Welcome to The Blog of the Kurgan

This is long, and imperative to read

If you wonder how the WEF and the pedovores in charge plan for you to quietly go into the night, preventing you from ever having any sort of rebellion, much less an armed one, you really need to read this whole, very long, but very thorough article on what Japan is like today. And in fact, what it was like already 33 years ago when I visited it with my Karate Team.

If you want to know the future you need to read the whole thing .

And if you want to know how to prevent it from happening, you need to basically read me and my writings for the last… well… since I started writing a blog really. And you may prefer to go to the more complete version that has been around since 2009 and taken out by feds or Israeli in 2024 but has been fully rebuilt without losses. The search me function on that blog lets you search for key words like “clown world” “community” “farming” and all sorts of related things, and it has a pinned “important posts” section at the top. Here it is:

Thekurganblog.com

But in a nutshell, the core idea is simple to lay out if not necessarily easy to do:

1. 1. Become a zealot. A human needs an idea, a religion, a purpose, larger than himself and ideally one that extends to infinity. The closer that concept is aligned to how reality ACTUALLY functions, the more likely his success at building whatever it is he wants to build. Historically, the most successful concept in human history at producing the most beautiful art, safe societies, and warriors unmatched by anyone was actual Catholicism (not the inverted version Satanists have created since 1958). The same Catholicism that created the Dominican monasteries, that converted the Pagan Vikings, that created the Crusader Knights that fought Muslim hordes of 100:1 and more against and won, that had the 600 knights of Malta foil an Islamic invasion force of 40,000 enemies. That Catholicism today exists only in the last few Catholics left that actually still are Catholic, believe as their ancestors and the Catholics before them did and are known as 1958 Totalist Sedevacantists, but our real name is Catholic, it’s just most have been fooled by the Freemasons, Communists, pedophiles, faggots and deceivers currently led by Bob. Not a single Catholic is left in the Vatican, and the sedevacatist clergy has been in an interregnum, without a Pope, since the last valid one died on 9th October 1958. I became a Catholic because of a mystical experience I would have laughed at you had you told me it would happen to me and that Catholicism, of all the religions would be where I landed. I too thought the pederasts in the Vatican represented it. Then I had a road to Damascus moment and I spent 4 years studying Catholicism like an obsessed man, because even after that event, I could not reconcile the Vatican squatters as being exponents of what I had seen. And indeed they are not. They are impostors. And Vatican II was their almost (but not quite) total victory. Anyway, YOU don’t need to be a Catholic zealot like I am. I mean, you should be, and it would be best if you were, and we joined forces, wherever you may be. I certainly have met and been involved in seeing the beauty of the lives of several young men that have gone on to get married, have children, produce great works for the faith, and all helped me on my farm. And it would be even better if many such men moved near me and we built a physical community that can thrive, which it would because such zealots are extraordinary in loyalty and ethics. We help each other in any way we can, and as a community we would put the Amish to shame. But that’s my mission. It would be great if you join it, but you don’t have to. Go ahead and build your own community, but realise that you need to do that and that it needs to outlast generations. No ideology has done that better than Catholicism. Nor will it. We have been here for 2000 years, and shrunken though we may be, that too was prophesied so no worries. We’ll be here 2000 years from now too. But you do you.
2. 2. You need to get land in a rural area.
3. 3. Get married and stay married no matter what (picking the right person is paramount. I fucked it up twice before I got it right. Shit happens. But you are at a decided advantage if you start off as a Catholic. Divorce doesn’t exist in our faith.)
4. 4. Have plenty of children.
5. 5. Become as self sufficient as possible so pick your location so that you can have free water, grow food and protect your land.
6. 6. Build a community of zealots like you.

That’s it. Get to it.

Subscribe

Share

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here

…of doing what I advocate, using AI to defeat the purposes of the very people trying to make sure you stay sick, alone, and despondent!

The Gen Z fighters will be fine.

Subscribe now

Share

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here

This video is only a few minutes long, but extremely interesting, I strongly suggest you watch it. My most recent book, which includes protocols for fasting up to 14 days at a time is also linked below the video, and below that is my best educated guess as to why the Russians got the results they did. Remember that modern psychiatry and psychology cure literally NO ONE. These so-called “professionals” psychologists and psychiatrists were interviewed at random and asked how many patients they cured and ONE of them said “Maybe…one.” All the others said none.

The only thing I (was) aware of that helps and can cure at least some mental disorders is hypnosis properly done, for two reasons:

1. The work of Milton Erickson, which I am probably the only person on Earth who has read every single thing Erickson ever wrote (approximately 20,000 pages in total). And,
2. Because I have achieved it myself with a person that was on medication and officially diagnosed as “Paranoid Schizophrenic”, and yet after four sessions he was no longer on medication, resumed his studies, got a girlfriend, and went on to live a normal life.

So why would fasting work? See the video, which is only 7 minutes long and covers some amazing work done by the Soviets during the Cold War. My thoughts on it are below it.

Subscribe now

Share

If you don’t care for my explanation and just want to know how to go about it with zero filler, here is the book . Link is to the digital PDF version, you can print yourself, but the description there also has links to Amazon so you can order ready-made paper copies. It’s only 48 pages and then nearly 30 pages of plans for your notes.

It has daily diet and supplement plans, along with fasting Protocols from 3 to 14 days, and also 8 recipes of how to do your own fermented foods; As well as exercise routines for during, after and beyond the fast (each thing can be done separately or all three [better eating, exercise, and fasting]).

Subscribe now

Share

My View of Why it Works

The relationship between our mental processes and the gut biome, is, in my opinion, far, far, far more relevant than pretty much any current medical “professional” understands. Just like I have demonstrated things like close range telepathy on video, as part of the 40 videos you get when you purchase my seminal work on Systema, The Russian Martial System, or the effects of Hypnosis not just on the mind, but also on the physical body ( see the effects on eyesight ), there are far more interesting physiological, and neurological effects and links between our mind, body and gut biome than pretty much anyone can even guess.

The Body-Snatcher Issue

I personally experienced a very real “hijacking of my brain” by the parasitic overgrowth of Candida I had developed by about 2014 or. so, without realising what it was, I went almost overnight from basically fit, training regularly and being healthy, to being fatigued, always bloated, with fur on my tongue and no real explanation as to why. Doctors couldn’t tell me either. This continued until early 2016 when I moved to Venice. It was then through a Facebook friend in a group I was part of, that someone suggested it was an overgrowth of Candida. So I did a 3 day water fast, and then basically only ate bresaola, octopus, and water, for months. The occasional fish or meat only stew for diversity, and a tub of 1kg of natural Greek Yoghurt once a month (yes in one go). I lost weight, got healthy again and the Candida issue disappeared, however… one evening, a few weeks into this Spartan regimen, I was lying on my couch, watching an episode of Montalbano (hilarious, well made and gives a real insight into Italian way of life) and out of the blue, I had a sudden, and really STRONG urge to eat an entire tub of Nutella. I didn’t have any such thing in the house, and it was 2 am anyway, but I was off the couch and half-way to the fridge before I realised… Wait… WHAT THE FUCK AM I DOING? AND WHY? And I realised that the “need” of suddenly a tub of Nutella, was nothing to do with what. my body actually needed, or even my brain wanted. It was the closest thing to awakening from being directed by a body-snatcher that was parasitically attached to my brain-stem. It’s really quite disconcerting when you become suddenly so consciously aware of it.

And it was that very realisation that gave me the impetus to kill the damned parasitic bacteria (we all have Candida in our gut as part of our natural flora, but what it does, and if it’s even useful at all remains open to debate. What is sure is that sugar feeds it and almost everyone on processed food has an excess of it, and it is NOT good.)

Throughout 2016, 2017, and 2018 to about 2021 or so, I was healthy, then we moved to Italy, I got a bad case of Covid (no jab for me thanks) and then 2 pneumonias in 2022 that nearly finished me off. Recovering from that and being busy on the farm and making another 2 children with my wife meant I did not take care with what I ate, when, how, etc.

Mental Stability

It make sense to me that, given all sorts of bugs can and do exist in our gut, some can react with out nervous system in ways that are truly very much analogous to a parasitic creature taking over our brain. And not in a good way. This is very much known to be the case in the animal world, not just with insects, but mammals too (cats, rats, etc.) so I seen reason why it would be any different for humans.

The Reset

And lately I again was under the weather, constant joint inflammation and so on. So… I decided to reset everything with a full 14 day water only diet (see how to do it in the book) and I can attest that not only am I feeling a LOT better, but the inflammation has gone, a ganglion cyst I had that formed on the inside of my palm and made using any tool painful has now almost completely re-absorbed (it was probably the result of my fracturing my elbow when I slipped and fell on ice in January, the elbow is still tender in that area).

But my thinking is also a lot clearer, and I believe it’s because I essentially starved the body-snatcher known as Candida. And I will continue to do so. I have entered a regimented refeeding protocol (you need to be careful after you do a long fast how you start eating again to avoid serious complications), which is now at an end, however, I have once again, eliminated:

• All sugar, in ANY form
• All dairy products, in ANY form
• Sticking to healthy meats (properly raised, zero antibiotics wherever possible)
• Some vegetables (small amounts, but not the carbohydrates ones like potatoes)
• Zero Carbs (any alcohol, breads of all kinds, any pasta of any kind, and things like potatoes are all out)

I do take a few supplements and drink salted water.

I know to most people such a regimented and limited diet is unrealistic, but I have done. this plenty of times before when I was training in karate at my peak and later in Systema too, so I know it’s doable, but it DID need a mental reset, which the 14 day fast provided, as I ignored the tasty foods my wife prepared (supposedly for the kids, but possibly to torture me) and just drank my salty water and took the magnesium and couple of other things. Now, I can ignore. their eating cake in front of me easily, and it’s not an issue, also because, I get a kind of pleasure from knowing I am murdering colonies of Candida in my gut by the millions. Nothing drives one like an active enemy to defeat.

Exercise and Return to Peak

That is how my diet will stay as I gradually increase the exercise routine in order to get back to my peak performance from about age 35 or so, which will be hard enough to do at 56 with a compromised left lung. That is partly damage from the pneumonia, and partly due to a reduced diaphragm mobility on the left side that may have been congenital, the result of trauma (I was certainly kicked and punched there enough times over the years), or possibly also due to the Pneumonia. It was something discovered over the last year due to chest X-Rays. So I apparently have an atrophied ability to fill the left lung to full capacity. Due to all that, if I get back to age 35 performance I will be quite happy. Projected for 12-18 months of training, I think it should be fairly achievable, and possibly even go beyond it. My forest gym is in place now, I do need a better spinning bike because the one I got is fine for someone like my wife, but too light for me to train properly with.

I also commissioned a metal frame to perform some maximum effort static resistance training exercises with, but that’s made to measure for me and the. wife, so may not be useful for most people, but if they manufacture it properly and with proper technical diagrams I may put the plans for it on sale for a modest fee as it is adjustable for people between 6’ 2” and 5’ 7” and with a few adaptations could suit people up to 6’ 4” too.

I don’t do weights, as I find it too mind-numbing for me, but they are essentially irrelevant for me as I was always able to outperform most so-called body-builders (amateur level) of a size comparable to my own height and weight, mostly because the exercises I trained in most of my life are fast twitch and endurance body-work against gravity type of things, which is known to pretty much outperform weight-pushers in every respect, but especially cardio work, long-distance work like hiking, etc.

One thing I keep thinking would be beneficial is Tai-Chi, but I am mostly ignorant of it and not sure how much I could learn from videos or maybe a book, but I also can’t see myself travelling to any classes s I can’t afford the time, still, it interests me a lot more now at my age than it did when I was 30 years younger.

So… I had long ago promised you guys some health posts for subscribers and kind of failed at that, but. here I am… returning to it and probably with more useful information in one short place than you will know what to do with.

And yes, it reads great exactly for people like me, who HATE reading about diets, and healthy eating, and blah, blah, blah, zzzzzzzz….

So hopefully it will be useful for more of you than most supposed “health plans”.

At least, that is my hope.

Subscribe now

Share

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here

Subscribe now

Share

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here

As you can tell, I am right up there following “current events” in great detail… Supposedly Shotgun fired six times, no one, hit, Kash Patel staring into the middle distance, possibly contemplating the fact his lack of understanding of the concept of toilet paper was helpful in retaining it all in his underpants, naked guy mobbed by burly SS men, something, something. And I could not care less, because it’s all very obviously fake and very, very, very, gay.

Thomas Crooks appeared in a Blackrock Commercial..

Ryan Routh was filmed by Newsweek in 2022 about his effort to recruit mercenaries to fight in Ukraine.

Cole Allen appeared in an ABC News report back in 2017..

Isn’t it weird how all the would be assassins appear to be MKUltra Project Artichoke Assets?

I’m sure they are all just Cohen-cidences.

Subscribe now

Share

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here

Satan never sleeps. So, be ever-vigilant.

There are some structural changes to the original post, because for one, now Bishop Sanborn is directly named, and a few clarifying points have been expanded on for the benefit of both Catholics and those who are not but want to understand more of the current situation.

Please note that I was clear about Sedeprivationism not being valid already back in 2020 when I wrote Reclaiming the Catholic Church, but it is now blindingly obvious to really most of the remaining Catholics, and it is high time, this absurd “Thesis” was called out and rejected once and for all.

The Original Post unchanged, written in January 2025 is here:

Subscribe now

This post will not mean a lot to you if you don’t even know what the issue is, so there is a cliff’s notes version directly below labelled introduction. If you already know what a Novus Ordo impostor clergy is, a fake 2023 “sedevacantist”, an una-cum 1 “sedevacantist”, a sedeprivationist, or finally a 1958 sedevacantist is (i.e. and actual Catholic), then you can skip the intro and go directly to the core post.

If you are a little fuzzy on the above (or even totally ignorant of most of the terms) then the below intro should really help. Let me preface it by saying that it will simply be a summary of the facts. I do not intend to provide exhaustive (or even any) links and references. Mostly because almost all that work has already been done in BELIEVE! and Reclaiming the Catholic Church. This merely aims to explain the concept in very accessible layman’s terms so ANYONE reading it can understand it.

Please be aware that mental retards that start to spout off some mentally retarded nonsense about Catholicism, ignoring the post in order to spout their retardation, will immediately be banned from ever being able to comment again. So, protestants, curb your heretical tongues if you will and instead contemplate this image.

The Kurgan’s Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Introduction

The Catholic Church was instituted by Jesus Christ Himself, putting Peter at its head as the first Pope. The Church then put together the Bible some three hundred years after the ascension of Christ, from both written and oral tradition. At this time, the Church already had 300 or so years of Popes, Holy Mass complete with transubstantiation, the perpetual virginity and immaculate conception of Mary and so on. And despite attacks from various Magus , (magicians, wizards, deceivers) described even in the Bible itself, gnostics, heretics and their heresies of all types, not to mention the most barbaric and vicious persecutions by various Roman emperors (and later by various European kings and emperors), the Church continued to grow and spread the gospel.

The schism of the Easter “Orthodox” was nothing more than their usual (aptly named) byzantine politics rooted in worldly matters. Keep in mind that until 1054, literally EVERY Christian until then knew and accepted that the Pope in Rome was the ultimate authority on Church matters wherever and whenever a dispute appeared. Evidenced by plenty of times when the Pope was exactly referred to in order to settle any disputes. There was only ONE Christianity, and it was absolutely, and ONLY Catholic, in every single respect. In any case, the fact the “split” of 1054 was mostly just “politics as usual” for the Byzantines, is clearly evidenced by the fact that when they called for help from the Islamic depredations of their cities and lands, some 40 years after splitting from, and rejecting, the West and the Pope —that had in any event tried his best to reconcile with them— the Catholics immediately mounted the First Crusade, at the behest of Pope Urban II, who gave a rousing speech that convinced the most wealthy and noble families to go so far as sell all their lands and possessions and fund the Crusade to save the Eastern schismatics. And when they started to do so, the Eastern Schismatics immediately made alliances with the Muslims and literally attacked and tried and kill the Catholics that had saved them.

This happened repeatedly and incessantly through the first, second, and third crusade. By the time of the fourth crusade the Venetians had enough, so Constantinople was sacked (rather gently as these things go in history, by the way). The Backstabbing Eastern Schismatics are still whining to this day about how the Catholics “massacred them” for no reason at all other than greed. Right.

Some 500 years after that, we get that maid-raping, nun-fetishists, probably Jewish, fake Monk, Luther who is at first rejected by everyone, including Henry VIII, until old impotent Henry gets bored of his wife and wants to murder-divorce her, and the Pope says: “No. Marriage is for life.” At that point Henry splits from the Church massacres Catholics en masse, and steals all their lands, wealth, Churches and so on, and invents his own version of the “Christian” religion, and by extension gives licence to many other “nobles” on the mainland to do the same. Their motives are entirely obvious and historically documented as having to do with money, land, and power, and almost precisely nothing with the in any case absurd theological “differences” (wild lies, exaggerations, and errors Martin made up) that Protestants supposedly had then with Catholicism. 2

From this time on, it became increasingly required for the valid Popes of the Catholic Church to spell out things that everyone, including illiterate peasants, had always known, understood and never questioned. But as is Satan’s way, the gnostics, various tribes of Satanists, and the entirely Satanic Freemasons, whose temples the flaming homosexual and heretic King James instituted as we find them today. Along with his version of the “Bible”, which aside having already been severely edited by Luther, had also been edited by the enemies of Christ (the Pharisees) for 700 years, and which today contains more than 33,000 “errors” of translation. This is the “Bible” revered by the most retarded of the Protestants sects, the KJV, also known as the Freemason Bible, which is basically saying the Satanic bible, because Freemasonry is absolutely, 100% Satanism, and anyone who says otherwise is simply an outrageous liar (i.e. Satanist).

So… as a result of the hydra-like spawning of the people rebelling against God’s Church and “Protesting” it, Popes (the valid ones anyway, because there have been more than 40 anti-popes even before 1958) had to start issuing papal encyclicals that spelt out in autistic detail, what everyone who had not been deceived and lied to by these heretics already knew. So things like Cum Ex Apostolato Officio , which says the most obvious and logical thing, which is: if you behave like a heretic, guess what, you’re not a Catholic, and therefore not a priest, or bishop, or Pope. You are nothing but a heretic, and no one needs to make any big deal about it, nor is an official pronouncement required. Again, this is not rocket science, and yet, there are so many morons on this planet, especially Sedeprivationists, that even if (when?) Bergoglio Bob, starts to sacrifice babies on the altar, they will still try to say he really is a Pope.

Nevertheless, this constant having to explain that 2+2 is still 4, has always been 4 and so on, gives the enemies of truth and God, the latitude to say “Aha! It was never 4, you guys only stated to say that in 1451! This means it was always 3.5!”

And once again, because the average person really is best to just be silent and do as his VALID priest says, a LOT of confusion and lies and infiltration of the Church began to become possible.

In fact, the Satanists (in their Legions of names, be it Illuminati, Freemasons, Carbonari, Rosicrucians, Golden Dawn, Skull and Crossbones, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseam) began to infiltrate the Church with Satanists, homosexuals, pedophiles and communists (see Bella Dodd and many other Papal encyclicals, most notably by Pious X) in earnest from the late 1770s. And by 1958 they had finally managed to make so complete an infiltration that the first of so far an unbroken chain of false Popes was “elected”: Angelo Roncalli. 3 And the Church has been absent a Pope, and today, absent ANY valid clergy in the Vatican.

Vatican II is composed of 16 documents which ALL contain direct reversal of positions the real Catholic Church always had unchanged for 2 millennia. What the Satanists tried to “change” are of two sorts, neither of which has ever changed, nor will it:

1. Clarifications of what should already have been obvious to any Catholic because it always was the case. For example: the papal encyclical of Pope Paul the IV, Cum-Ex Apostolato Officio, summarised (and not abrogated) in Canon 188 part 4 of the Code of Canon Law of 1917, which basically states that heretics are not Catholics and a heretic pope is not a Pope, and when this abandonment of the faith is done publicly, regardless of rank, no one needs to say anything officially, nor make a ruling etc. That person is a heretic and should forever be treated as one by all Catholics.
2. Changes to ecclesiastical rules or laws, which is entirely permitted, because these are not divine laws. So for example a rule was introduced you need 70 cardinals to elect a Pope. This is not a “forever rule” it became necessary as the Church became global in size. But in the current situations, there doesn’t even exist ANY valid Cardinals, and yet, neither did Cardinals exist in the year 250 AD, and the people voting for a Pope were sometimes not even clergy. And it is a dogmatic principle of Catholicism that the truth is immutable, so any divine rule that was true in the past cannot be changed in the future, and vice-versa. The only rules that CAN and HAVE changed are human rules. But a an imperfect general council of remaining valid clergy (Only 1958 TOTALIST Sedevacantists are fully and correctly Catholic in their theology) could happen tomorrow to elect a newly valid Pope. Because Sedevacantists number probably a million or two at most (but have HUGE numbers of sympathisers, and our numbers keep growing) this would not necessarily be wise, and the enemy would immediately shout with all the power of their wealth and mass media that this is a ridiculous act by a few crazy people. Not too dissimilar from what the Roman Empire did to the first few actual Catholics, but they are not crucifying us and setting us on fire (yet). And it is absolutely necessary that the Church continue as it needs to, because after all, it’s not a numbers game, Catholicism started with eleven scared men in hiding and a few (braver) women. It’s not about numbers. It’s about truth.

So, in reality, the real rules of the church that matter (divine law) has not changed at all in 2 millennia. And the entirety of these rules (both divine and human) were finally put down in ONE document that took years to compile because it required the vetting of some 40,000 documents in total (and maybe several thousands more) to ensure that no aspect of the rulings of all the Popes and doctors of the Church expressed in various writings from the start of the Church to 1917 was in any kind of conflict or contradicted each other. In short, the Code of Canon Law of 1917, is the most vetted document humanity has ever created, and was put together by two valid popes (Pious X and Benedict XV) and a college of Cardinals, to ensure no error in it. So, it has the indelible stamp of infallibility, which the magisterium of the Church, as per dogmatic Catholic belief, has.

In short, ALL the rules of the Church and Catholicism can be found in this document and the documents produced by the valid Popes from 1917 to 1958 as official pronouncements ex-cathedra (from the chair of Peter, that is, a Pope can be a completely flawed man, but when he issues a decree officially from his position as Pope of Faith and Morals, we Catholics believe that pronouncement will be supernaturally protected from error, not because the Pope is infallible per se , but because Jesus promised He will always be with us, so a valid Pope cannot pronounce a heretical document.)

Now… according to the CoC of 1917, Roncalli, and all the other impostors became heretics by producing, promoting and promulgating the heretical Vatican II documents. In short, the ONLY actual Catholic clergy left are those that reject everyone who promoted and did not refute Vatican II and all its heresy.

Anyone claiming to be “Catholic clergy” who does not reject all of Vatican II and its fake “Popes” is absolutely NOT a Catholic, never mind validly ordained clergy.

Right… if you have followed all that, we now have reached the issue about sedeprivationism vs sedevacantism, which, ultimately, as it turns out, is just the latest Satanic attack against the last remaining Catholics.

A last point before we get into the autistic level of details (what, you thought the above was convoluted? Wait, you sweet innocent!): Some lost souls, like Ann Barnhardt, pretend that Ratzi the Nazi was a valid Pope, which is of course absurd as he was one of the main architects of Vatican II. Nevertheless these confused souls, illogical morons, or knowing deceivers, whichever the case may be individually, all “believe” that as Ratzi was the “Pope” when he died, because Bergy-the-oleous was clearly a Satanist from all he did, they too suddenly became “Sedevacantists”. But these are 2023 “Sedevacantists” (when Ratzi went to finally meet his master in Hell), which are, at best, just another deceived mass of well meaning (but erroneous) Catholics.

So, to be clear, when I say Sedevacantists, I am always referring to ACTUAL Sedevacantist, that is, those who recognise we have been without a valid Pope since the 9th of October of 1958; the day Pope Pious XII died.

Now contemplate this little image if you’re thinking Bergy-the-Oleous was, or Bob today is “Pope” instead of the Satanic defiler of the Church he is.

Sede vs Sede

Now we have reached a point that has been brewing behind the scenes for several years.

If you paid attention to the introduction, it should be obvious that the situation with Catholicism today is as follows:

1. There is a HUGE number of nominal Catholics4 that are almost entirely ignorant of these details and believe themselves to be Catholics in good faith and are increasingly becoming despondent, disillusioned, let down, distraught, and even leaving Catholicism because the constant heresy of the Pedophile Protector Jorge Bergoglio, pretender to the Throne of Peter, are so outrageous that no sane man can think he really is a Catholic of any sort, never mind a Pope. I mean, the placing of a demonic symbol of a baby-eating demon (Pachamama) on the altar of Christ during supposed Holy Mass, and then doing the ritual to that same demon in the Vatican with a bunch of “Cardinals” and “Bishops”, is kind of a clue. Even if you are deaf, dumb, blind, and have the IQ of a lobotomised rat on crack. To be clear these fooled/ignorant/lazy lay people, ARE catholics, but they have been fooled massively and are in error. However, if they have read this far, they now have an obligation to educate themselves on these matters, or else possibly become guilty of a mortal level sin of sloth. Because we’re not talking about leaving some dishes undone here. We are talking about not taking the time to learn the truth about your supposed faith, and thus your allegiance to God and Jesus Christ and the Truth above all.
2. There is also a HUGE number of INVALID and FAKE “Catholic” Clergy. These impostors are, in the first place NOT validly ordained, because the ritual for ordination was changed and thus made invalid; and in any case, heretics cannot ordain valid clergy. But even if they had been somehow validly ordained by someone legitimate, they become non-Catholics, and heretics, the minute they do not reject Vatican II and all its fake “Popes”. So, these are all just impostors in “Catholic” clothing. And even if a few of them might be well-meaning ignorants, then they are at best, criminally incompetent. Because being a “priest” and being unaware of these things is like saying you’re an engineer but have no clue what a bending moment is. Sorry buddy, if you really don’t know, there is no damned way you should EVER be let near a construction site, or, in their case, the supposed robes of a clergyman. But for the most part these people are absolutely knowing and conscious deceivers, as demonstrated by the homosexual orgies in the Vatican (Coccopalmieri etc.), the scandals of child abuse that have skyrocketed since the 1960s (and even earlier because the infiltration had been ongoing for a long time), and the continued heresies these freaks keep pushing.
3. Then there is a small number of still VALID Sedevacantist clergy, that, however, as we have been in an interregnum since 1958 (from the Latin “between realms” the period when one Pope dies and before another valid one is elected) have no jurisdictional authority at all. Because all jurisdictional authority derives from the Pope. So, valid Priests and Bishops can continue to dispense the sacraments, perform Holy Mass, and Bishops can ordain Priests and other Bishops,5 but there are no dioceses, and no Bishop nor priest has any authority over a specific territory, congregation, etc. In essence, all Bishops and Priests become first and foremost dispensers of sacraments, and teachers of catechism and Catholic dogma. And of course, they can keep teaching and doing their duties, but no layman is obligated by anything other than his own sense of what is right and true, and his conscience, to give his or her loyalty or obedience to any of them, beyond that of not behaving in a way that contravenes Catholicism. What I mean by this is that NO ONE, No Bishop, no Priest, currently has the right to tell a group of lay people “You can’t discuss theology amongst yourselves”.” Or, “You can’t take sacraments from THAT guy!” (pointing to another valid clergyman). This point is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT to keep in mind for a little later.
4. A generally unknown but relatively small number of laypeople that are Sedevacantists, are aware of these issues, and attend only valid masses given by valid clergy. And herein lies the snake.

Within the Sedevacantist movement, keeping in mind that no Bishop nor priest has any more power than any other. And none have any Jurisdiction over anything, because it all stems from, and is assigned by, the Pope; and only a VALID POPE can do that. Again, this is an extremely important point to remember.

Now, the thing about Catholicism is that it is ONE True Church, undivided. So, while the mouth-breathing and drooling retarded Protestants, devious “Catholic” Novus Orcians, Eastern Schismatics and other gnostics, all want to pretend Sedevacatists are just like Protestants because they don’t recognise the “Pope”, the truth, of course, is simply that we don’t recognise a wild otter as the Pope either. And Bergy-the-oleous and Ratzi the Nazi, and Wojtla the Pole, and Luciani the murdered would-be Vatican Banker Investigator, and Roncalli the Freemason, and Montini the handmaiden to Satan, and now Bob the American, along with all their imps, are no more Catholic than a wild otter either. And possibly considerably less so, in fact. So yeah, we don’t recognise ANY of them as clergy of Catholicism.

I mention that because, while it is true that Catholics are one, this does not mean there aren’t open debates about various theological things. So, if you are Catholic you absolutely must believe in the Trinity and say that conversion to Catholicism (or confirmation to it) must be done of your own free will without coercion, same with marriage and so on, but there are other things that can be thought of slightly different from different people, and here now enters the sulphuric smoke of what the deceivers love… Any tiny doubt, any discrepancy, any honest inquiry, becomes for them, a way to infiltrate and parasitically bend, and twist the truth so as to confuse, deceive, and deny both innocents and faithful alike into error.

So, let us now enter into the difference between what is known as the Totalist position of sedevacantism (aka correct Catholicism) and the sedeprivationist position of sedevacantism (aka flawed Catholicism).

The basic difference is that father Gerard de Lauriers, a theologian of note, came up with the theory of Cassiciacum (it was first published in the French magazine by that name). In my opinion, it was a way to explain to those clergy who may not have been immediately prone to saying “Wait a minute, Satan, this Vatican II stuff is ALL HERESY!” and throw Montini off the Papal throne, and preferably off the balcony into St. Peter’s square, you know, to send a bit of a message to the other Freemasons infesting the Vatican. It was a polite way of saying “Look guys, maybe you believed he was really a Pope, maybe you guys really are not Satanists too, and you just made a mistake, but once you read the Vatican II documents, and the totally heretical changes to the Mass (which is not permitted, as per the eternal Papal Encyclical Quo Primum ), surely you can see he really isn’t a Pope, and we should do something about it?”

In a nutshell, and yes, it is accurate, the Thesis (as I will call it from now on) is a long treatise that delves into philosophy, Aristotelian logic and so on, but in essence tries to say that a Pope can be a “Pope” from the “material” (Physical) aspect, but fail to be a real(TM) Pope “spiritually” if he doesn’t behave like one.

Now, this is absolute nonsense and completely illogical . As well as going against basic logic it also goes agains Catholic dogma. And while I believe Father (and later Bishop) De Lauriers had good intentions… well, sometimes the best efforts of mice and men still means good intentions lead straight to Hell eventually.

First of all, there is absolutely no way anyone can definitively say what anyone else’s “material” or “spiritual” intent is. In Catholicism we have two levels of knowledge concerning a human being and his “fitness” in relation to God:

An External forum and an Internal forum

The external forum is what we can all see, hear and know by the use of our senses. So, if someone acts pertinaciously and publicly in defection of the faith, we MUST judge him to be a heretic. This is not as if a priest makes a mistake at mass, or teaches something in genuine error and then when corrected figures it out and corrects himself. This is the persistent denial of Catholic Dogma by people who are supposed to be the protectors of it.

As for the internal forum, that is between each man and woman and God. Only He truly knows what is really going on inside them.

But that is NOT our concern. Our concern as Catholics is to:

a) Obey the infallible magisterium of the Church (eg CoC 1917), and

b) Call out heresy wherever we see it as obvious and clear. And nothing can be clearer than Vatican II, since those 16 documents upturn 2,000 years of dogma with total heresy, and were published in the most notorious fashion possible since they are supposed to be for the whole world. And as Cum-Ex Apostolato Officio clearly says, anyone who behaves as heretic must be treated as a heretic, and anyone that knowingly receives a heretic as if he was not one, becomes a heretic too.

This is really basic, and simple logic.

Canon 188 part 4 is absolutely clear:

Canon 188.

Ob tacitam renuntiationem ab ipso iure admissam quaelibet officia vacant ipso facto et sine ulla declaratione, si clericus:

4º A fide catholica publice defecerit;

Any office becomes vacant upon the fact and without any declaration by tacit resignation recognized by the law itself if a cleric:

4.° Publicly defects from the Catholic faith;

Note the important points:

UPON THE FACT – Their actions alone make it so.

WITHOUT ANY DECLARATION – NO ONE needs to make any pronouncement, judgement, investigation, nothing. Literally, no one needs to do anything at all to make this heretic finally be a heretic officially. It is done. The fact itself does it, and…

BY TACIT RESIGNATION – That is, again, no one need say anything or do anything, the instant resignation of that heretic’s position is caused by…

THE LAW ITSELF – The entire conviction and judgement is done by the law itself, that is, this rule itself. No judge, no tribunal, no congregation of cardinals, or anything else is required.

Just as if you sacrifice a baby on the altar, this means you are absolutely not a Catholic, and is not anything that ever needs to be discussed or argued about. The law is clear and unambiguous, and the logic is such that a 5 year old child gets it.

There is no mention of material/spiritual duality or weird separation of these things in some amorphous idea that has zero basis in Catholic dogma, basic logic, Canon Law, or indeed, common sense.

In essence, such a thesis is really basing itself on some version (not even necessarily correct) of Aristotelian “logic” and possibly a gnostic element of “duality”.

The way that the seminarians, priests, and Bishops that follow the Sedeprivationist Thesis defend this illogical, nonsensical idea, is by essentially appealing to “charity”. Which in many cases is certainly true charity in their heart, but this “giving the benefit of the doubt” is an absolute deadly error, and in fact goes against Canon Law and Catholic Dogma.

The Danger of Sedeprivationism

Because Sedeprivationists are essentially saying that not only the “Pope” but also all the fake Novus Ordo “clergy” are “materially” valid but “spiritually” invalid, potentially, all Bergolgio Bob, and his Satanic imps have to do, is say:

“Oh yeah, by the way guys, the sedes (without saying which ones) were right, Vatican II is really bad stuff, but hey it was only a “conciliar” council so, blah, blah, anyway, ok guys, we agree, Vatican II was bad. We all repent and we’re gonna be the good guys ok? Not getting caught raping little kids while we sort cocaine off each other’s asses anymore. Alright? We all good? Cool. Now come to our (invalid, fake, sacrilegious) Mass and be good Catholics!”

And at this point what would the nominally sedeprivationist clergy do? They would accept Bob, and his retinue of pedophiles, commies, 6 and Satanists as the now legitimate Catholic Clergy! After all, their “idea” has come true, the “Pope” has repented, and now all is well! Right?

Except…

NO!

Because from Cum-Ex Apostolato Officio (note especially the bold part):

• (ii) that, moreover, they shall be unfit and incapable in respect of these things and that they shall be held to be backsliders and subverted in every way, just as if they had previously abjured heresy of this kind in public trial; that they shall never at any time be able to be restored, returned, reinstated or rehabilitated to their former status or Cathedral, Metropolitan, Patriarchal and Primatial Churches, or the Cardinalate, or other honour, any other dignity, greater or lesser, any right to vote, active or passive, or authority, or Monasteries and benefices, or Countships, Baronies, Marquisates, Dukedoms, Kingships and positions of Imperial power; but rather that they shall be abandoned to the judgement of the secular power to be punished after due consideration, unless there should appear in them signs of true penitence and the fruits of worthy repentance, and, by the kindness and clemency of the See itself, they shall have been sentenced to sequestration in any Monastery or other religious house in order to perform perpetual penance upon the bread of sorrow and the water of affliction;
• (iii) that all such individuals also shall be held, treated and reputed as such by everyone, of whatsoever status, grade, order, condition or pre-eminence he may be and whatsoever excellence may be his, even Episcopal, Archiepiscopal, Patriarchal and Primatial or other greater Ecclesiastical dignity and even the honour of the Cardinalate, or secular, even the authority of Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor, and as such must be avoided and must be deprived of the sympathy of all natural kindess.

In short, once you have been a heretic, you simply CANNOT EVER be rehabilitated, and you will have authority over precisely NO ONE. Even if your repentance is accepted as valid, (which can only be done by a valid Pope) the very BEST you can hope for is to be locked away in a monastery to remain in perpetual penance until you drop dead.

It really can’t be made clearer than that.

But now, with Sedeprivationism, we have again, a snake entering the Church, and there are already rumblings of some sedeprivationist Bishops or Priest making some funny noises about maybe someone like Vigano could convince a few Cardinals and other Bishops to “repent” just like he did, and then vote in a “real” Pope this time. And then everyone can clap.

No. As I stated already in 2020 in my book Reclaiming the Catholic Church , at which time I was trying to redeem the word sedeprivationist, 7 I nevertheless stated that Vigano was a heretic, and that even if he were elected Pope tomorrow, he would just still be a fake “Pope” and a heretic. And even if he truly did repent and denounce not just Vatican II but all the false Popes (which to my understanding he still has not done, because he still considers them “valid” just like the SSPX, and other supposed “traditionalists”) by inviolable Catholic Dogma, and hence infallible and Divine Law, he should have authority over precisely NO ONE. Ever.

But, as I have repeatedly stated since, in any case, Vigano is a snake, and always has been. Vigano has a Phd in Canon Law and he received this long before the fake “new” canon law of 1983, created by the Satanists in the Novus Orco for the express purpose of trying to “delete”the last and real code of Canon Law that Catholicism ever needed, that of 1917. This means his Phd is precisely in Canon Law of 1917, that is, the REAL Canon Law. Which means it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, for him to NOT know that all the fake Popes and himself too, are not even Catholics, never mind valid clergy. They are Satanists, impostors, and at BEST heretics. And he kept silent for over 50 years, and NOW he pretends to be all for the “real” Church. But we have already seen a heretic like him, at best, should be locked away in a monastery in penance, what business does he have pretending he is anything but a heretic? None.

HOWEVER, we already have at least one Sedeprivationist Bishop and possibly others, and possibly sedeprivationist clergy too, that appear to be starting the rumours or posing the idea that well, if only Vigano repented, as he did (did he? Then why does he not denounce all the fake Popes as fake, and in any case, even if he does… monastery. Perpetual penance. Fin.) and his buddy cardinals did the same, and Bergy Bob, bites the dust, maybe they can just cause a “revolution” in the Church. That is: a fake takeover by one group of Satanists to replace another group of Satanists, in order to better fool the masses, who are starting to hear about Sedevacantists and 1958 Sedevacantists in particular, and starting to understand what the Totalist position is. And starting to ask more questions, and starting to become sedevacantists, and getting communities together, and producing lots of children, and living like actual Catholics.

So at this point, we need to ask:

Can we trust any sedeprivationist clergy to do the right thing and protect the church?

THAT is the question.

And some people reading this who are sedes of one type or another, will be deeply offended by this question, because trained like dogs to obey their Bishops or Priests, even when they are flat out wrong (which is how we got here in the first place) makes them think I must be wrong.

For a number of reasons:

1. Sedeprivationist clergy are still valid clergy, whatever their errors may be. This is true (for now).
2. There are undoubtedly very honest, good, innocent Priests and possibly even a Bishop or two who are genuine and have too been fooled by a lot of words, and their overabundance of “charity” in giving the Satanists a totally unwarranted and erroneous “benefit of the doubt”. I say let’s call it niceness, though, not charity, because real charity can include the shooting someone in the face to put them out of their misery, and in my view, these type of Priests and Bishops are all the types who would hold the suffering guy’s hand to the end and deliver last rites (which is fine, no one expects or needs them to be like me, God forbid) but far too nice to do such a sometimes needed thing. And THAT, paradoxically is the problem. I am no one special, I am not clergy, I am just a layman and a very imperfect one at that (genuinely, this is not false modesty) but if and when a real crusade begins, I’m the guy you want at the command of your troops, or in your foxhole. And surely I need good people behind me, because so busy might I get in the battle, I may well forget to do the right thing and say a Hail Mary over the fallen enemies I would trample by the hundreds given half a chance. The fact these good men exist in the ranks of the sedeprivationists is not in doubt by me, but neither is the fact that they are in error with respect to the validity of the Thesis.
3. Humans get attached to their ideas, and only few of them are the ones who can turn on a dime once their idea has been demonstrated to be wrong. So, even if someone following a sedeprivationist clergyman started to get some doubts, it’s unlikely they would begin to rock the boat too much. And when some “rude bastard” like me comes storming in upsetting applecarts, and making waves for fishing boats, and whipping everyone into a theological frenzy, they react like wounded animals and tend to attack the messenger instead of the culprits.
4. Some, regardless of what they are, are always brainwashed in one way or other. Be they Clown World believers or the most devout Catholics.

In any case, the answer to the question, regardless of how anyone feels about it, is clearly NO. We cannot trust them.

Because they are holding on to a nonsensical, invalid, and completely outdated theory that is now obvious has no basis in fact . And it is this Thesis, and this Thesis alone, that might (falsely) “redeem” the Viganos of the Satanic Novus Orco cult, and thus reduce the numbers of real Catholics even further.

The reality is that there is even the potential that perhaps one or more of the sedeprivationist clergy are actually consciously aiming for this. Whether under misguided good intentions or intentional evil devious ones, only God knows, but certainly, one could see how what Rodney Stark calls a clergyman of Power, say a Bishop, who is more concerned with establishing greater and grander Churches and seminaries and perhaps glorifying himself as the leader and saviour of the “ real” Church, might just feel that if he manages to convince the Viganos of the world to denounce Bergoglio , Bob, hey, maybe he can become the next “Pope”, or if not, at least he can be part of the “saviours” of the Church and his influence and power will increase. And potentially he may well be so poorly educated in Canon Law, Catholicism, reality and truth, that his avarice, his greed for power, blinds him to the truth, and maybe in his heart of hearts he believes it’s a good thing (honestly I find this implausible. Again, you cannot be a Bishop and not consciously know these things).

But in any case, whether misguided or intentionally trying to further destroy the remnant of the real Catholic Church, such a Bishop, would absolutely be furthering the goals of the devil and the other devils currently squatting like Gargoyles in the Vatican.

How to Identify Problematic Sedeprivationist Clergy

In the first place, you can immediately conclude that ANY sedeprivationist clergy is in error with regard to the Thesis, and as such, even if honest and good men, to be first of all made aware of these issues and then see how they react.

But that aside, we can immediately tell if any clergy is abusing their power if they act in total contravention of Canon Law.

For example:

1. Do they claim to have authority where none exists (because we are in an interregnum)? If yes, they are talking nonsense, should be immediately called out on it, and be asked to correct their error. In private first, as the bible commands, with a few friends or colleagues, preferably other clergy, if any will be so brave, in a second instance, and finally publicly and openly if they still do not reverse their error. Bishop Sanborn falls into this category and I have done exactly all of the above.
2. Do they deny the sacraments to the faithful on the basis of either the thesis or their error in 1 above? If yes they are now also breaking Divine Law and are committing a serious error and sin against the faithful. Again, Bp. Sanborn has done this.
3. How do they answer the question of a heretic supposedly never being allowed to return to a position of ANY authority in the Church? Other than by falsely claiming that Cum Ex Apostolato Officio is “abrogated”8 or that “well some guy somewhere was allowed to return to his clerical duties at some point so it must be okay.” Which is nonsense, because even if it were true, (which to my knowledge so far it invariably is not true),9 any previous error that may have been committed, is not a sanction to re-do it. What arguments do they have against this? (Pro-tip: none exist, only waffling). Again, Bp. Sanborn, and hi Sanbornites, tend to try this tactic.
4. Do they bar would-be seminarians from studying at their seminary unless they adopt the erroneous Thesis? If yes, then again, they are perverting the path of would-be good clergy, and forcing onto them an erroneous belief system in a false theology. Once again, Bishop Sanborn has done this.

So, if your Bishop has done any of these things, and continues to defend the Thesis with nonsensical appeals to “we need a judgment” or “no one can judge the Pope” that is a flat out lie. We can no longer call it a mere “error”. As Sedevacantists, we are not “judging a Pope”, first he is not the Pope, and secondly the infallible magisterium of the Church in the form of CoC 1917 does so by the law itself, not us. You need to realise that anyone acting like Bishop Sanborn has been doing now for years, is NOT protecting the church, and valid Bishop though he may be, he absolutely does NOT deserve your respect at a human level. He needs to correct himself, repent and heal himself and become a FAR better custodian of the church before he really opens his mouth on anything else. Valid Bishop though he may be. For now. Because he is now beginning to stray rather deeply into territory that smells of sulphurous heresy.

Why deprive him of all human respect, though? Even if you acknowledge (as I do) the validity of his orders? Again, let me point out how heretics are to be treated, as per Cum Ex Apostolate officio:

(iii) that all such individuals also shall be held, treated and reputed as such by everyone, of whatsoever status, grade, order, condition or pre-eminence he may be and whatsoever excellence may be his, even Episcopal, Archiepiscopal, Patriarchal and Primatial or other greater Ecclesiastical dignity and even the honour of the Cardinalate, or secular, even the authority of Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor, and as such must be avoided and must be deprived of the sympathy of all natural kindess

See that emphasised phrase? Now, any valid clergy that refuses to give sacraments, under pretence of needing to be heeded as if they have jurisdiction, or refuses to allow would-be seminarians to study at their seminary unless they adopt the nonsensical Thesis, or refuses sacraments to Catholics that do not adhere to the Thesis, are not (yet) full blow heretics, but they absolutely are bad for the church and should be called on it.

And removing any human respect from them is the first step towards giving them a little taste of what becoming a heretic further down the line might feel like.

Also, it removes their power over the congregation, whom are slowly but surely leading to Hell, as more and more congregants engage with what may at first appear “scandalous” to them, but in time, if they bother to research it on their own, they will see is simply the unvarnished dogmatic truth of Catholicism.

Lastly, you need to consider the possibility they are infiltrators too, or bought out by their own greed and lust for power.

Unfortunately you can never let your guard down. The enemies of the church are Legion, and this time of darkness has been prophesied by many Catholic Saints through the ages and by our lady of La Salette and Fatima (despite the many attempts to deviate, change, and confuse the actual events as they took place).

Conclusions

This long post is merely a retelling, this time with name attached, against that Bishop (Sanborn) and any other clergy (that for now remain unnamed) that know very well who they are.

I was aware of their errors at least seven years ago, and I pointed them out openly to the congregations they affected. I also offered Bishop Sanborn a chance to correct himself privately, and offered that if he did so I would immediately apologise for my calling out his erroneous behaviour and respect him as the valid Bishop he is but also as a theologian. His response was to tell me I could no longer receive sacraments from him. As details in the post with his name on it of a few days ago.

Supposedly because on my ( original and still current ) blog I had the image of a naked ex-girlfriend in the gallery. A picture posted there many years before I ever became Catholic, and with the total approval and acceptance of the woman in question. Besides, she is tastefully posed and there are more pornographic paintings and sculptures by well-known patrons of the Catholic Church when it was still Catholic. See, for example the sculpture of David below.

The implication of his “banning” me, being none of “his” priests, trained in his seminary would likely offer them to me either, which of course was NOT the case, because any clergy knows that without Jurisdiction, no Bishop can impose such a rule on any clergy. And in any case his reason for denying me sacraments was rooted solely in the fact that I pointed out the authority he was claiming to have over a group of faithful Catholics was non-existent. My blog wasn’t going to change, because I have never been in the habit of being a hypocrite or changing my history to suit the present moment. In fact, many, many, people have come to Catholicism proper (1958 sedevacantism of the Totalist position) precisely because in BELIEVE! I don’t mince my words nor deny who I was and how I came to become a Catholic (with no one being more surprised by my conversion than me).

After his email telling me I was banned from receiving sacraments from him I replied, that very well, he had made his choice. And now we would see what would transpire over the years to come. This was in November of 2019. In the intervening fiv e six and a half years, the emails, and comments, and messages, and rumours, from Catholics as far apart as Australia, the USA, the UK, mainland Europe and so on, began to trickle in. I was not the only one who had noticed this behaviour. Nor was I the only one who had seen the grab for power and the attempt to spread and infiltrate the Thesis into all sedevacantist circles.

Unbeknownst to me, there were others that rejected the Thesis and also had far stronger motives for doing so, and a lot more context on the players involved and the history behind their actions as well as the history of Sedevacantism from as far back as the 1950s.

With the recent death of Father Anthony Cekada and Bishop Daniel Dolan however, a lot of the Totalist “fighters” lost their impetus, and the Thesis side has continued to advance. Or at least, so it appeared.

Now think ahead, regardless of how you feel about the people involved, one path clearly leads to eventual perdition, and the other does not. So… what are you going to do?

Keep silent and keep your head down, and make no waves? Like you grandfather or great-grandfather, and your parents before you while the Church was being infested and corroded by parasites?

Or are you going to speak up and point a finger and say: “You! Change. Fix this. Admit your error and turn back while you still can, or else say you will not and prove who you really serve.”

Is it necessary to be as confrontational as this post? As I tend to be?

No. Surely not.

BUT… do NOT be weak. DO NOT be silent.

You can be as well-educated and as polite and erudite as you like. Certainly these are virtues, of which I am not a great owner, and you can surely present your case better than me; but just as steadfastly.

But without a doubt, it is now time to find out if you are a Catholic man, who serves Jesus Christ, the Truth, and God, regardless of the cost, or if you are a mouse. One that may well soon inhabit a false Church.

Only you can decide. Study, confirm and verify what I write here so crudely. By all means. But once you know, and don’t take too long, if you are a man, act.

May God’s Grace fill your heart and mind, may He protect you and guide you.

All glory is to and for God alone.

Let His Will be done.

Subscribe now

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here

Aside the fact that their Thesis makes no sense, is circular in reasoning, devoid of any historical excuse for ever having existed, and is just completely inverse to reality due to their simply being intellectually incapable of understanding the vast difference between Roman Law (on which Catholic Canon Law is based) and the absurdity and travesty of Justice that is all forms of Anglo-Saxon “common” Law or worse still, American Jurisprudence; we can also see that Sedeprivationism is a fringe, minority position. One driven mostly by a cult of personality and the blackmailing of parishioners and seminarians alike that unless they adopt the sedeprivationist position, they may not receive orders, and I know from personal experience some parishioners have been threatened with not being allowed to receive sacraments if they also attended CMRI masses.

Subscribe now

Share

Let’s start by looking at some numbers, somewhat imprecise though they may be.

Q1. How many sedevacantist (1958) Bishops are there in the world (i.e. presumably actually Catholic)?

There’s no registry, and any count depends on which filter you apply to “valid.” Three filters are in play and they give different numbers:

Filter 1 — sacramentally valid consecration (pre-1968 rite, valid matter/form/intent, traceable apostolic succession). This admits quite a few, including much of the wider Thuc-line fringe.

Filter 2 — publicly professing sedevacantism (excluding sedeprivationists like the IMBC, conclavists like the Palmarians or Bawden, and “resistance” non-sedes like SSPX/Williamson successors).

Filter 3 — mutually recognized within mainstream sedevacantist circles (the real bottleneck — SSPV has historically questioned Thuc-line validity over Thục’s faculties in his final years; Thuc-line camps in turn sometimes question things on the other side).

Taking the intersection of all three — publicly sedevacantist, sacramentally credible, and actively functioning as of late 2025 / early 2026 — the core is remarkably small. The best-accepted bishops are in two succession streams:

Méndez line (universally accepted because Méndez was a pre-Vatican II Roman bishop consecrated under papal mandate, 1960):

• Bp. Joseph Santay (CSPV/SSPV, cons. 2007)
• Bp. James Carroll (CSPV, cons. 2018)

Kelly died December 2023, so SSPV/CSPV is now down to these two.

Thuc line (Carmona → Pivarunas branch):

• Bp. Mark Pivarunas (CMRI, cons. 1991)
• Bp. Giles Butler (CMRI)
• Bp. Martín Dávila Gándara (Unión Católica Trento, Mexico, cons. 1999)
• Bp. Andrés Morello (Argentina)
• Bp. Germán Fliess (CMRI)
• Bp. Rodrigo da Silva (Brazil, cons. 2021 by Dolan shortly before Dolan’s death in 2022)
• Bp. Roy (Our Lady of Joy Mission) Cons. 2024 by da Silva. Eastern Canada (Maritimes), French-speaking apostolate, ex-SSPX

Thuc line (des Lauriers → McKenna → Sanborn branch — strictly sedeprivationist, but adjacent and often counted):

• Bp. Donald Sanborn (RCI, cons. 2002)
• Bp. Joseph Selway (cons. 2018)
• Bp. Geert Stuyver (IMBC, Belgium) — IMBC proper

So the realistic mainstream count sits around 9–13 actively functioning bishops worldwide, depending on whether you admit the sedeprivationists and where you draw the line on smaller Latin-American operations. If you widen to include anyone with a plausible Thuc-line claim who identifies as sedevacantist (independent chapel bishops, small breakaway groups), you can push it into the 20s or low 30s, but most of those are disputed even internally.

Two caveats that matter for the 1958 framing:

1. The recent deaths of Dolan (April 2022) and Kelly (December 2023) — plus Cekada (2020) — thinned the Anglophone bench substantially. Carroll and Selway are the youngest, and consecration activity is rare.
2. If you apply strict 1958 criteria and reject the 1968 Pontificalis Romani episcopal rite as doubtful, you still get the same answer for this cohort, because nearly all of these bishops (or their consecrators going back to Thục 1938 and Méndez 1960) pre-date 1968 or use the traditional rite.

The functional episcopate keeping the sacraments available for a global sedevacantist population of ~30,000 is, in other words, tiny — roughly a dozen men, heavily concentrated in the US with outposts in Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and Europe.

Q2. Approximately how many sedevacantist priests are there?

Best estimate: ~120–180 priests worldwide, with a likely error band of roughly ±40.

Breaking it down by group, using current public directories and the most reliable available counts:

• CMRI (Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen) — the largest single body. Its directory currently lists Mass centres in 12+ U.S. states plus Canada, Mexico, New Zealand, Australia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Poland, Czech Republic, Germany, the UK, Russia (including Crimea), and Italy. Older sources cited 12 priests; the present footprint and the active Mater Dei seminary suggest something closer to 25–35 active priests today.
• Sanborn / Roman Catholic Institute + Most Holy Trinity Seminary — successor network to Dolan’s Cincinnati operation. Probably 15–25 priests across the U.S., with associated chapels in Europe and Latin America.
• SSPV / CSPV (Kelly’s group, now under Bps. Santay and Carroll) — a tighter U.S./Canada-only operation. Roughly 15–20 priests.
• IMBC (Istituto Mater Boni Consilii) — sedeprivationist rather than strictly sedevacantist, but commonly counted in this universe. Based in Italy, with priests in France, Belgium, Spain, and a few other locations. Around 15–20 priests.
• Sociedad Sacerdotal Trento (Mexico, under Bp. Dávila) plus the Carmona-line Mexican network — 10–15 priests.
• Argentina / Brazil clusters — Morello’s group (CJM, Argentina), Bp. da Silva’s seminary in São Paulo, plus the smaller Mexican-derived missions — 10–20 priests combined.
• Independents — sedevacantist priests not affiliated with any of the above, including former SSPX/CMRI/SSPV men running solo chapels and missions in the U.S., France, Italy, Spain, the UK, the Philippines, Vietnam, etc. — 20–40 priests, and this is the largest source of uncertainty because no one tracks them centrally.
• Conclavist and fringe groups (Palmarian remnants, Bawden’s group, the late Pulvermacher’s “True Catholic Church,” etc.) — usually excluded from a strict count, but if included add 5–15 more.

Sum of midpoints: ~135. Sum of low bounds: ~95. Sum of high bounds: ~175. Adding a margin for overlooked Latin American, Eastern European, and Asian missions gets you to roughly the 120–180 band, with ~150 ± 40 as a reasonable point estimate.

Q3. How Many Religious are approximately Sedevacantist?

There’s even less data here than for priests, because religious communities don’t publish member counts the way dioceses publish ordination figures. Working from what’s documented:

Best estimate: ~150–250 religious (sisters + non-priest brothers/monks) worldwide, central figure around 200 ± 60.

Women religious — the bulk of the total:

• CMRI Sisters (Mount St. Michael, Spokane; City of Mary, Rathdrum; and the various school foundations). Older sources cited about 50 sisters; the 2007 split removed 15 who reconciled with Rome, but vocations have continued and a new novitiate is being built. Realistic current count: 40–60 sisters, plus novices.
• Daughters of Mary, Mother of Our Savior (Round Top NY motherhouse, ~20 sisters in Long Island, ~11 in White Bear Lake MN) — founded by Bp. Kelly in 1984, associated with SSPV/CSPV. Total roughly 45–65 sisters.
• Sisters of St. Thomas Aquinas — small U.S. sedevacantist congregation, perhaps 10–20 sisters.
• Congregation of the Mother of God — also small, U.S.-based, 5–15 sisters.
• Carmelites of the Holy Face (Thuc-line foundations, mostly in Mexico) and various small Dominican and Carmelite tertiary groups affiliated with the CMRI and Sanborn networks — collectively perhaps 15–30 sisters.
• European and Latin American convents associated with IMBC (Italy), Bp. Stuyver (Belgium), the SST (Mexico), CJM (Argentina), and Bp. da Silva’s seminary network (Brazil) — small, scattered, perhaps 15–35 sisters combined.

That gives roughly 130–225 sisters worldwide.

Men religious who are not priests — a much smaller category:

• CMRI Brothers (lay brothers and seminarians not yet ordained at Mount St. Michael and Mater Dei) — perhaps 10–20.
• CSPV Brothers (Round Top) — a handful, 2–5.
• Most Holy Family Monastery (the Dimond brothers in Fillmore NY) — formally claims to be a Benedictine monastery but is essentially a two-brother operation with perhaps a few associates; mainstream sedevacantists generally do not recognise its religious standing. 2–10 depending on what you count.
• Monastery of the Holy Cross, Nova Friburgo (Brazil) — small Benedictine community linked first to Williamson, now with sedevacantist sympathies through Bp. da Silva. 5–15.
• Various OFM and Capuchin friars who appear in CMRI directories (Fr. Francis Miller OFM, Fray Leon Speróni OFM Cap., etc.) — these are mostly already ordained, so they’d already be in the priest count, but a few non-ordained brothers exist in these clusters. 5–15.

That gives roughly 25–60 brothers/monks worldwide.

Sum: approximately 155–285 religious , with my central estimate at ~200 .

Why the error band is so wide:

1. Convent populations turn over silently. Unlike priest ordinations (which get announcements), sister entrances, professions, and departures rarely make the public record. The Daughters of Mary’s loss of one sister to a 1988 family-instigated removal made the news; routine departures don’t.
2. Definitional scope. If you count only solemnly-professed sisters, the number drops by perhaps 20–30%. If you count novices and postulants, it rises again.
3. The “third-order” and oblate question. Several of these communities have associated lay tertiaries, oblates, or “consecrated virgins” who live a quasi-religious life without formal vows. Including them adds perhaps 30–80 more, mostly women.
4. Latin American visibility is very low. The CMRI directory lists sisters in Mexico and Argentina but doesn’t give numbers; similarly, the Mexican Trento and Carmona-derived networks have small religious houses that appear in passing references only.
5. Dimond-type “monasteries” are a category problem. MHFM and a few similar one- or two-person operations call themselves monasteries but have no canonical standing even among other sedevacantists. Counting them is largely arbitrary.

Ratios worth noting:

Against ~150 priests, ~200 religious gives a religious-to-priest ratio of roughly 1.3 : 1 , which is dramatically lower than the historical Catholic ratio (globally somewhere between 4:1 and 7:1 throughout the 20th century before the post-conciliar collapse). The sedevacantist movement is, in other words, structurally clergy-heavy and short on contemplative and active sisters — partly because forming a religious community requires more lay infrastructure than forming a chapel does, and partly because the demographic pool feeding sedevacantism is small enough that the men who feel called to consecrated life are funnelled almost entirely into the priesthood, where they’re more urgently needed.

Against ~30,000 laity, roughly 1 religious per 150 faithful — again, much higher than the modern global Catholic ratio, but driven entirely by the small denominator.

Q. 4 Extrapolating from all of the above, can we divide the populations of 1958 sedevacantists from the ones of sedeprivationists, by n. of bishops, priests, and laity that follows one route over the other?

First some distinctions: “1958 sedevacantist” isn’t strictly synonymous with “all sedevacantists who aren’t sedeprivationists.” Historically there have been intermediate positions (the See vacant from 1963, or from 1965, or from Paul VI’s promulgation of the Novus Ordo in 1969). In practice, however, those intermediate positions have largely collapsed —partly through CMRI’s intellectual influence, partly through generational attrition— so today “strict sedevacantist” ≈ “1958 position” for roughly 90%+ of the strict camp. The remainder (a few independent priests, some older laity holding Paul VI as valid but his successors not) is small enough to round into the 1958 column without much distortion.

Why laity skews even more 1958 than clergy does:

The clergy split is roughly 70/30 (1958/sedeprivationist), but the laity split is closer to 78/22 (~25,000/~7,000 of an estimated ~32,000 total). Three reasons:

1. CMRI’s chapel density. CMRI alone runs ~120 Mass centres globally — more than the entire sedeprivationist world combined. Each centre may only see a priest monthly, but the laity attached to it count as part of the 1958 universe.
2. Sedeprivationism is an intellectual/clerical position. The Cassiciacum thesis requires lay understanding of the materialiter / formaliter distinction to be consciously adopted. Most laity attending IMBC or RCI chapels are functionally just “trad Catholics who don’t trust the post-conciliar popes” and would not, if asked, articulate the Cassiciacum framework. They’re counted here as sedeprivationist by chapel affiliation, but their actual position is closer to undifferentiated traditionalism.
3. Strict sedevacantism has the more emotionally compelling story. “The See has been vacant since 1958” is intelligible to a lay Catholic in a way that “the popes are material but not formal” is not. This matters for retention and for the conversion of SSPX/independent laity who arrive at the position through reading Bellarmine or Pius XII rather than through systematic theology.

Important caveats and known gaps:

• The ~32,000 total laity figure is itself uncertain (Wikipedia uses ~30,000, citing pre-2010 estimates; a realistic 2026 figure is probably 30,000–40,000 given two decades of slow growth from SSPX defections and trad-Catholic conversions). The percentage split is more reliable than the absolute numbers.
• The SSPV/CSPV is officially silent on the 1958 question —Bp. Kelly was famously cautious about formal declarations— but the clergy and laity functionally occupy the 1958 position, so they are placed there.
• The “una cum” sedevacantists embedded in SSPX (perhaps 9–12 priests + a hard-to-estimate number of laity) are excluded entirely; if counted as 1958-leaning, they would push that column up by maybe 1,000–3,000 laity.
• Conclavists (Bawden’s “Pope Michael II” successors, Palmarian remnants) are excluded; they are technically 1958 sedevacantists who have resolved the vacancy by electing their own pope, and add perhaps 500–2,000 more if you want to count them.

The takeaway ratio: for every sedeprivationist bishop there are roughly 2 strict 1958 bishops; for every sedeprivationist priest, roughly 2.5 strict; for every sedeprivationist layperson, roughly 3.5 strict. The 1958 position is the dominant operational form of the rejection of the post-conciliar Roman claimants — by a wide and probably widening margin, are in aggregate larger and more vocations-rich than IMBC’s formation house in Verrua Savoia.

Subscribe now

Share

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here

I am one of those people who, when someone starts to talk about diets, healthy eating, and vitamins and supplements, my brain switches off, eyes glaze over, and I mentally check out, thinking about chasing down politicians, galloping at them on a mottled horse, on the grasslands of Argentina or the steppes of Mongolia, either with a lever action Winchester, or a medieval lance.

Now, if you are similarly inclined, you may want to read this post and check out the short, easy to follow, and filler-free booklet I produced at the end of this post.

But so you know it’s not just some grift shoved together to make a quick buck, below, I give you the context behind how I came up with it and why.

Subscribe now

Share

Of course, if you don’t care about that, just scroll to the bottom and order the book by the pallet load. I created it to be genuinely healthy, easy to use and as practical and useful as possible in a compact yet more complete way than I have seen in books ten times the size, but I am not averse to making any money from it if people find it useful.

How it works, what’s in it, and what it does

I think of it similarly to my also short book BELIEVE! That has now had well over a 100 people convert to proper Catholicism (Sedevacantist). The reason it had that effect is because it was written without filler, without apology, and truthfully, from a perspective most people can relate to because it’s based in reality, not some theoretical, dry, theological perspective. It’s certainly not like any book on theology you ever read.

And similarly, this is unlike any health book you ever read, and it covers a lot more than most:

• fasting and why it is beneficial (with protocols to follow), including supplements to take daily.
• Healthy eating, with day to day foods you can eat at breakfast, lunch and dinner, along with any supplements.
• Exercise routines week by week for the stages of refeeding (for longer fasts you need to restart eating carefully); building up muscle and fitness over a period of weeks, and a routine for long-term maintenance.
• 8 recipes for making your own fermented foods that will help rebalance and fix your gut biome.

And all in 48 pages, and leaving you some 24 pages blank for notes and recording your targets, results and so on.

The point is for you to be able to read this and hit the ground running, whether you want to fast or not, just eat healthier, or exercise properly. Or any combination of the three. No filler, no nonsense, just the facts.

Why and How I came to do this

In about 2014, quite suddenly, I noticed that I suddenly had some weird symptoms that I never had before. Excess bloating, my tongue felt weird and developed spots, and I just felt more run-down than I ever had. Doctor I went to didn’t figure any of it out, and It seemed things did not improve. Then in 2016 I moved to Venice for a year and a random acquaintance on facebook told me it sounded like I had excess Candida. So I did a Candida clearing protocol, 3 day fast and strict ketogenic diet for about 3 months. I literally only ate bresaola, octopus, occasional fish and meat only stew and once a month a tub of plain yoghurt. i deopped to my peak fighting weight and was very fit and healthy.

Then in 2017 I moved back to London, my now wife moved in as girlfriend then fiancée, and finally wife in 2018, and over the last 9 years we moved home twice and changed country, and had four children from 2019 to 2025. The time and pressure of fixing up the house in Italy, keep the farm in some semblance of order and doing writing meant my diet and lifestyle took a big dive, and at 56 you don’t recover as you do at 26 or even 36.

For the last year or so we have all been in less than ideal health, and in 2021 I had a bad bout of Covid then in 2022 two bouts of pneumonia that nearly killed me and getting back to a fit state has been a hard long road. Over the last year and a half I have build a mini-gym in the forest, and am having a special static resistance training frame built just for me and the wife, and I decided to take control of my health.

As a result, I did a bunch of research once and for all, and realised part of the reason why I glaze over when people talk about this “health stuff” is because it’s so generic, doesn’t cover the things I KNOW about what works and does not work and is paradoxically also over-specific in weird little ways that are not adequate for me or maybe anyone other than the person talking.

In researching this stuff, I wanted to design a protocol that got rid of Candida as much as possible and kept it gone, that reduced visceral fat, and got me back to a fit state, able to perform the kind of activities I always did, martial arts, swimming, and spinning (static bike work to maintain my knees. After years of karate and hiking with heavy bags I am one of the few people that has not had a knee operation, and God willing, I’ll keep it that way.)

That protocol will work for most people that don’t have some fairly serious underlying medical concerns, and possibly (followed by proper medical advice) may even cure or alleviate such issues. Given that Candida excess is essentially now a fairly global issue, especially in the West where it is almost impossible to eat food that is not processed and has loads of sugar in it, I felt many more people than just me could benefit from it.

So, after I figured out my own 14 day fast protocol in autistic detail, and did the fast, I also realised the wiggle room available for it and that it was essentially the same kind of protocol that would work for most more or less healthy adults. It seemed a shame to keep it to myself, so the booklet was born out of my wish to share the health, absent all the personal anecdotes, wishy-washy filler to fill an entire book with 99% irrelevant minutiae, making the book practically unusable for anyone serious, unless they took notes and essentially created their own version of the booklet I just built. And who has time for that?

So, you got all the anecdotes here on this blog post, all the filler and the booklet is clean, direct, and even has space for any changes or adjustments you may want to include for your specific regimen.

One small request: If you buy it and find it useful, whether on Amazon or my site, in either case, PLEASE leave a review.

Here it is, now available in physical paper format on:

• Amazon.com in America
• Amazon.co.uk in the UK
• Amazon.de in Germany
• Amazon.ca in Canada
• Amazon.it in Italy

And all the other Amazons around the world too.

If you want a cheaper digital only copy as a PDF you can print yourself or read on a screen, you can get it at my personal book store here: The Easy Spartan Guide to Health

Subscribe now

Share

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here

¹⁵ But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.

¹⁶ And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.

¹⁷ And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

— Matthew 18: 15-17

A Warning:

This is long, if you don’t care about the proof for the necessity of this, you can simply skip to the videos of Bishop Sanborn, where he convicts himself, —at minimum— of truly disordered thinking, in the most charitable of possibilities.

Part I – The Duty to Call-Out Heresy, Error, and Attacks on the Church

Before I point out the utter shambles that is the “reasoning” of Bishop Sanborn, by simply using his own words against him, and especially since I know there will be a great uproar of HOW DARE YOU from the cult of personality he has built over the years, 1 let me first of all establish with absolute clarity, the duty EVERY Catholic has to call out heresy, and therefore, my obligation to do so. Not out of personal vehemence or opinion, but due to absolute, and perpetually immutable, Divine Law, enshrined in the Bible, Canon Law, and Catholic tradition.

The case is already made in the passages from Matthew 18 above, which comes directly from our Lord Jesus Christ, and should suffice already on its own, but just for completion, here are the relevant Canons from the Code of Canon Law of 1917:

Canon 188

Cross-Refs.: 1917 CIC 156, 1444, 2168, 2314, 2379, 2388

Any office becomes vacant upon the fact and without any declaration by tacit resignation recognized by the law itself if a cleric:

…

4.° Publicly defects from the Catholic faith;

…

Canon 1324

It is not enough to avoid heretical depravity, but also those errors should be diligently fled that more or less approach [heresy]; therefore, all must observe the constitutions and decrees by which these sorts of depraved opinions are proscribed and prohibited by the Holy See.

Canon 1325

§ 1. The faithful of Christ are bound to profess their faith whenever their silence, evasiveness, or manner of acting encompasses an implied denial of the faith, contempt for religion, injury to God, or scandal for a neighbor.

§ 2. After the reception of baptism, if anyone, retaining the name Christian, pertinaciously denies or doubts something to be believed from the truth of divine and Catholic faith, [such a one is] a heretic; if he completely turns away from the Christian faith, [such a one is] an apostate; if finally he refuses to be under the Supreme Pontiff or refuses communion with the members of the Church subject to him, he is a schismatic.

§ 3. Let Catholics beware lest they have debates or conferences, especially public ones, with non-Catholics without having come to the Holy See or, if the case is urgent, to the local Ordinary.

Canon 2315

One suspected of heresy who, having been warned, does not remove the cause of suspicion is prohibited from legitimate acts; if he is a cleric, moreover, the warning having been repeated without effect, he is suspended from things divine; but if within six months from contracting the penalty, the one suspected of heresy does not completely amend himself, let him be considered as a heretic and liable to the penalties for heretics.

Canon 2316

Whoever in any manner willingly and knowingly helps in the promulgation of heresy, or who communicates in things divine with heretics against the prescription of Canon 1258, is suspected of heresy.

Canon 2317

Cross-Ref.: 1917 CIC 1347

Those pertinaciously teaching and defending, whether publicly or privately, doctrines that have been condemned by the Apostolic See or a General Council, but not formally defined as heretical, are prevented from the ministry of preaching the word of God and [from the ministry] of hearing sacramental confessions and from any office of teaching, with due regard for other penalties that a sentence of condemnation might establish or that an Ordinary, after a warning, concludes were necessary to repair scandal.

And lastly, in Catholic Tradition : It has always been the case that the armed non-clerical part of the Church, that is, the normal laity, usually (but not always) led by the Nobility, has always held a position that is normally subjugate to the clerical part of the Church. The Order of hierarchy, in terms of doctrine is Pope —> Bishops —> Priests —> Nobility —> Laity. However, because it is the duty of every Catholic to call out error, or heresy, and not have anything to do with it, the Nobility and Laity have, as a last resort, the possibility to revolt, and remove from office even standing supposed Popes, if they promulgate heresy, and such events have happened multiple times in Church history, as they should have.

Now that the Principle is established, allow me also to demonstrate that the conditions in Matthew 16 and 17 have also been fulfilled, and long ago too.

Part II – The Conditions for Public Reprimand Being Fulfilled

Bishop Sanborn, towards the end of 2019, on his own authority decided to replace the people that had been responsible for organising the Mass in London, with is own Protégé. The previous Co-ordinator and his family had organised the venue, collected the priests from wherever they were arriving, be it airport or train station, bringing them to the venue, along with all the relevant paraphernalia for the Mass, setting it up, and performing their duties during the Mass, ofter as altar servers, in order to help the priest perform it. And had done so peacefully and well for years. This sudden and abrupt change of co-ordinator was done against the wishes of the small Catholic community that was present, and had been present, in London for years; a trouble-free, small community of faithful that met every week for Holy Mass, prayers, and some camaraderie.

It was gently pointed out to Bishop Sanborn that he had no authority to do this, since Canonically, absent a valid Pope, as we have been since 9th October 1958, no cleric has jurisdiction over any diocese on Earth. He ignored this. Forcefully, he immediately asked that all financial accounts be handed over to his authority, along with all the duties that the previous people had been performing dutifully, unpaid, and out of simple devotion to the faith be immediately handed over to his new protégé.

Again, Bishop Sanborn was warned this was really something he had no authority to do, but he claimed he had moral authority to do so. This, of course, is nonsense. Firstly, there has never been any such thing canonically to override the express fact that absent a Pope no cleric has jurisdiction to do anything other than provide sacraments, the Mass, and basic, ordinary instruction. In fact, even the passing on of orders to new clergy is simply assumed due to the law of silent assent. That is, it is assumed to be valid, but if and when a new and valid Pope is ever elected, that Pope may well revoke such ordinations. If he says nothing however, they are assumed valid, since in Roman Law silence is equivalent to assent. But in the second place, no one can claim moral authority for themselves! It is not a claim you can validly make for yourself! In fact, doing so, almost inevitably means that person is probably the least likely to actually have any such thing! Moral authority is not claimed, it is given by others. Which is precisely why, when a fake or heretic “Pope”, somehow ascends to the throne, or becomes a heretic while upon it, the people have a right and a duty, to remove him from his post, by physical force if necessary. And in the inverse, it is why a truly humble and pious individual, can be repeatedly begged by the populace to be Pope, even if personally he would prefer not to be. This happens because the people recognise such a person has moral authority to be Pope as a result of his true commitment to the Catholic faith. The classic example being Pope Celestine V, who just wanted to be left alone to be a hermit.

This complete reversal of what is Just, true and actually moral, instead of merely pretending to be in order to gain illicit authority over people, is also why I am duty bound to speak out against Bishop Sanborn publicly. My silence otherwise would be complicity in the lies, nonsense, and undoubted heresy he is leading the faithful towards.

Now, Bishop Sanborm was warned and repeatedly so, in private, about his actions being illegal, authoritative and canonically erroneous.

His response was to deny the sacraments to all those who would not comply with his edict.

Fearful of not having sacraments at all, about half the congregation submitted to the new “organiser”, who promptly screwed it up to the extent they had no venue to do the Mass, expenses shot through the roof, and Bishop Sanborn’s primary concern, which was to increase the number of faithful paying money into the account set aside for it, instead of growing collapsed. About half the congregation decided to abandon that congregation, due to their conscience telling them that being held hostage to, or blackmailed with, a removal of sacraments, was morally repugnant as well as canonically anathema.

That was enough for me to post a few emails to the whole congregation and Bishop Sanborn himself too. This was, the part in Matthew 16, where I did not call him out privately any longer, as I and others had already done, but called him out in front of all the “brothers and sisters” of the congregation, still keeping the issue internal to that congregation and thus at least for then, preventing a wider scandal.

The result was the aforementioned roughly 50-50 split of the congregation, the complete shambles and ineffective behaviour of the new appointee, and general collapse of the congregation to a fraction of what it had been, with much discord, discontent and upset for all to go round.

I did one more private attempt to have Bishop Sanborn see the light and wrote to him privately, stating clearly that if he simply reversed his error, I would apologise publicly and submit myself to the new regime. Below is my email to him dated 18 November 2019, but a preamble is required to put it in context.

His previous email to me was essentially a ruse to do what he did subsequent to my letter, which was to ban me from his Mass (on which more later), and was a request to take down a part of my blog, where an ex-girlfriend is displayed nude, albeit in a pose that is no more pornographic than a Venus de Milo sculpture, and is there with her full consent even more than a decade later. 2

This request was prompted by the weasel that Bishop Sanborn had requested be the new co-ordinator. A “man” so underhanded, sneaky, and petty, not just in this instance which honestly was and is inconsequential to me, but in the way he infiltrated a Catholic moms private channel, just to be a spy trying to cause strife and report “scandal” to either Bishop Sanborn or whoever acted for him on things that were never scandalous at all in the first place, were private discussions between Catholic ladies —where a man had no place to be in the first place— and they were perfectly justified in expressing between each other; which ultimately was just a spelt out thought that they may wish to consult with a priest about various aspects of Catholic dogma so as to be better equipped to instruct their children. Frankly, not only not a scandalous thing, but a perfectly humble and dutiful thing to think about. This weasel in human form, however, presented this as some affront to Bishop Sanborn, who, according to weasel-boy, would have to “approve” of the priest in question, which is, of course, absolute nonsense and a flat out lie. And even if it were true under normal circumstances, of us having a valid Pope (it would not be so even then), the fact one is not present, means Bishop Sanborn has the exact same authority of jurisdiction over such things as an aborigine from Sentinel Island.

Nevertheless creatures like weasel-boy thrive on manufacturing drama and strife so they can present themselves as the moral authority.

Having expressed my opinion of him, word got back to him, and in the typical fashion of such “men” he apparently expressed the terror that I might bitch-slap him to his knees in the middle of the next Holy Mass service, which I found funny, in all honesty. And while it is true, that in a different era, it is absolutely what he deserves, sadly, in the modern day, doing the right thing is often punished severely by the secular powers; so the suggestion, while morally correct, was practically absurd.

With that explained, here then is my letter below:

Dear Bishop Sanborn,

I am glad you wrote, I meant to write to you individually in due course, but was awaiting confirmation on some things before doing so. As I have now verified this information, I am responding to your email and other things beside it.

There will undoubtedly be elements of this email that you don’t agree with or even that upset you, nevertheless I hope you read it through and consider it fully before taking any rash decision.

Believe it or not, in the early days of what has become rather unnecessary drama, I actually advocated for your position. Unfortunately, at this stage, the whole situation has reached a comedy of errors level for which I too have my faults, and perhaps more than most. That all said, let me start at the beginning and forgive me, but I will be very direct, both to save time and because I have got the sense from reading your blog and in general that you too prefer a direct approach. I have divided this email into three parts, one personal, one general and finally I end with suggestions for what I hope we can agree so that the maximum benefit to all the faithful can be achieved. Despite our differences in public, I do hope and believe our intent is the same, the helping to save souls. I would even go further and say that in all probability, in private and if we had a chance to get to know each other, you would find we are not far apart at all in terms of pragmatical approaches. That being the case, I see no reason why we cannot make, from this unfortunate situation, something positive come of it so that more persons are inspired rather than demoralised. I hope therefore you will agree with my proposal.

Personal Items

First let’s get the matter of my blog out of the way, especially since it has already been addressed publicly. My blog is not going to change, nor am I taking anything down on your request. I have amended the about page and that is that. There is, however, one concession I will make at the end in the suggestions. That said, all the items you or others may find objectionable were put there long before I converted to Christianity and will continue to stand as an example, so that many who are lost or are where I was can see that even someone like me can come to Christ. To those who would be scandalised by it, all they have to do is not go there. The internet is a big place, they can find other things to watch or read.

Furthermore, you will find I am not susceptible to any kind of emotional blackmail or pressure. At all.

As I explained publicly, there are very few people whose opinion of me may get me to alter my course in life, above all, God and my conscience as directed by Him, and then a very select few close people, and none of those would have any success in asking me to modify or hide my past.

Lastly, if I were a cynical man, I would think your request to me stems from Mr. [weasel-boy] being rather worried about simply sharing the same physical space of any room I may be in, and as such designed to elicit the response I already have made public so that perhaps you will make a public announcement of my not being allowed to attend the Mass. Mr. [weasel-boy]’s worries are known to me as is his type of personality and character, which are also familiar to me, sadly, through long experience of dealing with such men. That said, let me be very clear that I have no intent of causing a public scandal in what I effectively think of as our Church. I go there to receive the sacraments and see other people I like.

The fact that Mr. [weasel-boy] and I, short of a true miracle, will in all likelihood never be friends is irrelevant to me, nor should it be any cause of strife. While in a temporal and worldly way I find his behaviour duplicitous, two-faced, cowardly and driven by ego, in a spiritual way I pray for him and hope he finds peace, serenity and experiences God’s love. Nor is it for me to judge him, ultimately. That of course is not to say that I will not reply in kind if he doesn’t stay in his lane with respect to me and mine. All that Mr. [weasel-boy] has to do with regard to me, is simply keep his peace and not cause direct or indirect attacks on me and mine and I won’t disturb him in the least. In fact, at the last Mass I complimented his wife on the performance of his children as altar boys. I hope that will help put his mind at ease, as some of the worries he voiced where quite absurd as well as simply outright false, so much so, I found them quite ridiculous.

General Items

As I said I will speak plainly. Given the current situation of the Church, I personally found your rather autocratic approach to actually be rather in line with my own thinking. And while canonically it might not be correct, and while the moral authority you claim is, frankly, something every person can only decide for themselves, I honestly found very little fault with it. In fact, given you created the Mission, I personally have no problem whatever with you even dictating who does what with respect to its general running. I honestly don’t. I only got involved in this whole affair because to an extent or other it was brought to my attention that some unfairness was being done to [previous co-ordinator] and his family.

Before I got involved, I also asked that every aspect of this situation be shared with me, because I saw my involvement in it would probably only make more drama, and I was only willing to do so, in the sense of becoming a personal lightning rod for whatever was your ultimate decisions, in order to frankly shield the [previous co-ordinator and family] who have served loyally and humbly for a long time, while also exposing some of the underhanded behaviour of Mr. [weasel-boy] .

As it happens, not all the information was shared in what I would have thought was the right, timely and open manner I specifically asked for, and as a result I too made errors in my open letters and general approach. In fairness, I also believe you had only good intentions too with regard to replacing Mr. [previous co-ordinator] with Mr. [weasel-boy] , I just happen to think you are picking absolutely the wrong person for the job, but I also believe Mr. [weasel-boy] is very accomplished at presenting whichever face he deems necessary to get what he wants, and your previous relationship with his brother (of whom I know nothing and therefore assume he is a perfectly good man) may colour your views. At any rate, regardless of my opinion, like I said, I personally have zero objection to you placing whoever you want in charge. Time will tell soon enough if I was right or wrong, and I’d be perfectly happy to wait and see. Unfortunately, most of the other parishioners do not see things this way. The English people tend to like to follow the rules, and they generally always reject authoritarian type edicts. And sadly, canonically, your position is not correct, and morally, for a variety of reasons I am sure you can imagine, almost everyone is quite against your view since it has been seen now that there has been what is perceived as a using the sacraments and delivery or not of them and the Mass as a kind of stick to keep the parishioners in line.

Whether you believe me or not, Bishop Sanborn, despite my many faults, being a liar is not generally one of my sins, and as such, I want to specify that I have tried very hard to get the so-called “rebels” to see reason and that your position is not in any way affecting spiritual matters, at least, not until you stated that those who do not submit to your temporal authority in worldly matters are not welcome to the Mass in your second open letter. Even after this letter, I did still try to get those unhappy with your views to try and come to seeing things differently, but I admit I have failed in this at every turn.I therefore now propose the following solution, which I hope you will consider.

Suggestion

If you were to write a public letter stating that:

1. Everyone is welcome to the Mass and that,

2. While currently Mr. [weasel-boy] is the co-ordinator and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future, (especially since Mr. [previous co-ordinator] has officially resigned and made quite clear he will no longer have any responsibilities as co-ordinator) you will in due course review this both in line with the expected performance of the Mission as well as the input of the faithful, which you will take into account (perhaps after a trial period of say 3 or 6 months?) and you ask the patience of any disaffected, as practical matters do need to be taken care of.

I believe this would, I am certain, assuage any ill feeling and restore trust in your guidance and leadership as well as remove any sort of appeal to canon law of any sort. Nor would it change the co-ordinator since I very much doubt anyone at all would want to put themselves forward at this point anyway. Meaning Mr. [weasel-boy] would be free to act as co-ordinator as per your wishes and you can in due course verify yourself the performance.

If you can find it to write such a letter, I for my part promise the following:

1. I will write a public letter of apology, to the limits of my conscience, to yourself and the parishioners and also post the same on my blog and leave it as the main landing page for at least a month, but in any case I would leave it on the site permanently.

2. I will keep this letter and its contents private, (unless you specifically wish me not to, in writing) and not share it with any other parishioner, of this or any other country, or worse someone not of the Catholic faith, now or in the future, nor allude to it in any way.

3. I will also ask that one condition is that if you do make reference to this letter yourself, you release the whole letter. Or else, make no reference to it at all, my only intent here being to not be selectively quoted or taken out of context or in a new context not in keeping with the facts and this entire letter.

I believe such an action on my part would restore any semblance of disrespect as well as make public those errors I do feel I have done in good conscience (and they are not few), as well as restore the situation both canonically as well as emotionally for any parishioners that now have doubts and who will not otherwise attend Mass again, given these are a majority of the attendees, I hope you will find it in your own conscience to accept this suggestion.

Sincerely in Christ

Giuseppe Filotto

His response to me was, sadly, predictable:

Dear Mr. Filotto,

If you do not remove the objectionable material from your website, you may not receive sacraments at the Mass center in London.

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Bishop Sanborn

To which I responded in kind, since I knew, from logic, life experience, and having dealt with such egos before multiple times in life, that, as any hunter knows, all you have to do is wait, and eventually, such people expose themselves.

It seems you have made your choice rashly, Bishop. In line with the cynical view of things I presented in my letter.
So be it.

Giuseppe

To forestall any further accusations I want to point out that:

1. My statement that I would maintain my letter private was conditional on Bishop Sanborn reversing his error, which he did not do, hence freeing me from any such condition, and secondly, I have nevertheless kept its contents private for over six years, simply because I felt releasing it then would probably have caused more strife than good. But today, the balance has swung the other way. Keeping quiet about Sanborn’s authoritarian insistence on completely absurd tenets of his version of the Thesis of Cassiciacum, is damaging to all, and his refusal to have seminarians be ordained in his seminary unless they profess the erroneous, and frankly heretical Thesis, is a disgrace, as is the continued promulgation of the nonsensical, illogical, never before-seen rubbish that holding to that absurd theory inevitably requires, as has been amply demonstrated in a detailed breakdown of all the main nonsensical positions of the Thesis as produced by the people who created the site Contra-Thesis.
2. Regarding the “offending image” on my blog, it will stay, as will any and all other errors I may have blogged about in my life before getting baptised. No one is forced to go and look at my blog, and no one has to agree with it, but I as a man, will NEVER try and scrub my past so as to present a false aspect of who I was, what mistakes I made and so on. As all humans, I made plenty of mistakes, but throughout my life, to the best of my ability, I have always tried to act honestly, and as such, whatever errors I have made, in the main, have been genuine errors. I can no more “regret” making them than I can thinking 2 plus 2 was 10 before I knew anything about math as an 18 month old child. And what I will absolutely NOT do, is scrub my past to make me look more “respectable”. It’s dishonest, cowardly, and frankly, beneath me, my honour, my dignity, and disrespectful of anyone that may look upon me and my history. And as a matter of “look at the fruit it bears” kind of view, after one hundred or so, I lost count of how many people returned or converted to true Catholicism after reading my short book BELIEVE!, and that is, I am certain, because in that book, I never tried to hide who I was. And I present my argument in the same manner in which I lived and thought, or arrived at becoming Catholic. And the “warts and all” display clearly struck a chord with readers, who like me, were merely ignorant of the true Church, and rebelled against its impostor, not the actual Catholic religion itself.
3. I have kept the identity of weasel-boy and others involved redacted, even if those familiar with the events of the time will know who is who, because ultimately this post is not about any one individual; not even about Bishop Sanborn himself. It is about protecting the truth of the Catholic Church and ensuring souls are safe from lies, error, and madness, intentional or otherwise as it may be.

And now, having demonstrated that Bishop Sanborn has had ample time to reform, was asked to do so not only by myself but by other too with which I am perfectly familiar (but is not for me to divulge), and similarly been asked before multiple Catholic witnesses to reverse his errors, and years after he has used the sacraments as a cudgel, instead of the salvific duty a cleric has to dispense them to the faithful, it is time to publicly call him out, and I do so by using his own words, as shown below.

Part III – Bishop Sanborn, in his own Irrational Words

1. The Thesis does not say what the Thesis says…

I did not do the overlay of the woman confused by calculus on the below, and it does add a perhaps slightly disrespectful tone to the clip, nevertheless, it’s hard to find fault with it if you actually listen to the words, and I am not a video editor by any means, so, it is what it is.

2. Since Fake Popes invalidly elected are “Popes” in principle, so are fake “Priests” also “Priests” in principle!

So we go from Fake Pope, invalidly elected, to fake priest invalidly ordained, under an invalid rite, by invalid Bishops, who are not Catholic and do not profess the Catholic religion, but an impostor version that literally is 180 degrees in opposition to Catholic dogma. Yet these are, according to him “priests in principle”.

There is a further total AMERICANISM here, notice how he repeatedly refers to legalism over fact. This is absurd, nonsensical, and anti-human, but is a completely pervasive way of thinking in the general American zeitgeist raised on Hollywood presentations of legal dramas, and the actual American legal system itself, which is, of course, an absurdity and a lie, since it is absolutely rooted in the Freemasonic duplicity on which the entire USA was founded. Legalism over humanity is demonic, but the average American has been marinated in this “find the loophole in the law and it’s all good” type of thinking, and believing this is normal and rational. It is not, of course, it is a complete nonsense and a travesty of justice.

But the Catholic Church does not operate on the basis of ANY Anglo-Saxon Law, it is founded and exists purely in ROMAN LAW, which is based on justice first above all, as is absolutely logical and humane, and has as the primary purpose, the protection of the individual person, and his or her dignity and humanity before God. There is no “case-law” in Roman Law, because each case is judged on its merits, and where a specific Law does not exist, it is extrapolated by EXACT logic; which —for those who can do it— is as clear and obvious as basic math.

The fact is that pretty much no American —even smart and educated ones— can today to very good logic, much less the average Anglo-Saxon person. Nevertheless, for those who take up the Clerical orders, instruction in Latin and Roman Law is not optional, yet Bishop Sanborn here demonstrates either abysmal ignorance of the most fundamental and basic principles of Roman Law, or utter contempt and malice towards it. He also, of course, completely ignores canon law too.

3. Begging the Satanists for a Seat at the Table

It is extremely hard for me to view this in any way other than Bishop Sanborn being an intentional corruptor of what small remnant of Catholicism is left. How can someone who professes to say that the Pope is not validly the Pope and that the Novus Ordo clergy are not valid either, state, in good conscience, that if “appointed” (invalidly of course) to a fake Cardinalate, he would accept (with the of course obvious fake humility disclaimer that he would be really under such duress to accept but that he probably would)?

My personal opinion is that I don’t believe his false humility for a second. I think he would salivate at the chance to do so as it would, in his eyes, make him even more “relevant” and able to (corruptly, whether he is conscious of it or not) bring in his disciples into the greater fold of the fake Novus Ordo Church.

Conclusions

The idea that only the fake clergy of pedophiles, cocaine-snorting, homosexual orgies indulging, freemasons, satanists, communists, shills and stooges that form the Novus Ordo Satanic impostors of Catholicism are the ONLY ONES, who can elect a new Pope, is of, course absurd in its entirety.

It runs counter to everything that Catholicism stands for and of course, against the immutable Papal Bull of Pope Paul IV Cum-Ex Apostolato Officio that clearly states, that EVEN IF, a cleric WAS valid, once he is guilty of heresy, he can NEVER, EVER, —even if forgiven— have clerical authority or perform the sacraments to ANYONE, for the rest of his life.

So, why then, is Bishop Sanborn doing what he does?

There can only be one of three explanations:

1. He is mentally unfit. This means he is either too stupid, ignorant, and incapable of correctly reading Canon Law, the Bible, and basic Catholic Dogma, to perform his duties as Bishop in any responsible manner. It includes everything from his possibly being senile, which does not appear exteriorly at least to be the case, to having some form of arrogant or narcissistic ego and personality that makes him believe his way of seeing things is superior to the Church’s millennia-long established dogma, as well as Divine Law, and there is evidence of this to my view anyway given his behaviour over time.
2. He is more concerned with money and Power than Truth. I certainly saw this as being the case in the 2019 events. And he absolutely does treat the affairs of the Church under his domain as a business. In short, he is a Bishop of Power, not piety, as Rodney Stark defined it. I don’t in principle even have an objection to this, while they are not my favourite clergy, those priests and Bishops who accumulate wealth and power and then use it —or at least a good chunk of it— to create and expand more and better Catholic things, such as churches, seminaries and so on, are also needed. But when this takes precedence over the actual basic mission of the Church, then it’s time to remove the corrupt individual from office. By not ordaining more Bishops, controlling the number of priests that do get ordained and so on, it keeps the faithful bound to him and his “crew”, funneling all donations to his organisation, and thus, by extension, to him.
3. He is an Intentional Gatekeeper, working for the Enemy. This is the worst possible explanation and would be in addition to point n. 2 above. I am not ready to claim this is the case for certain, at least not yet, however, on circumstantial evidence alone, it is very hard to ignore this as a real possibility. What better way to try and destroy what is left of the True Church, than by teaching, promulgating, and promoting, a completely false theory that in essence states that the Satanists in the Vatican, merely need to say: “Ooopss! Sorry, we didn’t mean it, Vatican II was bad, let’s ignore it and move on,” and suddenly, magically, every fake priest and Bishop and Cardinal under them becomes valid. It is also typical of how the enemy really moves. By tiny degrees, subtly, infiltrating, subverting, and over a long time-scale. There is certainly enough evidence here for the probability to remain a definite possibility.

Whatever of those three options it is, the fact is clear that Bishop Sanborn is simply not fit to perform his duties in accordance with the Catholic Churches’ dogmas, and as such needs to be absolutely, and completely ignored. Do not take Mass with him, do not attend his Mass, do not go to confession with him, do not donate to him, and do not consider him a Catholic going forward, until he either corrects his errors in full, abandons the. Thesis and repents. While there is still a tiny window wherein he cannot possibly yet be fully accused of heresy, his errors have been promulgated for years, and it is now time he receives a formal and clear warning from the laity, if the other clergy will not do so, and that if within six months he does not repent, then we must consider him a heretic.

And finally, please remember two things:

1. As per Cum-Ex Apostolato Officio:

   • (iii) that all such individuals also shall be held, treated and reputed as such by everyone, of whatsoever status, grade, order, condition or pre-eminence he may be and whatsoever excellence may be his, even Episcopal, Archiepiscopal, Patriarchal and Primatial or other greater Ecclesiastical dignity and even the honour of the Cardinalate, or secular, even the authority of Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor, and as such must be avoided and must be deprived of the sympathy of all natural kindess.

So, yeah, I’m not being harsh or disrespectful. I am doing my Catholic duty as a layman that is duty bound to call out such things. And remember that in Catholic Dogma, and Roman Law too, timidity or silence in the face of evil, error or madness, is cowardice and complicity.

And,

2. While it doesn’t really matter or make any practical difference in any way, for those of a technical mind, I and my family, are, nobility. If even of the lowest rank (Patricians, though a separate branch of the family are Marquises), therefore, not only do I have a duty to call out such things, but on a personal level, because I DO believe, not only in jest, that Noblesse Oblige, it is incumbent upon me —and moreso than on normal laity— to perform this duty. Not just for myself, but for all Catholics. And I do so gladly, and without any fear whatsoever concerning the undoubted reprisals and attacks my doing so will foster.

In Closing

I have prayed the full rosary, to the best of my ability, and recited the Lord’s prayer too in the appropriate places too, on this, and I would also like to close with a personal prayer, which I share here with any who may find it useful.

Lord, please guide me, my actions, and hands, in Justice above all, but also Truth, Mercy, Charity, Patience, and Humility. Forgive me my many sins, weaknesses, and failings, undeserving though I am of your Grace. And permit me, by your guiding hand, to serve your purposes as best I can, while you keep my family and loved ones from suffering harm or pain on my account.

Subscribe now

Share

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here

If this doesn’t warm you up…

Subscribe

Share

This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here