SATANIC BERNARDIN NEW SAINT IN LEO'S NEW CHURCH

 

To comment please open your gmail account or use my email address, FB Messenger or X (Twitter).

 

 

You won't see this first-hand evidence from the real-life 'Agnes' of Fr Malachi Martin's Windswept House in mainstream Catholic media. And the reason for that is not the satanic, torrid details of an 11 year-old girl's rape and the unspeakable desecration of a consecrated Host by the consecrated hands of Joseph Cardinal Bernardin - who was commonly touted even then in his native Chicago as a candidate for future canonisation.

No. The reason is, the truly virtuous testimony of not-her-real-name 'Agnes' at the age of 80 is a terrible embarrassment to the Vatican. If bruited abroad  - advertised widely in the Catholic world - the ensuing scandal would be a killer for Bernardin's cause for sainthood in the conciliar, synodal church. As for parading him as 'a model' for the future of the Church ... one is left in little doubt as to the diabolical disorientation of said 'Church'.  

Leo's Vatican presents us with a new religion, and a new religion with a New Mass needs new saints to match, right? More 'saints' like Paul VI who invented its Novus Ordo, Protestant Communion service, and the cultish Divine Mercy's St Faustina and her prime promotor, the Q'ran-kissing John Paul II. And these dubious post-Vatican II 'canonisations' were facilitated by JP II himself in his 1983 reform through the Apostolic Constitution Divinus Perfectionis Magister. Most tellingly, the historic role of Devil's Advocate was done away with. Ask yourselves why.

Bear in mind that the beloved, undoubted saint Padre Pio of Pietrelcina (canonised by JP II in 2002) was raised to the altar well before his interview with the famed exorcist Fr Gabriele Amorth in 2011, in which the stigmatist disclosed that he had met Padre Pio around 1960, and spoken with him about the Third Secret of Fatima.

Padre Pio told Amorth that "Satan has been introduced into the bosom of the Church (the physical structures), and within a very short time he will come to rule a false church." Today, in 2026 that false church has arrived, it's in your face, and even the suggestion of a 'St Joseph Bernardin' is evidence of Satan's rule within it. 

Amorth said that Padre Pio was “really tormented” by one issue: the great apostasy, which Mario Luigi Cardinal Ciappi has stated was prophesied by Our Lady of Fatima in the so-called Third Secret, which remains hidden in and by the Vatican to this day - for glaringly obvious reasons. (Incidentally, Padre Pio prayed the Rosary almost constantly (up to 35 times a day), and urged others to pray it also.)

The exorcist, professor and writer Malachi Martin is described by Catholic commentor Anthony Stine https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wjX3AZgocy0 as "the biggest cheerleader" for Pope John Paul II - that is, until Martin went to him with the 'Agnes' story, after which his attitude to JPII changed dramatically. Stine suspects that the Pope's reaction to 'Agnes' convinced Martin to publish Windswept House, with her story 'Agnes' up front, first chapter. 

Stine also warns that readers horrified by that chapter will find her personal testimony now, 70 years later, even harder to stomach. He advises readers to proceed only with due diligence and discretion. 

Mention Malachi Martin and his detractors in the synodal church, influenced by JPII, pop up like jack-in-the-boxes. 'Agnes' sought Martin out in Rome as someone who had the ear of the pope: Father Martin is reputed to have been secretly ordained as a bishop, to work behind the Iron Curtain during the Cold War for the Vatican.

The satanic Bernardin 'crucifix'
 https://juliadufresne.blogspot.com/2025/07/leos-satanic-cross-lavender-mafia-j-h.html

A very salient detail is the odd (to say the least) pectoral cross worn by Bernardin, bequeathed by him to Bergoglio ('Pope Francis') and now worn by Robert Prevost aka 'Pope Leo XIV'.  Incidentally, that same cross is now flaunted by the newish Bishop Mark Beckman of Knoxville, Tennessee, a declared enemy of the Traditional Latin Mass who has now forbidden the recitation of the St Michael Archangel Prayer at all diocesan liturgies. It figures, does it not? 

That pectoral cross seems to be what you might call a badge of dishonour.

Cardinal Bernardin (r); St Mary's, Greenville, South Carolina 

And now to Father David Nix and his revelation of the real-life 'Agnes':

 

Last week I (Fr. David Nix) had a four hour dinner with Bernardin’s victim and her husband. She is now 80 years old. The Satanic Ritual Abuse happened to her about 70 years ago by Fr. Joseph Bernardin (later Cardinal Archbishop of Chicago, top-left.) The abuse happened at St. Mary’s Church in Greenville, SC (top-right.)

My mother is from Chicago (and my father is from West of Chicago) so I grew up hearing from extended family that one day Cardinal Bernardin would be canonized. Much in my life has changed since then. Another thing that has changed is Rome’s recent attempt to rehabilitate the reputation of Bernardin.

 

Keep in mind as you read below that I still support my article from earlier this year describing the gravity of breaking the 8th Commandment on the public reputation of another. But the sins of public members must be exposed if there is evidence.

 

Again, I am 100% certain that I had dinner last week with Bernardin’s own victim from 1957. She now breaks her years of silence because of the upcoming attempts to “canonize” Bernardin.

 

 

yes, it's AI. And yes, it could happen

Reader discretion is highly advised going forward. But I promise you the rest of this article in italics contains only Bernardin’s victim’s words:

 

I am Agnes. Actually, I am not. That name was applied to me by a writer, Malachi Martin, who thought my story to be the perfect overarching explanation for the conditions in the Church that he described in his novel. And, yes, it is my story. He used many details I had given him, but changed the date.

 

I believe he did so to make the story fit better with his aim to make it the framework for his narrative. It happened in 1957, not the early 60’s. It happened in Greenville, South Carolina, and I know nothing of any connection to a ritual in Rome. I saw and heard no telephones.

 

I had been referred to Martin by a priest, who told me that Martin was the Pope’s on-the-ground source in the United States and had good access. I wanted to get the information about a Cardinal to the Pope because only a pope has jurisdiction over a Cardinal. I was leery of going through official channels.

 

There were several people there that night in the Fall of 1957. The apparent leader was someone still unknown to me to this day, a man who spoke German. Other than the nature of the activities, his rhyming words were what made me realize the event was a Satanic ritual. In this month of the departed, I pray for his soul, as I do for all the people there that night.

 

The celebrant was Bishop Russell. He was vested. I had admired him as a child. When he tried to rape me, I recognized and reprimanded him. I had just been confirmed by him a few months prior (this happened in the Fall of 1957 and I was confirmed in February, as I recall).

 

I said, “You are the bishop! You confirmed me. You shouldn’t do this! You should be good!” He was unmoved except for a quick flash of alarm in his blue eyes, an alarm I saw again 40 years later when I visited him in his nursing home.

 

Bishop Russell came frequently to our parish, and with his white hair and stately bearing he was the holy card image of a bishop. I thought he looked like God the Father. When he came,Father Bernardin always came and was always at his side as MC of the Pontifical High Masses that were often celebrated in the parish.

 

I have described the rest of what happened that night elsewhere. I resisted and the people there tried to convince me I was evil. I said God made me and God was good, so I was good.

 

I remember a call from Martin, when he told me that the Holy Father wanted to know something personal about the event, how I felt spiritually. Naïve, I told him this story and he put it in his novel.

 

I will never forget the violation I felt on reading his use of what to me was a most sacred moment (when, because of Confirmation grace, I was able to resist and speak something true) to make believable his sensationalized version of the event.

 

After that, the people were very angry. Their plan, whatever it was, could not succeed. They needed to repress my memory of the event. One way to do that would be to make me feel complicit. Father Bernardin took me in his lap and told me I had been a good girl, that this had been a test and I had done well. I started crying and relaxed, letting down my extreme resistance.

 

That is when he raped me and said he was putting the devil in me, making word associations between semen and demon. He said that if what he did to me felt good, that was the devil in me and meant I was evil.

 

Then he did something sacrilegious with what he said was a consecrated Host and forced me to take it orally, which I did because I wanted to protect it if it were indeed consecrated.

 

After that the light grew dim. There were lots of people in motion. I was offered something to drink and do not remember anything else. As for the dog Martin mentions, there was no dog there. Malachi Martin specifically asked me if I had a pet. I told him that I had had a dog that I loved, but that it had disappeared, and I was told it was my fault.

 

A few years later, we got a new associate pastor, Father Condon, who was later adjudicated on many counts of aggravated sexual assault of minors (boys, at least one of whom committed suicide).

 

He had been Bernardin’s roommate, I read much later, and he began to give graphic mixed group sex-ed talks to our class. Within a month or two, the boys in our class, boys I had known since 2nd grade, changed considerably, becoming focused on homosexual jokes and gestures.

 

Russell was transferred, Bernardin didn’t come back, and my family moved to the (Washington) DC area. I did not think about Bernardin until 1983. When I lived in the Midwest, I knew that a Ber-NAR-Din had been made Archbishop of Chicago but did not make the connection because his name was mispronounced.

 

But after I returned to the States four years later from abroad, I realized who he was, and I began the journey of trying to get him stopped and disciplined by the Church.

 

Where there is one such victim, there are many. I wrote a personal letter to Bernardin, asking him to make public repentance. I told him that God had given him that Holy Season (Lent and Holy Week) to come out.

 

He gave the letter to his review board and they wanted me to cooperate with their completely illegal process. I told them no, they had no jurisdiction, so they made up some new rules involving other bishops. Bernardin died before another Holy Week.

 

I pursued many avenues of report and exposure, risking my safety and that of my family. I could not for years get a lawyer, which anyone needed to deal with the countersuits that always came from the Archdiocese of Chicago. I submitted an amicus brief with Steve Cook’s case.

 

I did not want to sue because I did not want even the appearance of gain. Shortly after, Cook withdrew his suit. He told me he remembered perfectly well but had decided to believe Bernardin’s eyes over his own memories. I said, “Steve, he used those eyes on me when I was 11!” He responded, “I’d hate to think I was conned twice.” Think about what that means.

 

At the end, my husband and I visited the Congregation of Bishops. While at the Vatican, I went to Confession, a confession of nothing related to these events. The priest told me to go home, to forget about what I had come for, to go back and be a quiet housewife. I was shocked. My husband was in law enforcement and knew what those words implied.

 

When Bernardin had a press conference about Cook, he actually talked about my accusations, laughing about them. Steve Cook told me that Bernardin lied about him reconciling with the Church. Cook said he had reconciled with Bernardin but not with the Church. Cook also told me he was writing a book about his experiences. Where is it?

Malachi Martin promised to get my testimony directly to John Paul II (which I assumed he already had done when he conveyed the Pope’s question to me). He asked permission to mention my story in connection with “a little thing” he wanted to publish because he thought it would help people understand the situation in the Church.

 

I thought he meant a commentary or letter to the NYT [New York Times] and that he would just mention a credible allegation. I had no idea of his plan.

 

Over the years, I have kept my identity secret for the sake of my family. One attorney finally agreed to represent me but told me that if I went public, the life of my entire family would be destroyed.

 

By that time, everyone who needed to know had been informed, so there was no point in going public. I have no need for publicity. I thank those journalists who have honorably kept my confidence and I ask them to continue to do so.

 

I write this now because I hear there is a renewed movement to canonize Joseph Bernardin. Would to God we still had a Devil’s Advocate in the canonization process.

 

I have copies of all correspondence, and notes of most conversations.https://padreperegrino.substack.com/p/cardinal-bernardins-victim-speaks

 

Holy St Michael, Archangel, please pray for the Church and all those mentioned above

LEO'S VATICAN BANS SP PILGRIMAGE FOR GOOD - THE LOWDOWN

To comment please open your gmail account or use my email address, FB Messenger or X (Twitter).

 "Oh the ingratitude! Fake-Pope Leo slams the doors of St Peter’s Basilica in the face of 'Give Leo A Chance' Trad Inc." So says a wag on X (Twitter).

And "Oh the shame, oh the ignominy", says - in essence - Tradition's eminence grise, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, in a blistering condemnation of Trad Inc's failed politics of appeasement in regard to the synodal, counterfeit version of the Holy Catholic Church  domiciled in Rome. Specifically, the very good bishop addressed the Vatican's premeditated humiliation of 1,500 traditional Catholics (including many babes in arms) at the 2026 Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage. 

Even more specifically, Viganò named Cardinal Burke, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Abbé Claude Barthe, Monsignor Gilles Wach, Professor Roberto de Mattei, and the leaders of the semi-traditionalist institutes as men who "chose to remain silent so as not to lose face" with the Vatican.

So 1,500 pilgrims were barred from St. Peter's, denied the tomb of the Apostle, and treated like uitlanders by the Vatican. (One week later, Robert Prevost aka Pope Leo XIV was welcoming radical anti-ICE, pro-immigration activists to the Vatican. And then he voted in the US mid-terms which dumped Trump. But we digress.)

Immigration activists detained by ICE

The Vatican’s decision to withhold permission to enter St. Peter’s, said Bishop Athanasius Schneider, was a “scandal” and an “act of pastoral cruelty” which will “surely go down in history as a sign of the Vatican’s disdain for Tradition.” His Excellency traced the controversy back to Traditionis Custodes in which the Vatican had made it clear that “the Traditional Latin Mass must die and be extinguished.”

Traditional Catholics are inured by now to Rome's contempt. We could just shrug our shoulders and await the next scandal, but there's more to this one than first met the eye. The organizers of the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage knew exactly what the Vatican was planning and they stayed shtum. They let those Summorum Pontificum pilgrims in for it.

Not just next year but for good

And the upshot of it all is, the Vatican has banned the Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage for 2027 - and for good. It's the end of an era.

And so, for what it's worth, The Tradical Report: 

DOMESTICATED TRADITIONALISTS

The Price of Silence, Compromise, and Vatican Approval

By The Tradical Report

Stop calling what happened in Rome on October 23–25 an "accident." Stop calling it a "procedural matter" or an "unfortunate coincidence." What happened to the 1,500 pilgrims who were barred from St. Peter's, denied the tomb of the Apostle, and treated like lepers by the Vatican, was a premeditated humiliation.  

But here is the real scandal: it wasn't just the Vatican behaving like the Vatican. The true scandal is that the organizers of the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage knew exactly what was coming, and they chose to keep their mouths shut.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò finally named this betrayal in his explosive statement on X on October 29. He didn't mince words. He opened with the Prophet Isaiah: “Speculatores eius cæci omnes... canes muti non valentes latrare” (Is 56:10)—"His watchmen are all blind... they are dumb dogs who cannot bark."

Viganò shamed the big names. He named Cardinal Burke, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Abbé Claude Barthe, Monsignor Gilles Wach, Professor Roberto de Mattei, and the leaders of the semi-traditionalist institutes. These were the men who "chose to remain silent so as not to lose face" with the Vatican.

Let's be brutally honest about who these organizers are. They are not traditional Catholics. They are conservatives. A conservative wants to save the furniture; a traditionalist wants to save the Faith. A conservative accepts the legitimacy of the conciliar revolution and just wants a little corner where he can say the old Mass in peace.

A traditional Catholic, in the spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre, knows the hierarchy has defected—and he doesn't ask permission from the defectors to keep the Faith. As Lefebvre told Fideliter in 1989: "We do not have the same outlook on a reconciliation." Error and truth are not compatible.

They Knew and Said Nothing

The timeline of this betrayal is sickening. The Vatican denied the usus antiquior Mass on August 7. The organizers scrambled and sent a letter on September 8, begging just to walk into the Basilica and pray. The Vatican's Archbishop Paolo Rudelli shut them down on September 30. The organizers got that letter in Paris on October 12.

They had eleven days. Eleven days to warn the faithful who were booking flights and hotels from all over the world. Instead, they said nothing publicly until October 23—literally twenty-four hours before the pilgrimage began.

They knew. Bishop Schneider especially knew. He had personally asked for the Mass during a private audience with the Vatican and had already been told no. Yet he, along with Burke, Barthe, Wach, and De Mattei, still put their names on this event. They didn't walk with the pilgrims. They abandoned them to keep their cozy relationships with the Palace.

When the pilgrims arrived, they were stopped at the edge of Italian jurisdiction. And what did the organizers do? They whined about the "confusion" caused by commentators and reminded everyone how much they love the Pope who just slapped them in the face. A Vatican spokesman even had the nerve to say they should have made a "more specific request"—a flat-out lie contradicted by the September 8 letter.

Viganò called this exactly what it is: *“È la vergogna che si aggiunge alla vergogna”*—shame added to shame.

At St. Mary Major, Bishop Schneider did offer a Pontifical Low Mass, but Holy Communion wasn't even distributed because the time limit was exceeded by eight minutes. And the organizers had the absolute gall to send a written thank-you note to the archpriest and the ceremoniarius.

It is pathetic. As Viganò said, these men preach the Mass of All Time but act like "employees of an administration." They don't disturb, they don't expose themselves, they don't say a word until it's safe to speak. The faithful traveled, prayed, and got humiliated. The pastors weren't asked to conquer the Basilica. They were just asked to warn their flocks. They didn't have the guts to do it.

The Elephant in the Room: The Lineage Problem

But let's go deeper. The problem isn't just their cowardice. The problem is their entire ecclesiology—and their sacramental lineage.

The conservative "Traditional Mass" industry is built on sand. I'm talking about the FSSP and the ICKSP. They claim to offer the Mass of All Time, but look at their bishops. Their priests are ordained in the old rite, sure—but by bishops consecrated in the 1968 Novus Ordo rite.

You cannot build a traditional priesthood on a doubtful episcopacy. If the bishop wasn't consecrated properly, how can we be sure the priest he ordains is actually a priest? As one resistance observer bluntly put it: "Why does it matter if they hold onto the TLM when it is at best doubtful that the priest offering it is even a priest?"

This isn't a coincidence. Another observer noted that "not one of the non-Lefebvre ordinations of the Fraternity of St. Peter were done by an old ceremony consecrated bishop... It had to be done purposely." The only FSSP priests we can be completely sure about are the few original ones ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre himself.

When faithful kneel for Communion at an FSSP or ICKSP Mass, they are being fed "mouthfuls" of uncertainty while being told it's Tradition. Good will doesn't replace valid orders. A movement that champions the old Mass while quietly accepting a doubtful priesthood isn't defending the Faith. It's putting on a liturgical pageant on a foundation of sand.

A Combatant Warning to the Neo-SSPX 

  And now, I have to say something to our own brethren in the neo-SSPX.

I see the shadows creeping in. I see the spirit of *Summorum Pontificum* conservatism—this comfortable, face-saving, negotiating spirit—seeping into the halls of the Society of St. Pius X. Some of its leaders and priests are adopting the language of the conciliar establishment. They are softening the sharp, anti-modernist combat that Archbishop Lefebvre waged.

The neo-SSPX is being contaminated from the inside out. Liberal priests are diluting the salt. They are trying to turn a fortress of Faith into a comfortable chaplaincy for nostalgic conservatives. They want respectability in the eyes of the Vatican more than they want the approval of God. They are becoming exactly what Viganò called out: "domesticated traditionalists."

Do not follow the spirit of conservatism. It is a dead end. It is the exact same spirit that led the organizers of this 2026 pilgrimage to betray their own faithful into the hands of the modernists.

We pray this contagion doesn't spread. The Society must keep the real Traditional spirit—the fighting spirit of the old SSPX, the spirit of the Cross. If the neo-SSPX trades its combat for conservative appeasement, it will just become a slightly more traditional wing of the conciliar Church. It will lose its entire reason for existing.

Don't let the infiltrators turn the SSPX into another Ecclesia Dei community. Don't let the superiors trade the birthright of Tradition for a bowl of pottage. The faithful don't need another conservative club. We need the uncompromised, fighting Church of all ages. Remember Lefebvre: "The day we compromise, we are lost."

The Lesson of 2026

This year's pilgrimage wasn't a tragedy. It was a revelation. It proved that the conservative project—petition, negotiate, preserve face, hope for a good protocol number—has no future. The Vatican told them no in two lines, without a reason.

The Palace is at least consistent with itself. As Viganò said: "The Palace did what the Palace does: it responded in two lines, without a reason, with a protocol number."

We, the Resistance, must be equally consistent. We don't seek the face of the Palace. We don't organize pilgrimages to beg for a basilica from men who want to eradicate the Traditional Mass. We don't pretend that conserving the liturgy is a substitute for transmitting the Faith and the sacraments.

It's time to leave the Summorum Pontificum charade behind. As the Lord said, “Domus mea domus orationis vocabitur cunctis populis” (Is 56:7)—My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples. All peoples, that is, except Catholics who just want to profess and pray.  

None of those who knew the truth had the courage to say it out loud. We will.

To the faithful: stay close to your true Resistance priests. To the neo-SSPX: wake up before the rot sets in completely. And to the modernists in the Vatican: we will not ask for your permission. We will not seek your face. We will fight for the Mass of All Time until our last breath, contra mundum.

 

On Christ the King Weekend, Traditional Catholics Shut Out of Rome and Lourdes

 

From  Riaan van Zyl at Integrity Magazine:

 

While “House Trads” and conservative slopagandists continue to reel with disbelief and performative indignation, another voice has joined the chorus condemning the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage.

Once again, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has reached for his proverbial sword and launched a blistering attack on the organizers and prominent supporters of the pilgrimage, accusing them of abandoning the faithful to preserve their relationships with the conciliar hierarchy.

The former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States condemned not only the Vatican’s treatment of traditionalist pilgrims but also the cowardice and duplicity of those supposedly defending Catholic Tradition.

 

“Those who should have told the faithful what they knew, and who chose to remain silent so as not to lose face,” he said, referring to the fact that event organizers had been told ahead of time they would not be allowed the process into St. Peter’s as a group. “They knew, and their fault is not only silence, but betrayal toward their own faithful, upon whom the humiliation and scandal of the denial fell.”

As Integrity Magazine argued shortly after the ill-fated event, the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage has become nothing more than a humiliation ritual that perpetuates the dangerous illusion that Catholic Tradition can coexist within the apostate, post-conciliar establishment, an institution which desires nothing less than its eradication. 

Summorum Pontificum - an humiliation ritual

Viganò then used the words of the prophet Isaiah to describe the perpetrators of the fiasco as “blind watchmen, all of them ignorant; they are dumb dogs, unable to bark.”

Next, he made a damning observation that should serve as a wake-up call to those pretending to be outraged and surprised by the Vatican’s rejection. “At this point, I am no longer interested in the Palace. The Palace has done what the Palace does: it responded in two lines, without a reason, with a protocol number.

The Palace, at least, is consistent with itself,” wrote His Excellency, before rightly explaining that the real scandal lies in the conduct of those who claim to defend Catholic Tradition while remaining unwilling to jeopardize their standing with the conciliar establishment.

The good archbishop noted that, “what interests me are those who should have told the faithful what they knew, and who chose to remain silent so as not to lose face,” before explicitly naming the most prominent culprits, including Cardinal Raymond Burke, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Abbé Claude Barthe, Monsignor Gilles Wach, and representatives of semi-traditionalist institutes.

Later in his X post, Viganò was equally scathing about subsequent attempts to explain away the scandal. “Someone then hurried to explain, after the fact, that in the end it was a procedural matter, a misunderstanding, an unfortunate circumstance: it is shame added to shame,” he fumed.

Viganò did not spare one of the main protagonists of the “tradi-conservatism” movement, Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, denouncing what he called a “pathetic retraction” he issued over details surrounding the event while rebuking it on the whole.:

Whoever justifies the official who denies prayer before the Altar of the Chair is not defending the Church: he is defending a bureaucratic fiction against the Faith, as well as his own interests … It is the shame of seeing men who preach the Mass of all time behave, when it comes to ‘putting their face on the line,’ like employees of an administration: one does not disturb, does not expose oneself, says nothing until it can be said without consequences.

The underlying premise of the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage, which was established in 2012, was that the Traditional Latin Mass could flourish through negotiated coexistence with the post-conciliar hierarchy. That premise has now completely imploded.

The restrictions imposed under Traditionis Custodes, the 2026 crackdown on diocesan and Ecclesia Dei Latin Masses, and the “excommunication” of the SSPX, followed by the humiliations surrounding this year’s pilgrimage, demonstrate the futility of endlessly seeking permission from authorities who are vehemently hostile to Catholic Tradition.

Archbishop Viganò’s post has now also exposed the moral bankruptcy of this approach. Integrity Magazine concurs with His Excellency on the points raised in his denunciation and reiterates its recent call: It is time to abandon the Summorum Pontificum charade, because Catholic Tradition is not a privilege to be negotiated with its enemies.Viganò rebukes Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage's appeasement-minded organizers - Integrity Magazine

O Mary, Mater Ecclesiae, ora pro nobis