He's risking that people will finally wake up and leave.
And now you have your reason why Mr. Emeritus hung around. He was plausible deniability for the entire sick structure. It's one big fat hegelian comedy - and the laugh is on the conservatives.
My best guess is that the puppeteers told her to do it. For no one, I repeat, no one can be a bennyvacantist except there is money and power and an agenda behind the scenes.
::)
Let me help. "Katechon" can and has been interpreted in different ways. He does not see Trump as THE katechon, nor does he view there to be a single "katechon", but his reference to the "final" katechon means that he's basically using this in the sense of "the last domino will fall" before the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr comes into full control. Elsewhere he mentioned Ratziner as another "katechon", and that is alluded to here when refers to the advent of Bergoglio, then the fall of the US (via fraudulent election) into a complete takeover by the NWO.
While I believe that both Trump and Bergoglio are active participants in the destruction of the Church, +Vigano clearly views "katechon" as a series of things not a single thing and does not refer to Trump as THE katechon.
Nor does being a "katechon" necessarily mean that one is a valiant defender of the faith. So, for instance, one might view Pius XII as a "katechon", as a critical turning point or watershed, even though he contributed mightily to ushering in the Vatican II era.
Another interpretation of "katechon" is actually the opposite, where the "man of sin" is the "katechon" (obstacle or final prelude) before Our Lord's Second Coming.
I myself believe that it refers to the Catholic papacy, which "fell" (so to speak) after the death of Pius XII.
If Trump loses the presidential elections, the final kathèkon [withholder] will fail (2 Thess 2:6-7), that which prevents the “mystery of iniquity” from revealing itself, and the dictatorship of the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr, which has already won Bergoglio over to its cause, will have an ally in the new American President.
The quote doesn't even make sense to me. Perhaps someone could write it in English?
As you said, let's look at the actual quote:
This is deeply troubling to me. The kathekon of 2 Thess. is a spiritual power in heaven (the Holy Ghost) who acts through the Church, and consequently through the pope, as the Church's head. The "witholding" of 2 Thess. is metaphorically expressed by the "keys" and the "binding and loosing" language of Matt. 16. This language or metaphorical sense is carried over to Apoc. 20 when it speaks of Satan being "bound" for 1,000 years and then being "loosed."
The Holy Ghost acts through the Church/pope, and of course the Church/pope sometimes utilizes secular power and authority to accomplish its ends. Holy Ghost (the ultimate spiritual power, God, heaven) - Church/pope (spiritual power on earth) - kings, governments (the secular power on earth).
So, what happens in the secular sphere of ultimate spiritual consequence through governments/kings does indeed reflect what is happening or being directed from above, initiated by heaven - as Christ said Caesar would have no power over Him if not given from above - through the "loosing" or "binding" of the spiritual authority's representative on earth - e.g. the High Priest and Sanhedrin handing Christ over to Caesar to be crucified.
It could simply be a translation issue, but making the success/failure of the "katechon" conditional and as depending upon the election or non-election of a secular political figure is very disturbing. It may be that the removal of the "katechon" (the Church/pope) or the failure of its power to withhold unleashes a chaotic "loosing" that reverberates into a political nightmare in the secular governance of the world, but to say if a certain political figure fails to get elected then the "katechon" has failed is askew and shows a lack of true balance as to what is going on and the powers that direct it.
As I said, it could be a translation issue. But I see this tendency in Vigano of giving what happens in the secular realm - the NWO, etc. - sometimes a primacy or emphasis that it should not be given: what happens there is not determinative or ultimate, but is simply a reflection of what is. Perhaps this is why I get the sense (as do others) that he, while recognizing the problems with V2 and the Conciliar religion and making some very strong statements against it, has failed to, as of yet, "close the deal" in his final analysis of the crisis.
This is my only reservation in the post. I’m not convinced that this is true.Hi QVD,
You raise a good point that there's a subtle financial incentive behind Bennyvacantism.EXACTLY!!!
See, a lot of people that make their living off their Internet Celebrity, their websites, podcats, Youtube videos, etc. ... they stand to lose a huge percentage of their financial support if they go full-blown sedevacantist. So this is a compromise position. "I'm not one of these crazy sedevacantists. I'm on board with Vatican II and the New Mass and Saint JP2 the Great, etc."
Now that Benny is dead, there's no actual difference between the Bennyvacantists and the Sedevacantists regarding the current state of the Church. They're divided ONLY on the principle of whether the Crisis goes back to Vatican II, the NOM, Roncalli, Montini, Wojtyla, Ratzinger ... or whether it started the day Jorge got elected.
I've always been a bit leery of women who come from a background in finance that then go onDarn good post!!!
to pose as some Christian NWO opponent.
Catherine Austin Fitts is another of these types.
She was a big player on Wall Street and was in George Bush senior's cabinet!
I've never personally met someone so involved with mammon worship just suddenly
become interested in truth.
I suppose it's possible, like a sodomite becoming a wholesome family man, just
very very improbable.
Greed is probably a worse addiction than sodomy. Eventually one's libido slows down
with age but every elderly wealthy person I've known has wanted more money even when
they became too feeble to do anything with it.
Darn good post!!!
Fitts is really creepy.
Ever notice there are no real Catholics in the alt media?
You're catching me in all of my sloppy affirmations! :laugh1:
Do you consider Barnhardt or Taylor Marshall that be “real Catholics?”
I see Taylor Marshall as someone who is slowly evolving as a Catholic and anyone whoIndeed, I cannot fault anything you say in your post.
directs others to the rosary is likely to keep going in the right direction.
He has a big family, God bless him, and he has to support it somehow so I don't
necessarily see him as a grifter.
In these unprecedented times of confusion we're all bound to have the wrong view
at some point or another on the faith.
I think we need to balance what good a person does against the bad so I'm reluctant
to dog pile on Ann. She no doubt helped a lot of people struggling with covid with ivermectin.
Salza on the other hand is just a bad actor
Why so many of them go from total obscurity to top of the heap fame in less than 60 seconds?
I don’t trust any of them. Most of them are narcissists.Going door to door with the Legion of Mary actually was quite surprising when I participated, ( 15 years ago) You would be surprised how many non- Catholics are interested in what you have to say about the Church. People were very friendly- a lot of people were just glad to talk to someone. I can't imagine what it would be like today post-COVID. Another world entirely.
I trust people here on Cathinfo, even the ones I don’t agree with on certain topics. There may be some narcissists on here but they are trying to grow in their faith.
I think going door to door evangelizing works. I even thought about doing mailings.
I wasn’t sure who this woman was so I went to YouTube to view one of her videos.I especially don't get the men who follow her.
My-my she’s aggressive. Her foul language and machoism made me feel a little embarrassed. What person with a Catholic sense would listen to a woman who acts like that and take her word on anything.
She has a sharp mind but seems to be unhinged. Think of the wonderful things she could do for Christ and his kingdom if she’d remove herself from her public pedestal and start acting like a lady.
I especially don't get the men who follow her.Yes! I thought the exact same thing when reading the comments from men praising her on the 1 video I watched.
Honestly, were I an outsider, I’d say I was witnessing some kind of a form of projection, here.
Laramie,
“Okay, to return to the OP, this is a thread about Ann Barnhardt and Narcissism,
Certainly, there are people going into the blogosphere with battleplans and intentions. Voris comes to mind. Marshall as well. Voris appears to have been looking for a grift, though I didn’t think so at first. Marshall was a former Episcopalian priest, so his life and career were already pivoted around religion. I’m not so sure his mission is to grift, so much as it is to continue a career that involves his religious conviction. Remember Skojec? Yeah, I feel he was grifting, for sure.”
Laramie,Although I try extend the benefit of the doubt you could very well be right about Marshall, whose ties to Opus Dei I was only recently made aware of.
The hired grifters or “talking heads” strike me as a part of the final phase of the spiritual psy-ops by our enemies.
For example, Michael Voris is a freak trad fabrication from Opus Die’s fertile recruiting grounds at Notre Dame.
He appeared out of nowhere, producing his shows out of an Opus Dei office building.
There we’re (3) Voris shows where he really came out, to show his masonic colors. They dealt with promotions of the h0Ɩ0h0αx, the Noahide Laws and Opus Dei itself.
So too for Taylor Marshall, an admitted Jєω and admirer of Escriva and Opus Dei.
Like Malachi Martin, they function as confidence-men, who infiltrate and have the mission to confuse or misdirect what’s left of the Catholic faithful.
As you said, let's look at the actual quote:
This is deeply troubling to me. The kathekon of 2 Thess. is a spiritual power in heaven (the Holy Ghost) who acts through the Church, and consequently through the pope, as the Church's head. The "witholding" of 2 Thess. is metaphorically expressed by the "keys" and the "binding and loosing" language of Matt. 16. This language or metaphorical sense is carried over to Apoc. 20 when it speaks of Satan being "bound" for 1,000 years and then being "loosed."
The Holy Ghost acts through the Church/pope, and of course the Church/pope sometimes utilizes secular power and authority to accomplish its ends. Holy Ghost (the ultimate spiritual power, God, heaven) - Church/pope (spiritual power on earth) - kings, governments (the secular power on earth).
So, what happens in the secular sphere of ultimate spiritual consequence through governments/kings does indeed reflect what is happening or being directed from above, initiated by heaven - as Christ said Caesar would have no power over Him if not given from above - through the "loosing" or "binding" of the spiritual authority's representative on earth - e.g. the High Priest and Sanhedrin handing Christ over to Caesar to be crucified.
It could simply be a translation issue, but making the success/failure of the "katechon" conditional and as depending upon the election or non-election of a secular political figure is very disturbing. It may be that the removal of the "katechon" (the Church/pope) or the failure of its power to withhold unleashes a chaotic "loosing" that reverberates into a political nightmare in the secular governance of the world, but to say if a certain political figure fails to get elected then the "katechon" has failed is askew and shows a lack of true balance as to what is going on and the powers that direct it.
As I said, it could be a translation issue. But I see this tendency in Vigano of giving what happens in the secular realm - the NWO, etc. - sometimes a primacy or emphasis that it should not be given: what happens there is not determinative or ultimate, but is simply a reflection of what is. Perhaps this is why I get the sense (as do others) that he, while recognizing the problems with V2 and the Conciliar religion and making some very strong statements against it, has failed to, as of yet, "close the deal" in his final analysis of the crisis.
Laramie,Whoah, Whoah! Marshall’s a Jew? Source, please. I’ve GOT to see this.
The hired grifters or “talking heads” strike me as a part of the final phase of the spiritual psy-ops by our enemies.
For example, Michael Voris is a freak trad fabrication from Opus Dei’s fertile recruiting grounds at Notre Dame.
He appeared out of nowhere, producing his shows from an Opus Dei office building.
There we’re (3) Voris shows where he really came out, to show his masonic colors.
They dealt with promotions of the h0l0hoax, the Noahide Laws and Opus Dei itself.
So too for Taylor Marshall, an admitted Jєω and admirer of Escriva and Opus Dei exploded onto the social media platforms and is ubiquitous now.
Like Malachi Martin, they function as confidence-men, who infiltrate and have the mission to confuse or misdirect what’s left of the Catholic faithful.
Whoah, Whoah! Marshall’s a Jєω? Source, please. I’ve GOT to see this.(https://i.imgur.com/G7RNDRX.jpg)
I know he has Opis Dei friends. So does EMJ. This does not mean they, themselves, are Opus Dei. That said, without a doubt, EMJ is influenced—at the least—by his Opus Dei colleagues.
But yeah. Direct me to the Marshall/Jєω connection, please.
(https://i.imgur.com/G7RNDRX.jpg)Not to derail the thread, but I wonder if someone can direct me to some source about the problems of Opus Dei. Lately, I've had to interact with some people who may have ties. There are people from other groups too (the Neocathecuмenates come to mind), but they're easier to read.
(https://i.imgur.com/9ZisnWW.jpg)
By no means exhaustive but a beginning down the Taylor Marshall rabbit hole:
https://twitter.com/search?q=%402022moshiachnow%20marshall&src=recent_search_click
He named his son after Opus Dei Escriva. He says his "inner Jєω" was speaking for him as he wrote his books....
it goes on.
Some allegations are over the top, but others are on target.
Not to derail the thread, but I wonder if someone can direct me to some source about the problems of Opus Dei. Lately, I've had to interact with some people who may have ties. There are people from other groups too (the Neocathecuмenates come to mind), but they're easier to read.A very worthwhile derailment. This should be a start
Whoah, Whoah! Marshall’s a Jєω? Source, please. I’ve GOT to see this.
I know he has Opis Dei friends. So does EMJ. This does not mean they, themselves, are Opus Dei. That said, without a doubt, EMJ is influenced—at the least—by his Opus Dei colleagues.
But yeah. Direct me to the Marshall/Jєω connection, please.
By no means exhaustive but a beginning down the Taylor Marshall rabbit hole:This is the archived link to those screencaps, in case anyone wants to save it:
https://twitter.com/search?q=%402022moshiachnow%20marshall&src=recent_search_click
He named his son after Opus Dei Escriva. He says his "inner Jєω" was speaking for him as he wrote his books....
it goes on.
Some allegations are over the top, but others are on target.
Sometimes, I think that talking heads exist only to gather information about the people who are going to their sites and listening to their podcasts.I notice they all have time and money to go to Rome and other places. If I went to Rome, Bergolio would sissy slap me.
The other day, the podcast would make suggestions of other podcasts according to my current viewing.
I notice they all have time and money to go to Rome and other places. If I went to Rome, Bergolio would sissy slap me.
Is it about money and power. Maybe they are getting a kickback by selling email addresses and other info too?
There was that interview that Br. Bugnolo recently did where when he was asked how people could suppot him, he said that he needs money first and foremost. For what? To fly in various electors?.
If I went to Rome, Bergolio would sissy slap me.:jester:
If I went to Rome, Bergolio would sissy slap me..
This is the archived link to those screencaps, in case anyone wants to save it:Archive erased it. I guess they now censor what is archived?
https://web.archive.org/web/20170613222337/http://taylormarshall.com/2016/10/taylor-marshall-is-part-Jєωιѕн-as-it-turns-out.html
He seems to have deleted it from his site for some reason, even though there are plenty of other articles still up from that time..
There was that interview that Br. Bugnolo recently did where when he was asked how people could suppot him, he said that he needs money first and foremost. For what? To fly in various electors? Given that response, we probably are dealing with another grifter here. He gets to live in Rome and have othe people pay for it.Spot on!
(https://i.imgur.com/G7RNDRX.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/9ZisnWW.jpg)
By no means exhaustive but a beginning down the Taylor Marshall rabbit hole:
https://twitter.com/search?q=%402022moshiachnow%20marshall&src=recent_search_click
He named his son after Opus Dei Escriva. He says his "inner Jєω" was speaking for him as he wrote his books....
it goes on.
Some allegations are over the top, but others are on target.
(https://i.pinimg.com/600x315/57/42/0f/57420f887328e01604d164da1971e58a.jpg)
What's with all of the sudden denunciation of Ann Barnhardt?
She has to pick up where men fail to be men, where they fail to teach and lead. God will use women to fill the places of men who are cowards or too degenerate to do anything of God's calling.
She doesn't mince her words like the milquetoast sissy males of the Church.
I will, also, add that she longs for a real man to conquer her - to dominate her. :popcorn:
What's with all of the sudden denunciation of Ann Barnhardt?I think the milquetoast would fair better with Ann. There is room for only one to wear the pants in the family.
She has to pick up where men fail to be men, where they fail to teach and lead. God will use women to fill the places of men who are cowards or too degenerate to do anything of God's calling.
She doesn't mince her words like the milquetoast sissy males of the Church.
I will, also, add that she longs for a real man to conquer her - to dominate her. :popcorn:
What's with all of the sudden denunciation of Ann Barnhardt?Lay people should not play theologian. The end.
She has to pick up where men fail to be men, where they fail to teach and lead. God will use women to fill the places of men who are cowards or too degenerate to do anything of God's calling.
She doesn't mince her words like the milquetoast sissy males of the Church.
I will, also, add that she longs for a real man to conquer her - to dominate her. :popcorn:
Lay people should not play theologian. The end.
There goes ~90% of all CI posts.
Lay people should not play theologian. The end.I have better trust in a real lay theologian, i.e., someone holding a pontifical degree (STL, STD, SSL, SSD, JCL, JCD, LEccHist, DEccHist), than I do in the theological opinions of most priests. History shows that many heresies have arisen from the clergy. The laity are nearly always the source of authetic reform.
I have better trust in a real lay theologian, i.e., someone holding a pontifical degree (STL, STD, SSL, SSD, JCL, JCD, LEccHist, DEccHist), than I do in the theological opinions of most priests.
Yes, Pontifical degrees are certifications from the Church, but no one being discussed here has such degrees. Lay people with such degrees or certifications can be delegated by their ordinary to act in a public capacity, but the thought of people parading around with degrees in finance and/or Ph.D.s from Conciliar Universities or even Protestant Universities presenting themselves as quasi-theologians, that's what I have a problem with. There's sometimes a fine line between opining and presuming to teach or lecture the faithful, but some of these celebrities have clearly crossed the line with their large followings.^^^^^
^^^^^
Exactly!
The plain sense of the term ["essential error"] is meaningful. Don't kid yourself and don't allow yourself to be tricked or deluded by people who tell you that just mere lay people cannot ... cannot ... understand the law. Of course you can. But if you want to delve into what exactly this term "substantial error" means, I've got you covered.
Barnhardt’s fine.
Sure, Barnhardt is just fine ... if you believe the Church crisis started in 2013 and actual Traditional Catholics are like тαℓмυdic Jєωs, and Benny Ratzinger was St. Pius X the New. :facepalm:Crisis didn't start in 2013. She never said it did. The whole throwback to Jews...well, she's a Trad. It's what we do.
Crisis didn't start in 2013. She never said it did. The whole throwback to Jєωs...well, she's a Trad. It's what we do.
If you think Barnhardt is a Traditional Catholic, then you're no Traditional Catholic.
I agree.
Averaging 7 lengthy posts per day for 13 years…
Posting to always have the last word, spinning excuses for Marranos…
And in the last 6 months, he can thumb down the opinions on others, but he is untouchable.
It is a lack of honest Catholic discourse and a true display of trad hubris. :facepalm:
Lads,
Your interpretation of the word slander is equivalent to Poche’s use and understanding of the word charity 😉
1) I don't care if someone agrees or disagrees with Lad.
2) You know it's sad when someone drops F-bombs on a Catholic forum.
3) You know it's truly sad when my calling it out rec'd 2 thumbs down.
4) There should be a ban on four letter words (and their 'interpretations'), but I will suffer the ignoramus who uses them.
I second that!If not once or twice, the third time's a charm. However, it was a Shia LeBeouf context, but I'm not in favor of Hollywood or the Jews or Opus Judei either, besides bad language.
Lads,I wonder what Poche is having for dinner.....😄
Your interpretation of the word slander is equivalent to Poche’s use and understanding of the word charity 😉
I see dat. I respekts dat. But like Malebranche, etymologies have they spell, even if they also be an error on occasion, as much as Amway at least, and mo' than Opus Judei. We gonna drop Amway on Putin's Kremlin nekst and see what he gonna do.Then we gonna put Albert Bourla and the Rothschilds in jail..
You epitomize "Trad hubris", buddy, and you're a disgraceful slanderer who when called out for it, simply double down on your slander. You're worse than a gossipy old lady. You're constantly slandering people, accusing Gibson of being a Mason, +Vigano, Taylor Marshall and others of being Opus Dei operatives, and LaBeouf for being fake convert, none of it with any evidence other that your God-given gift to read the internal forum. You should have bee banned from here a long time ago for slander. It's one thing to have suspicions, but quite another to categorically declare that Gibson is a Mason, these others are Jєω Opus Dei operatives, etc. as if it were fact. When called it for your slander and calumny, you double down and the assert that the people who call you out for this disgraceful and objectively sinful behavior are guilty of "hubris". You have an amazing temerity, and it's a diabolical inversion for you to pretend that those who rebuke you for this behavior are the ones with "hubris", while there's absolutely nothing wrong with your posting slanderous accusations.Nah, in my experience Incredulous is great at sizing people up.
It's astonishing the amount of typing spent about this freak Barnhardt, beating around the bush instead of getting down to brass tacks. If you all had a better-tuned Catholic Sense you'd know Barnhardt is a fraud just by virtue of her not being anti-Jєωιѕн, as I revealed on this thread where I call out Ladislaus for promoting the Jєω Nostradamus.
Barnhardt is fixated on the Muslims for sure, and barely makes a peep about the Jєωs. Having come from the financial world, it's hardly a wonder.
As for Nostradamus, he converted (or rather, his father's family converted). If you want to alleged that his conversion was fake, go right ahead, but I have seen no evidence of it. Not every Jєωιѕн convert was insincere, and some of his letters suggest to me a sincere Catholic faith. So that's not in the same category, disagreement about whether a convert form Judaism was sincere vs. those who remain Jєωs.