Aldo Maria Valli: Your Excellency, I think it is appropriate to start our conversation again with what you said responding to my question about the logic followed by Bergoglio in his most recent nomination of cardinals. You said:

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: Bergoglio’s logic is very evident: he wants to create the premises for a schism, which he denies and deplores in words, but which he has been preparing for some time. Bergoglio wants to separate, in one way or another, the good part of the faithful and clergy from the official Church; and to achieve this, to ensure that they distance themselves from the modernist Sanhedrin, he is placing in key positions in the Roman Curia those characters who guarantee the worst possible management of the Dicasteries entrusted to them, with the worst possible result and the greatest damage to the ecclesial body.

The progressive restrictions on the celebration of the ancient liturgy serve to confine conservatives to hunting reserves, in order to then channel them towards the Society of Saint Pius X, as soon as the Synod leads the doctrinal, moral and disciplinary changes that are in the pipeline to their tragic consequences, causing an exodus of Catholics into what, after the suppression or normalization of the Ecclesia Dei Institutes, will become the “monopolist” of Tradition. But at that point – that is, when the traditional Catholics have migrated into the Society and its leaders believe they have won a victory over the competition due to the suppression of Summorum Pontificum– a new intolerable provocation will force at least one faction of the Society of Saint Pius X to distance themselves from Bergoglian Rome, sanctioning the “excommunication” of traditionalism, which is no longer represented within the official Church, if it ever was. For this reason, in my opinion, it is important to maintain a certain fragmentation, in order to make the malicious maneuver of expelling traditional Catholics from the ecclesial body more complex.

The message and the method is clear.  When they want you gone, they can make you gone.  They aren’t even going through the motions any more and any and all sense of due process or rights under canon law have been dispensed with.  That should make any Bishop nervous, which is exactly the point. - Archbold

Deaconesses, the abolition of ecclesiastical celibacy, the blessing of homosexual couples, tolerance for polygamy, gender theory, LGBTQ ideology, and ecological pantheism à la Teilhard de Chardin: these are the points of confrontation that Begoglio is deliberately opening up between the conservative wing (but not the traditional wing, which is already distant or out of the picture) and the ultra-progressive one. His purpose is to create confrontation, let it grow, encourage the supporters of the most extreme requests with appointments and promotions, so as to then witness the predictable reaction of condemnation by the few good remaining Bishops, priests and religious, who, in front of Bergoglio’s trap door, will have two choices: either to return to suffer in silence, or or to stand up, denounce the betrayal of Catholic Truth, and be forced to leave one’s post and exercise the ministry clandestinely or at least in apparent canonical irregularity. 

Once the inconvenient Pastors have been ostracized and the faithful conservatives have been dismissed, the Bergoglian hierarchy will be able to exercise full control over the clergy and people, certain of the obedience of those who remain. And this sect, which will only have the name of Catholic (and perhaps not even that anymore), will totally eclipse the Bride of the Lamb, in the paradox of a traitorous and corrupt Hierarchy that abuses Christ’s authority to destroy his Church.

In short, the logic seems to be to create conditions that will make true Catholics abandon the Barque of Peter. Is this correct?

Look, already back in 2019 (here) Bergoglio said clearly that he does not fear a schism. And while he stated that “schismatics always have one thing in common, they detach themselves from people, from the faith of the people, from the faith of the people of God,” he added: “The morality of ideology leads you to rigidity, and today we have so many schools of rigidity within the Church, which are not schisms, but they are pseudo-schismatic Christian ways that will end badly: when you see rigid Christians, bishops, and priests, there are problems behind them, there is not the sanity of the Gospel.” As usual, he accused Catholics of doing what he himself was about to do.

In order to further highlight the strategy adopted by Bergoglio, you have mentioned an essay by an American author who already in 2018 highlighted certain lines of action which were soon confirmed. Can you tell us about this essay?

Of course. The author is Patrick Archbold, and his essay appeared in five installments in 2018 at Creative Minority Report, entitled Actuating Schism (here, here, here, here, here).

In the essay, with great lucidity, the author outlines what in his opinion was the malicious action of the Argentine intended to deliberately cause a schism in the heart of the Catholic Church. Archbold wrote:

We can count on this process to continue.  Gamed synods producing pre-ordained results to continue to move the heretical ball down the field. […] The Church has been in a de facto state of schism for some time, only that those who no longer hold to the Church’s teachings refused to leave.  Now, they are not just here but they are in charge. They didn’t seek their own alternative church or power structure, they instead took the long view and were covetous of the name Catholic and its power structure.  They didn’t want their own Church, they wanted ours.  Now they have the power and they use power.

Archbold continues:

So this is the question that stays with me.  How do you get rid of those Catholics who are fighting against your power?  How do you get rid of faithful Catholics who, by definition, tenaciously cling to the one true church?  How do you get the true Catholics out of the true Church? How do you turn a de facto schism into a real one?

And here Archbold wisely outlines the scheme adopted by the Central Committee of Santa Marta, identifying it by the consistencies that are detectable in several different cases: the Franciscans of the Immaculate, Bishop Rogelio Livieres Plano in South America, Bishop Martin Holley in the United States, the Petites Sœurs de Marie Mère du Rédempteur in France. To this short list we can add the names of many other Bishops and religious communities – especially communities of religious women – who since 2018 have been given a taste of Bergoglian mercy.

As many clerics, religious, and faithful rightly ask, at this point how can we resist this subversive action, if any path we undertake will lead to us being accused of schism?  -Valli

The system is always the same: there is an Apostolic Visitation made with very short notice, no report is ever made about the results, or about any critical issues found, and there is no possibility of clarification or defense for those who are the object of the investigation.

The message and the method is clear.  When they want you gone, they can make you gone.  They aren’t even going through the motions any more and any and all sense of due process or rights under canon law have been dispensed with.  That should make any Bishop nervous, which is exactly the point.

In parallel with this completely illegitimate canonical action, Bergoglio’s emissaries do not hesitate to intimidate the Bishops and communities so as to prevent them from welcoming those who are ostracized: we remember well the way that Father Fidenzio Volpi participated irregularly in the meeting of the Italian Bishops’ Conference in order to carry out an act of terrorism against the Franciscans of the Immaculate, threatening the Episcopate by telling them not to incardinate the conservative friars into their Dioceses.

But when the rules allowed for other Bishops to possibly provide an escape hatch for the abused, those prelates were threatened and the rules were changed to make sure that no bishop could allow new faithful Catholic groups to form in some far flung diocese.

It seems to me that Traditionis Custodes is precisely the expression of this plan...

Exactly. Traditionis Custodes claimed for the Holy See the faculty to canonically erect “traditional” institutes, and it made the Bishops understand that no diocesan priest would obtain permission to celebrate according to the ancient rite. The cancellation of Summorum Pontificum goes in this same direction, this is obvious. It’s enough to think of, among others, the case of the Benedictine Sisters of Pienza or the Dominican Sisters of Marradi who just happen to find themselves in a situation that is no different from the Petites Sœurs de Marie Mère du Rédempteur: “they have committed the double crime of being a little too conservative and of possessing real estate coveted by the local Ordinary” – a property on a hill overlooking the Val d’Orcia or an enormous 16th-century convent in the Appenines. The same thing happened with the Carmel of Arlington, Texas, where the fury against the conservatism of the nuns led to the shameful defaming of the Mother Prioress, who was subjected to a commissioner and dismissed in violation of the canonical norms. There too, it is a Monastery with a vast amount of property and a oil field.

But while the Vatican does not hesitate to limit the rights of Bishops to prevent them from helping certain traditional communities to survive, it significantly extends the rights of other Bishops beyond the law – by sanating the irregularities and abuses of its own lackeys – whenever it serves to suppress and persecute such communities. To this we may add the Constitution Vultum Dei Quærere and the Instruction Cor Orans, with which Bergoglio has deprived monastic communities of their autonomy and arranged them into federations under the strict control of ultra-progressives – along with Chinese-style reprogramming – of the self-styled Dicastery for Religious.

The politburo approved Catholic media will tell you that synodality is all about decentralizing the governance of the Church closer to the people in the form of the Bishop’s conference.  This, obviously, could not be further from the truth.  In an incredible validation of the lie, before the ink was even dry on the synod document on synodality, the Pope personally intervened to publicly castrate the USCCB before they even thought about even discussing doing something useless about the abuse scandal.  It was quite the show, even for veteran Church watchers.

Archbold sums up this pattern with the following words:

It is about making sure that no stray orthodox bishop can be a bastion of tradition and a safe space for traditional Catholicism.  He can’t allow new groups of religious to form in his diocese, he can’t invite traditional nuns to set up shop in his diocese, and if he does anything too traditional, he will be on the receiving end of an apostolic visitation for the crime of not getting along with his Bishop’s conference.  All of this has been about cutting off all escape paths for traditional Catholics.

At this point Archbold quotes a passage from The Art of War by Sun Tzu: “To a surrounded enemy, you must leave a way of escape.”

We find the answer in the firm resistance of those who have preceded us: from the heroism of the Martyrs and Confessors of the Faith to the silent faithfulness of many Catholics – clergy, religious, and laity – who down the centuries have found themselves faced with the same choice: either to choose the broad and comfortable path of compromise and apostasy or the narrow and difficult way of fidelity to Christ.  - Viganò

Archbold comments:

To surround the enemy, you must cut off all other paths of escape.  You need to get the enemy, traditional and red-pilling conservative Catholics, all into one place where they feel safer, before you lower the boom.  But the boom.  She is coming. […] I believe they intend to do away with Summorum Pontificum and its individual right of priests to say the mass and force all traditional Catholic into one or a few approved sources, perhaps the FSSP and the ICKSP or some juiced up Ecclesia Dei commission, if they can’t close the deal on the SSPX. […] They will move us back to the indult era and consolidate us into a few groups (FSSP, ICKSP, etc) and some grandfathered indult locations.  They will claim, and their lickspittle brethren in the mainstream Catholic media will gush, that this is not an anti-Traditional move.  “The Pope hasn’t done away with one single Traditional mass, this is about governance only.” […]

So there you have it.  Any approved group that resists the changes or complains too loud gets the Apostolic Visitation and is squashed for refusal to submit to the Pontiff.   Any diocesan indult community that resists is squashed.  And any Catholic who thinks he can go underground and just have masses said in someone’s house?  Nope.  Individual priests no longer have the right to say the mass.  Do it and you have refused to submit to the authority of the Pope.  You are a schismatic.  So too any bishop.  You either accept the Vatican Two boot on your neck or you are a schismatic.

Any attempt to live an authentic traditional Catholic life, whether as a religious, or just attending the mass of the ages, will make you a schismatic by default.  Go SSPX, you are schismatic.  Go to an underground mass.  Schismatic.  Form a group of faithful under a traditional rule without permission of Rome, schismatic.  They will turn any and all attempts to live a traditional Catholic life into an act of disobedience.

It seems clear that, five years later, the alarm raised by Archbold’s 2018 essay has proven to be well-founded. But as many clerics, religious, and faithful rightly ask, at this point how can we resist this subversive action, if any path we undertake will lead to us being accused of schism?

We find the answer in the firm resistance of those who have preceded us: from the heroism of the Martyrs and Confessors of the Faith to the silent faithfulness of many Catholics – clergy, religious, and laity – who down the centuries have found themselves faced with the same choice: either to choose the broad and comfortable path of compromise and apostasy or the narrow and difficult way of fidelity to Christ. It is a choice that is often painful, but one for which the Lord has prepared us: “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I have not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to separate the son from his father, the daughter from her mother, the daughter-in-law from her mother-in-law: and one’s enemies will be those of his own household. (Mt 10:34-36).

This sword – which Saint Paul identifies with the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Eph 6:17) – separates Christ’s faithful from a rebellious and corrupt hierarchy, faithful religious from their heretical Superiors, and faithful priests from their modernist Bishops. And our enemies are those of our own household: our parish priests, the Bishops, and the one who usurps the Throne of Peter in order to spread error and division.

Let’s not forget that for sixty years we have become accustomed to seeing the authority of the Pastors used against the faithful and against the Church herself, all while maintaining an appearance of formal legitimacy. The “Council” itself was a colossal deception against the ecclesial body, because it maintained the authority of an Ecumenical Council while fraudulently insinuating heretical doctrines...  - Viganò

Woe to the world for scandals! Scandals must inevitably occur, but woe to the man through whose fault scandal comes (Mt 18:7). These words admonish us about the seriousness of the present scandals – doctrinal, moral, and liturgical – and about their inevitability, which is the result of the temporary triumph of the wicked before the Final Judgment. But these words also admonish us to resist them, to denounce them, to not consider them to be normal just because they have become widespread at every level of daily life.

Let’s not forget that for sixty years we have become accustomed to seeing the authority of the Pastors used against the faithful and against the Church herself, all while maintaining an appearance of formal legitimacy. The “Council” itself – the only Council that is dear to the heart of the Modernists, because it is the only one of which they are the architects and that has nothing Catholic about it – was a colossal deception against the ecclesial body, because it maintained the authority of an Ecumenical Council while fraudulently insinuating heretical doctrines; it maintained the authority of the Council Fathers and the Roman Pontiff precisely as it was being used to demolish the Catholic edifice; it imposed blind and servile obedience to norms in contrast with the uninterrupted and immutable Magisterium. The abolition of the traditional Liturgy, intended by Paul VI using his apostolic authority, was a fraud. And the current attempt to cancel Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum with an analagous Motu Proprio – apparently carrying the same canonical efficacy – is no less malicious. Its aim is not the good of the Church and the salvation of the faithful, but the ruin of both. On the other hand, even the accusation of blasphemy that the Sanhedrin brought against Our Lord had all the appearances of a formally unexceptionable action, even though it was intrinsically illegitimate and null, because it was used against the Divine and Innocent Legislator.

Authority can obtain obedience in virtue of its own authoritativeness, or it can impose itself with authoritarianism. In the first case, power is exercised for the purpose for which it has been instituted; in the second case authority becomes the end in itself. Authoritarianism subverts the divine order – both in temporal matters as well as in religious ones – because it prescinds from the sole authority of Christ and from the vicariousness of the earthly authority that represents him. In short, authoritarianism acts as if a person placed in authority – a governor, a Bishop – possesses his own legitimacy in himself, and not because he is a vicar of the authority of Christ. This makes it a subversive power, unchained from any duty to conform itself to the will of Christ in pursuing the common good, and for this reason it is inexorably destined to transform itself into hateful tyranny.

Second part (Added July 28)

Your Excellency, let us pick up where we left off in the first part. There is a clear parallel between what is happening in the Church and what is happening in the secular sphere. An expression you often use is that “everything holds together.” Can you explain this more?

The authoritarianism of democratic national and supranational institutions – yesterday with the pretextual pandemic emergency, today with the absurd environmental emergency – is not at all different from the authoritarianism of the synodal Vatican institutions, yesterday with the pretextual ecumenical dialogue and today with the no less pretextual encouragement of sexual and moral deviance. Both are also corrupt expressions of true authority, one with the deep state of the global coup, the other with the deep church of the St. Gallen Mafia coup. In both, the corruption of their members is a guarantee that they remain subservient, because it makes them easily blackmailed. For this reason, it is not possible that those who ascend to certain levels in these institutions to be honest, since honesty would remove them from the control of those who want maneuverable puppets in the key roles, puppets in the hands of a ventriloquist.

Bergoglio's ostracism towards conservatives is identical to that of the globalist elite towards the “deniers” of Covid and global warming. It does not matter that the psychopandemic and the environmental farce have no scientific basis and are disavowed by eminent scientists and irrefutable evidence: science is replaced by scientism, any scientific literature on these topics has now been removed, canceled, and censored.

Schism is therefore Bergoglio’s ultimate goal, because it is the pharisaical way – that is, the way of a hypocritical and false formalism – with which to oust good Catholics from the Church, leaving her totally in the power of traitors and renegades, free at that point to do with her what they want.

The same thing is happening also in the civil sphere: the rulers and the entire ruling class of Western countries are totally subservient to a power that no one has elected, they obey it even against the interest of the nation and violating the fundamental rights of citizens, without there being any organ or judiciary that is willing and able to try and condemn them for high treason.

Bergoglio's ostracism towards conservatives is identical to that of the globalist elite towards the “deniers” of Covid and global warming. It does not matter that the psychopandemic and the environmental farce have no scientific basis and are disavowed by eminent scientists and irrefutable evidence: science is replaced by scientism, any scientific literature on these topics has now been removed, canceled, and censored. And here too the parallel with the Church appears in all its evidence, if we consider the blatant contradiction of the "magisterium" from Vatican II onwards with respect to the Catholic Magisterium: doctrine has been replaced by heresy, morality by the subjectivity of the individual, liturgical rituality by sacrilegious improvisation. And those who question the official narrative – for example by highlighting the sudden deaths of the vaccinated alone or the crisis of vocations of the post-conciliar period – are criminalized, because their dissent is reasoned and rational and cannot be refuted. Instead, it is delegitimized by attacking the individuals who express it.

At this point the question returns: how do we get out of it? Here at Duc in Altum for some days there has been a wide debate on the subject, with the participation of many readers. It seems clear that Bergoglio and his troops have failed to chloroform Catholic public opinion.

Some suggest that we must get out of it by means of prayer. And thus is true: asking the Almighty to take the reins of history in hand is certainly an effective tool. But at the same time, this is not enough: prayer – which is always indispensable – must also be accompanied by action, as our fathers in faith – the Apostles, the first Christians and all Catholics – have always done, they who over the course of the past two thousand years have confronted tyrants and satraps who were convinced that they could “crush the infamous thing” – écrasez l’infame, blasphemed Voltaire – while the enemies of the Church are now all dead and buried, and behold, the Church is still alive.

This action must first of all – as I said in our first interview – foresee a strategic fragmentation of traditional movements, which must be coordinated but remain independent so that it is impossible to strike them all with one blow. The fragmentation of the traditional movement is in my opinion the only possible response to the present attack: we must not institute any new pseudo-ecclesial entity, but rather maintain that minimal coordination between different forces, which sooner or later will find themselves regaining full citizenship rights in the Church, the only true and legitimate place where true Catholics must stay. Obviously, this does not mean standing by and watching what happens as passengers on a sinking ship: on the contrary, our permanence in the Church must spur us – as her children – to defend her from the attacks of those who, from within, act as the enemy's fifth column .

Let us not forget that the mentality that guides the globalist elite – and the Bergoglian sect that is its handmaiden – is of a mercantile matrix that is typically Protestant and usurious. The dominant idea is power and profit, obtained through the commodification of everything, that is, the transformation of every aspect of life into a commodity, into a sellable and purchasable product.

If on the one hand Bergoglio wants to close all our escape routes, then on the other hand it is necessary for us to open others. If his action aims to isolate us in order to intimidate us and make us desist, we must denounce embezzlement by all means at our disposal. And since sooner or later the persecution will necessarily – I repeat: necessarily – spread also to those who delude themselves that they are somehow protected from possible Vatican retaliation, it will be the case that they, too, can now begin to organize forms of resistance, strengthened by an increasingly pressing state of necessity, which will guarantee the Holy Mass and the Sacraments to the faithful.

What do you suggest to your brothers in the Episcopate in this regard?

I invite them to consider – onerata conscientia – whether it is not appropriate to think of forms of ministry in clandestinity for their conservative priests, in view of possible further maneuvers by Bergoglio or where the civil authorities undertake actions of open persecution of traditional Catholics. The FBI's investigations into groups of faithful linked to the Tridentine Mass in the United States suggest that deviant parts of the intelligence services consider Catholics a threat to their subversive plan, while they have an ally in the Bergoglian church.

Traditional religious communities – especially those of women in contemplative life – must keep in constant contact in order to give each other mutual support and help, both material and spiritual. It is important that the fringe of dissent against this cupola of heretics and perverts who occupy the highest levels of the Church is increasingly present in the media and on social networking platforms, so as to encourage those who still hesitate between resigned silence and the necessary opposition to apostasy. Let these priests speak: let us give them a voice, let us comfort them, let us make them feel welcome in our homes, in our churches, in our monasteries.

Let us not forget that the mentality that guides the globalist elite – and the Bergoglian sect that is its handmaiden – is of a mercantile matrix that is typically Protestant and usurious. The dominant idea is power and profit, obtained through the commodification of everything, that is, the transformation of every aspect of life into a commodity, into a sellable and purchasable product. And commercial strategies always follow a well-determined process to conquer the market.

Can you give us an example?

Certainly. Imagine having two companies, a foreign multinational corporation that produces a poor-quality article at low prices in the Third World and an Italian artisan company that produces the same article with high-quality raw materials produced strictly in Italy alone, with expert skill and at an honest price. In these conditions it is clear that the multinational has no hope of being able to impose itself on a new foreign market, also because under normal conditions the government provides forms of protection of its country’s own domestic entrepreneurial excellence and imposes heavy duties on imported goods. But membership in the European Union prohibits member states from giving priority to their own companies, imposes onerous taxes and duties, causes the costs of raw materials and production to rise, facilitates credit to multinationals and drastically restricts its availability to small and medium-sized enterprises. Behind these economic and fiscal policies, of course, are the lobbyists of the large financial groups. At this point our Italian company is forced to increase prices, while the multinational corporation immediately becomes competitive. The multinational therefore enters the Italian market, with an impressive media campaign, which the small competitor cannot even remotely afford; after a while the multinational acquires the small company and lets it work for a while; then it eliminates the valuable artigianal product in favor of the poor-quality manufactured one. What has the multinational gained? The cancellation of the alternative product and the general lowering of the product’s quality. The competition has been eliminated, and the manufactured product will be able to increase its price simply because it is the only one offered on the market. In this process it is essential to remove the quality product, because it is an annoying term of comparison for the product that is mass-produced in a Chinese prison or in an Indian village. So what solution is proposed to deal with foreign competition? After the lowering of raw material costs, all that remains is the cut in labor costs, with the reduction of wages and the introduction of an underpaid foreign workforce, also thanks to the pressure of the landings of illegal immigrants ferried from North Africa or entered Europe from Turkey. If we add to this coordinated assault the increases in the cost of energy – all of which are deliberately provoked – and the obligation to balance the budget for the EU member nations (or at least for some), we understand that in this case too all escape routes have been closed, except for the only one that is desired, which is then the one that will prove fatal for those who take it.

Let’s not forget that the World Economic Forum is a lobby of entrepreneurs thirsty for money and power – when it has to force the adoption of new lifestyles in society: social manipulation is an integral part of marketing actions, and if the “product” to be sold is an experimental serum or an electric vehicle, the modalities of creating demand and placing it on the market will include a media campaign of pandemic or environmental social alarm thanks to the cooperation of the press, individual journalists, so-called “experts” – virologists or climatologists, for example – and politicians.

Forgive me, Archbishop, but when you express yourself in this way, some say: Archbishop Viganò speaks of things that do not concern him as a pastor.

I realize that here we are on at least “unusual” ground for a topic being addressed by a Bishop, even if in my former duties as Secretary General of the Governorate of Vatican City State I also had to deal with economic issues. If you notice, the commercial strategy I have just illustrated is also adopted in the ecclesiastical sphere. The high-quality product is represented by Catholic doctrine, morals and liturgy. Competition from the low-quality product is constituted by modernist ideological rubbish, mainly the reformed rite of the Mass. Since the “clientele” is not willing to freely give up the high-quality product it has always had in exchange for something incomparably inferior, this is when the “conciliar multinational” acquires the “small artisan company” and lets it offer its product under Summorum Pontificum, only to then close almost all the points of sale and prevent the formation of clergy and religious according to the traditional ratio studiorum by imposing the legislation of Traditionis Custodes. And in order to prevent people from seeing that the imported product is poor, it avoids comparison with the high-quality product by simply making it disappear. But these maneuvers, however effective from an organizational point of view, cannot prevent the gulf between the two alternatives from being very evident. If the “clientele” resigns itself to buying what is imposed on them by the “large retailer,” it is only because they have been deprived of the possibility of a free choice due to to fraud and market manipulation.

I know well that in religious matters this “shopkeeper” approach is inappropriate and offensive, especially because the good of the Faith is of such an inestimable value, freely granted to us by the magnificence of God, while the alternative that is proposed to us cannot compete in the least and has as its price our eternal damnation. But I believe it does not escape any of us that the usurious cynicism of the sellers of heresies and perversions is not able to go beyond seeing the matter as commercial exchange, giving a price to everything: the thirty denarii paid by the Sanhedrin for the betrayal of Judas confirm this, and there are always High Priests ready to pay the sum, as well as renegade apostles who are willing to hand the Lord over by means of a kiss to the temple guards.

This is the mentality that moves and orients merchants – let’s not forget that the World Economic Forum is a lobby of entrepreneurs thirsty for money and power – when it has to force the adoption of new lifestyles in society: social manipulation is an integral part of marketing actions, and if the “product” to be sold is an experimental serum or an electric vehicle, the modalities of creating demand and placing it on the market will include a media campaign of pandemic or environmental social alarm thanks to the cooperation of the press, individual journalists, so-called “experts” – virologists or climatologists, for example – and politicians. All of them are in fact employed by the technocratic lobby of the WEF, because they are owned by large investment funds such as Vanguard, BlackRock and State Street or directly or indirectly sponsored by them. If a newspaper spreads certain news, it is because this or that multinational corporation controls it, because they buy advertising space and finance events. And the same applies to research institutes, universities, and foundations that are assigned the task of publishing studies that confirm the narrative. This is accompanied by interference and lobbying activities at public institutions, whose officials sign agreements with private entities that in return finance their activities or that hire them at the end of their term of office, according to the well-known practice of revolving doors.

The circle closes with the last missing piece: the cooperation of the Catholic Church – and of other religions, but in a completely secondary way – to the coup d'état of the globalist elite. The deep church has not hestitated for a moment to lend itself to this ugly alliance, because it is totally occupied by characters linked to the deep state. It did so by pandering to the psychopandemic farce, then aligning itself with the Ukrainian crisis, then embracing the green narrative in an Amazonian flavor through the worship of the Pachamama, and finally prostituting the Synod to woke ideology.

And even when this libido serviendi of the sect of Santa Marta has not been spontaneous, we know well that the blackmail of leading figures would have persuaded them to align themselves without skipping a breath: the scandals of the former Cardinal McCarrick and his minions who are still in power – Cupich, Gregory, Farrell, Tobin, McElroy . . . – are not so different from those of Joe Biden's son. The pathetic and grotesque attempts at whitewashing and cover-up may perhaps postpone the redde rationem that awaits the pedophile-satanist cupola currently in power, but they will not succeed in preventing the truth from emerging in all its terrifying gravity, and from doing justice to these perverts who are devoted to the Evil One. We must be ready, at this juncture, to open our eyes to a vast network of complicity, which will make it clear why this infernal machine has worked so well so far.

We must not just resist: we must become actors rather than reactors: we must take the initiative, as I believe is already happening in many quarters. Only in this way will we realize that the pusillus grex is not so small, and that the gates of hell, just like a haunted house at an amusement park, are only an impressive stage set constructed by those who have already been definitively conquered by Our Lord.

But how to effectively cope with such a widespread and organized network? The forces of those who oppose it, although sustained by a great passion and spirit of sacrifice, appear far insufficient...

Look, I believe that the very efficient organization of the forces of the Enemy is certainly a strength, compared to our disorganization and fragmentation; but at the same time it is also the Enemy’s Achilles' heel. It will be our disorganization, our ability to move autonomously, the unpredictability of our moves that will prevent the deep church from succeeding in its quest to oust us from the Church – and, likewise, the effort of the deep state to oust us from civil society. And vice-versa, it will be precisely their soulless organization and the identifiability of their chain of command that will allow us to sabotage their plans, denounce their authors, and frustrate their actions.

So let's start looking at short-term projects and long-term projects. We must not just resist: we must become actors rather than reactors: we must take the initiative, as I believe is already happening in many quarters. Only in this way will we realize that the pusillus grex is not so small, and that the gates of hell, just like a haunted house at an amusement park, are only an impressive stage set constructed by those who have already been definitively conquered by Our Lord.

Let me conclude with an appeal to support the activity of Exsurge Domine, the Association I have founded to give assistance to priests, seminarians, and men and women religious being persecuted by the Bergoglian junta. Your help will allow us to respond to the many situations of discrimination against these good souls, who are being targeted by unscrupulous mercenaries who are without Faith and above all without Charity. You can find all the information and how to send a contribution by visiting the website www.exsurgedomine.org.

Latest from RTV — VATICAN II, 60 YEARS LATER: Can You Handle the Truth? (includes never-before-seen vintage video)