Refresher course on conditional baptism (not “rebaptism”)

by T. Stanfill Benns | Feb 4, 2026 | New Blog

February, Month of the Holy Trinity and the Holy Family

Prayer Society Intention: I adore the O Blessed Trinity, One God; have mercy on me now and at the hour of my death and save me. (Raccolta)

+St. Agatha, Virgin Martyr+

The following is posted after a reader revealed there is some confusion between conditional baptism and rebaptism, (baptizing as if the person has never been baptized before). Hopefully this will dispel any misapprehensions and better explain the reasons for administering conditional baptism.

© Copyright 2020, revised 2026; T. Stanfill Benns (All emphasis within quotes is the author’s unless indicated otherwise.)

Introduction

In the Baptism of infants, as well as the baptism of adults who wish to become Catholic in these times, many have questioned what actually constitutes good reason to baptize someone who may already have been baptized before, but where certain circumstances prevent one from knowing the validity of that baptism. Therefore, it is essential to understand how and when we may determine these circumstances to the best of our ability and what to do when we can’t be certain about the need to baptize. Below we hope to examine all the reasons why both Novus Ordo and Traditionalist baptisms cannot be held as certainly valid, or, to be honest, valid at all, and why in the case of those coming to the pray-at-home position, any baptism in these sects should be conditionally repeated.

A look back

As William Strojie observed in the 1980s, the baptism of the Novus Ordo church cannot be trusted as true sacramental baptism, for many reasons. Some would argue that because even lay heretics and Jews can validly administer Baptism, then this means that we cannot question baptism as invalidly administered because the Church recognizes the baptism of these individuals. The caveat here is that the Church actually teaches that in baptizing others, even heretics and apostates must intend to “do what the Church does;” in other words even though they are not Catholics they must intend to do what true Catholics do in baptizing. Not so these Novus Ordo ministers. As Mr. Strojie notes, there is no mention of the bestowal of sanctifying grace or the removal of original sin in the new rite of Baptism, the sole purpose in every baptismal ceremony performed in the Church prior to the false Vatican 2 council. Instead the child is “initiated into the community” and is “empowered to sanctify creation.”

Strojie points out that the importance of the community is emphasized over and over again just as it was when eliminating the Latin Mass and promoting the NOM. We can relate this to a modernized form of communism — communitarianism — that has permeated society for decades, and as a form of heresy could scarcely be mentioned in the same breath as valid baptism. Also suspect here is the intent of using “Holy Spirit” vs. Holy Ghost. The Mormons use this form, but the “spirit” intended by them is Jesus’ “brother,” Lucifer! Strojie mentions the Theosophist Leadbetter’s baptism, identical to the Catholic form but intended to initiate the baptized into the mysteries of the Solar Deity.

The Church always has taught that one can never take chances where the Sacraments are concerned. If there is any doubt the Sacrament was invalid or would be invalid, it must either be performed again conditionally with the right intention or not performed at all until it can be performed validly. Those today who baptize, believing the NO is the true Church and intending to do what its ministers do, cannot convey the Sacrament to others. Traditionalists who believe that the juridical Church can exit on earth without a true pope and valid bishops and priests can issue from Her, cannot intend to make those they baptize members of Christ’s true Church on earth because they hold a conception of that Church that is heretical.  These craven ministers fraudulently baptize their subjects into what only APPEARS to be the Catholic Church, and as the canonists T. Lincoln Bouscaren and Adam Ellis explain: “SUBSTANTIAL ERROR INVALIDATES AN ACT… Error of law or a fact, if it is substantial, renders an act null and void.” It must be remembered that as Can. 22 teaches: “A more recent law given by competent authority abolishes a former law if the new law explicitly says so or if it is directly contrary to the old law or if it takes up and re-adjusts the entire subject matter of the former law.”

Some have objected that the teachings of Pope St. Stephen validate these baptisms. But what Pope St. Stephen and the Council of Trent forbade was to repeat baptism absolutely, as though it was certain it had never been administered in the first place. This is known as the rebaptism controversy, and that is what Pope St. Stephen was forbidding even in the early days of the Church. But doctrine has developed since his day. According to the Catechism of the Council of Trent: “Nor let anyone suppose that it is repeated by the Church when she baptizes anyone whose previous baptism was doubtful, making use of this formula: ‘If thou art baptized, I baptize thee, and not again; but if thou art not yet baptized, I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ In such cases baptism is not to be considered as impiously repeated, but as holily yet conditionally administered. According to the authority of Pope Alexander, the conditional form of baptism is to be used only when, after due inquiry, doubts are entertained as to the validity of the previous baptism. In no other case is it ever lawful to administer baptism a second time, even conditionally” (Revs. McHugh and Callan, 1923). Later, in 1679, Bd. Pope Innocent XI condemned the notion that one can use a probable, not the safer, opinion to determine the value of the Sacraments, particularly the Sacraments of Baptism and Holy Orders (DZ 1151).

The use of “spirit” in the Novus Ordo sect

Unfortunately, the Novus Ordo church has returned to those teachings about the Trinity condemned in the early centuries and now holds concepts concerning Three Persons in One God that calls even the validity of Baptism into question. In his The Emergence of Catholic Tradition, Jar Slav Pelican, commenting in 1971 on the teachings of the early Fathers in regard to the Trinity noted that the word spirit could be used for the Divine in Christ, effectively separating His Divinity from His humanity. This is a denial of the Incarnation, one of the heresies for which Antichrist will be specifically known. This heresy was condemned in 680 by Pope St. Agatho at the Roman Council, (DZ 288). As Pelican explains, Christ’s “spirit” and the Holy Ghost have nothing to do with each other. He cited such a distinction as suggestive of a “binitarian mode of thinking,” and ascribed it to “those early Christian writings, which still showed marks of the Jewish origins of Christianity.”

Early Hebrew heretics rejecting Christianity taught that the Holy Ghost was the “life-giving” or creative principle of the Trinity, a notion condemned in 451 by the Council of Chalcedon. The Hindu teaching of Kundalini is responsible for this identification, teaching the “sacredness” of sex for its own sake and equating the creative power with the Divine creative principle in God the Father. Some heretics even described the Third Person as a female. This can be traced to the Egyptian “trinity” of Osiris, Isis and Horus, where Isis is revered as “God the Mother,” spouse of Osiris, (Fire of Creation, by J.J. Vander Leeuw). Vander Leeuw provided the missing factor in the androgyny equation: “It is by giving the worship of Our Lady the proper place in the Christian religion… that we can actively insist in bringing nearer that religion of the near future, which in its ideals will show us the unity that binds what we call the masculine and feminine aspect in all things… This precious heritage… the worship of God the Mother… (will), in the Christianity of the future, be a great and splendid religious ideal.”

So here we have the reason why Theosophy reveres Our Lady, and New Age priestess Annie Besant is even featured in one photo holding a rosary. The Church had grave reasons indeed for mandating the use of Holy Ghost in the English language, particularly in prayer and the Sacraments when administered in English: to eliminate the possibility of error in reference to this blasphemous and heretical idea of spirit. The use of Holy Spirit versus Holy Ghost began to creep into Catholic missals and prayer books in English in the 1940s, 1950s. In his work New Age Bible Versions, G.A. Riplinger contrasted newly translated biblical texts to the King James and (in some instances) the Douay-Rheims versions. He concluded that all these modern translations have replaced “Holy Ghost” with “Holy Spirit” in key passages, a change arising, he said, “from ecumenical practices.” He cited the rebuke from Job 26:4 to those who were moved, not of the holy Spirit of God, but by their “human spirit;” and also referred these changes to Gal. 3:5 and Cor. 2:11 which mention “unclean spirits.” This affords us further insight into what may be intended by the Novus Ordo usage.

In “returning” to the primitive usage of Holy Spirit on the ruse that this return reflected a greater faithfulness to Tradition, the Novus Ordo church failed to explain to its members why the usage was suppressed in the first place. The Kabbalistic Jews believed in an ever-generating (and incestuous) quatrinity. They even represented Christ as synonymous with the pagan god Metraton and Samauel, the evil principle in Kabbalism, (The Kabbala Unveiled). And the Gnostics who infiltrated first Jewish then Christian ranks taught man’s divinity. Protestant author Texe Marrs provided a more sinister explanation of the term Holy Spirit along these same lines in his work, Dark Majesty. Quoting Rex Hutchins’ A Bridge to Light, Marrs wrote: “There is a Life-Principle of this world, a universal agent, wherein are two natures and a double current of love and wrath…It is a ray detached from the glory of the Sun…It is the Holy Spirit, the universal Agent, the serpent…”

Since spirit can refer to the soul of Christ excluding the Holy Ghost from the Trinity, or even to Satan as a “necessary” component of that same Trinity, can this ambiguous usage, so suggestive of Manichaean dualism, be accepted as innocuous, particularly in the administration of the sacraments? In condemning the errors of Michael Molinos, Pope Innocent XI taught that a probable opinion could never be used in administering the Sacraments, the safer opinion being abandoned, (DZ 1151). So if it is a matter of mere opinion (which it cannot be, since the Church has suppressed the usage to avoid the danger of a wrong conception of the Trinity) the safer opinion and that adhered to traditionally by the Church must be preferred. Other errors of Molinos condemned by Bd. Pope Innocent XI include the use of ambiguous words, (DZ 1177). The Sacraments convey the graces necessary for salvation and the Church tolerates no possibility of error or a false intention in their administration.

Spirit is an ambiguous word that could be interpreted as man sharing literally in Christ’s divinity, Satan’s long-coveted ambition, and many today believe such a thing is possible. Such a conception of the Mystical Body is in direct contradiction of all Church teaching on the matter; for while Catholics are granted a share in the Church’s earthly, spiritual upbuilding, they are invited to heed only the call to be “other Christs,” not THE Christ. To avoid any confusion on this matter, Pope Pius XII specifically proscribed any idea of membership in the Mystical Body that passed “beyond the sphere of creatures and wrongly enter(s) the Divine, were it only to the extent of appropriating to themselves but one single attribute of the eternal Godhead,” (Mystici Corporis). As stated above, these heretics wish to limit the identification of the Holy Ghost with a “Christ-spirit” emanating from His soul — a spirit they say we share with Him. So in Mystici Corporis Pope Pius XII went to great lengths to identify the Holy Ghost as a separate person in one God, not an indistinct extension of Christ Himself. To pervert the Holy Ghost’s action in the Sacrament of Baptism or any of the Sacraments, or to omit His existence at all disfigures the intention requisite for sacramental validity. Depending on the minister and his understanding of theology, it could refer to the “holy spirit” of Christ indwelling (a heresy), which is entirely separate from the indwelling of the Holy Ghost. The indwelling of the Holy Ghost is lost through commission of mortal sin, but this spirit referred to in Novus Ordo usage is bestowed on recipients as a constantly abiding principle. This would explain why the form in Novus Ordo baptism no longer refers to taking away original sin. For if all are divine by nature, who can sin?

The apostate priest Abbe Roca puts this usage into context by predicting, in his work Glorious Century, that “The convert of the Vatican…will rest content with confirming and glorifying the spirit of Christ, or Christ-spirit [divine humanity], seed of the Word, in the public mind.” The Catholic Encyclopedia under Holy Ghost explained that in the works of St. Paul the word spirit, particularly the use of the term “spirit of God, [can] signify at times the soul or man himself.” In denying the existence of the Holy Ghost as a Divine entity, some ranked Him among the highest choir of angels. Others identified Him as the female principle, or “feminine side” of God. And evidence that these heresies still exist is readily available.

Rev. Leeming verified the Church’s condemnation of the above interpretation for spirit. “St. Irenaeus tells us that certain of the Gnostic sects taught that the ‘Father’ whom Christ revealed was different from the Creator of the Universe, and that the spirit who came upon Jesus was really Christ. They carried out their false beliefs in the ceremonies of Baptism, for Iranaeus says they baptized ‘in the name of the unknown father of all, truth, mother of all and in him who descended into Jesus,’” (#597). Others, St. Epiphanius says, baptized “’in the name of the uncreated God, the created Son and in the name of the spirit of sanctification, created by the Son.’” The Fathers were suspicious of the use of the names, Father, Son and Holy Spirit by these sects because they could be understood in a sense different than that of the true Trinity. The Paulinists used the above formula and were condemned by the Council of Nicaea, (DZ 56). The Sacraments of Baptism and Orders administered by the Paulinists were to be entirely repeated for this reason, since the correct Trinitarian formula must be  used for both Sacraments.

Illicit Baptism 

This topic, to the best of the author’s knowledge, has never been addressed. But it is important to address it because like all the other Sacraments, Baptism can be validly but illicitly given and/or received, and if this is the case then the graces it is meant to convey are absent. This is true anytime one who is not a priest (for whatever reasons, including invalid and/or illicit ordination) attempts to perform Solemn Baptism, not the simple baptism performed by the laity; or when one who may be validly and licitly (or illicitly) ordained and does not possess jurisdiction performs Solemn Baptism.

Rev. Stanislaus Grabowski, in his examination of St. Augustine’s idea of the Church, (“The Church,” 1957), notes: “Without the Holy Ghost are such as have been baptized in heretical and schismatic factions… Baptism so administered produces in the soul of the recipient an effect which Augustine calls a form or ‘forma,’ [the indelible mark?]. However, since it is produced outside the Church, it is irregular and illicit and consequently it does not convey a life of grace, it does not bring a rebirth of the soul, it does not effect a participation in the Holy Ghost,” and unfortunately this includes Traditional sects because they are not Catholic and not in communion with the pope. Grabowski says such a Sacrament from heretics and schismatics “is not worthless. Because it is valid it impinges a ‘form’ on the recipient… On account of the sacramental ‘form’ impressed on the baptized one, when such a person returns from heresy and schism… to the fold of the Church,” he becomes a member of the Mystical Body, returns to grace and receives the Holy Ghost.

“The sinner administering it in the Church does not hinder the Sacrament from producing that life which he himself does not have, for it is Christ who is the principal minister. The sacrament is not affected by the sinfulness of the dispenser,” and this is the entire thrust of the Donatist heresy fought by St. Augustine and mistakenly applied by Traditionalists to the situation today. Sinfulness is one thing; lack of membership in the Church quite another. “…The sacrament, however, does not produce the supernatural life it is intended to convey…[when] administered or received outside the pale of the Church of Christ. This Church is the sole legitimate possessor of the sacraments. Just as they are said to be the sacraments of Christ, they are the sacraments of the Church.”

“After irregular baptism, received at the hands of heretics or schismatics, the recipients should be reconciled to the Church and receive the baptism of the Spirit… Theodori Poenit. li. il. 13, a.d. 673, in Haddan & Stubbs, in. 192 : “If an ordained priest discovers he has not been baptized let him be baptized and reordained, and all whom he previously baptized be re-baptized. The same is repeated i. ix. 12, Ibid. in. 185, with this addition: It is stated that another decision has been given on this point by the Roman Pontiff, according to which the grace of baptism is not conferred by the man who baptizes, although he be a pagan, but by the Spirit of God. See note 110 above. Nicolaus l. a.d.865, ap. Gratian in. Dist. iv. c. 24: You say that many in your country were baptized by a Jew who may have been a Christian or may have been a pagan, and ask what ought to be done.

“If such have been baptized in the name of the Trinity… they ought not to be re-baptized…Theodori Poenit. li. ix. 3. 1. c. p. 197: Whoever has a doubt about his baptism let him be baptized. Alexander in. a.d. 1180, in Decret. Lib. in. Tit. xlii. c. 2 : Concil. Westminster, a.d.1200, Can. 3: We charge according to the holy canons that the sacraments of which there is a doubt be conferred. Const.1, Langton, a.d. 1223 ; Const. 11, Edmund, a.d. 1236: If he find by full evidence that baptism was given in the form of the Church let him approve the fact, whether he did it in Latin, French, or English. But if not let him baptize the child.” (From: The Complete Manual of Canon Law, by Oswald J. Reichel, M.A., B.CAL., F.S.A.; author of The See of Rome in the Middle Ages, 1923).

Traditionalists and intention

We have seen above how Traditionalists, in performing Solemn Baptism, not only baptize illicitly but fraudulently. For while a simple lay baptism by their pseudo-priests might be argued to be valid, given the right intention can be proved, a Solemn Baptism, to be administered only by validly ordained priests, is fraudulent and sacrilegious. And as taught in Can. 104, such acts by laymen pretending to be priests are therefore null and void, both under Can. 104 and Pope Pius XII’s Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis. But does a Traditionalist, whether a pseudo-priest or not, even when baptizing privately, have the right intention to baptize? For they must intend to baptize the individual as a member of the Catholic Church in “the same sense and understanding” of that Church as it has always existed (Pope St. Pius X). They can call their baptism Catholic, and claim the church they are baptizing such a person in is Catholic, but is this the actual truth? No, because the clergy and faithful of the one, true Catholic Church must always be in communion with and obedient to a head bishop, the Pope, to be Catholic.

One cannot claim to possess hierarchy and constitute the Catholic Church without the pope. Is it different than any other heretics or schismatics baptizing people into their sects, meaning if the proper matter and form is used it could be valid? Yes, it is different; for never before have sects such as the Novus Ordo and Traditionalists insisted they were CATHOLIC and possessed valid hierarchy and Sacraments. Again, their very insistence constitutes fraud and nullifies and invalidates all their acts.

We have “Solemn Baptism,” (irregular) received at the hands of heretics and schismatics (Traditionalists, Novus Ordo ministers) and we are not sure if they had the intention of baptizing “in the name of the Trinity.” Or if, in the case of Traditionalists, they intended to baptize into the true Catholic Church which, if it claims to possess bishops, must always be under obedience to a head bishop, a canonically elected pope. One cannot proceed on doubt concerning a matter involving the Sacraments. When possible, one must always be certain to have received Baptism by water. It is not lawful or prudent to ever rely on Baptism of desire when valid water Baptism is available.

Conclusion

Because Baptism is a Sacrament necessary for salvation, there cannot be any doubt concerning its validity for it to take effect. It is the common opinion of theologians that any time there is any question in our minds about the validity of any of the Sacraments, we are not to partake in them or presume they are valid if we have done, without realizing the dangers. Since the Novus Ordo and Traditionalists are non-Catholic sects just like any other sect, and because we have no bishops or pope to put this question to, in my opinion it is wise to conditionally baptize anyone who has been baptized in the Novus Ordo or Traditionalist sects. This since the minister’s right intention cannot be proved.

We should inquire carefully concerning any previous “baptisms,” but when inquiry fails to prove validity, we should not hesitate to baptize conditionally. Rev. Adolphe Tanquerey writes in his Dogmatic Theology: “In case of necessity, anyone who has the use of reason can baptize, even licitly. This is certain: first, from the declaration of the Lateran Council IV (‘The sacrament of baptism, rightly performed by anyone in the form of the Church, is useful unto salvation for little ones and for adults’ — DZ 430); from the Council of Florence (“In the case of necessity, however, even…a layman or a woman, yes even a pagan or a heretic can baptize, so long as he preserves the form of the Church and has the intention of doing as the Church does.’ — DZ 696); also Canon 742; secondly, from the practice of the Church…thirdly, it is most fitting that Baptism, so necessary for salvation, be able to be easily conferred — hence that it be able to be conferred by all.”

The following on Baptism is taken from A Practical Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, by Rev. Stanislaus Woywod and revised by Rev. Callistus Smith, Vol. 1, (Imprimatur and Copyright 1943, pages 353 and 354):

“Of the Time and Place of Baptism”

“668. Infants shall be baptized as soon as possible. Pastors and preachers shall often remind the faithful of this grave obligation.” (Canon 770) …It is considered to be within the power of the Bishop to demand that the Baptism be conferred within eight days after birth, making due allowance for circumstances where that regulation would impose undue hardship.In an Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of the Propaganda, July 31, 1902, to the missionaries among the Nestorians, it states that Baptism shall be conferred on the infants at least within eight days after birth, and if necessary, Private Baptism should be given rather than wait longer for Solemn Baptism.

“669. … One may hold with Noldin and Vermeersch-Creusen that one cannot delay Baptism over a month without sinning gravely against the law. If circumstances are such – and they certainly exist in the scattered districts of the United States — that the priest cannot be had within a month — some layperson should be asked by the parents to baptize the child, rather than delay the Baptism. The Sacred Congregation of the Propaganda approved an Instruction given to the catechists and other well-instructed Catholics to baptize any of the infants of the Christians, though they are in good health, if the priest is absent or it is difficult to go to him. We saw that the Instructions to the missionaries among the Nestorians insisted that Baptism should be conferred within eight days, and that, when necessary, the infants should be baptized privately rather than delay Baptism and expose the infants to the danger of dying without it.

“670.Private Baptism may, in case of necessity, be given at any time and in any place (Canon 771).

One further note

All baptisms by Catholic adults when no priest is available are valid as long as the intention to baptize the child into the Catholic Church as she existed up to pope Pius XII’s death is present and the proper form is used.  This is a matter of Catholic teaching and Canon Law and has been for centuries. In his Communication in Religious Worship with Non-Catholics (Catholic University of America Press, Sacred Theology Dissertation, 1943), Rev. John Bancroft, C.S.S.R., J.C.B, S.T.L, notes that the approved theologian Lemkuhl believes that heretic, apostate and schismatic priests are the equivalent of vitandi. Merkelbach and several others are quoted as believing that to allow anyone but a Catholic layman, that is a heretic, infidel, apostate, or vitandus to baptize is a mortal sin. Bancroft quotes a decision of the Holy See that seems to indicate that even when there is a question of Baptism by either lay Catholics or even lay non-Catholics versus a non-Catholic priest, the lay Catholics or non-Catholics are to be preferred! He concludes: “What has been said has referred to the administration of Baptism by a [valdily ordained] non-Catholic priest. The doctrine applies a fortiori to a non-Catholic [non-ordained] minister. He has no consecration to act as a minister of the Sacraments [so is] really only a layman.”

Candace Owens, TPUSA and the deepfake psyop

by T. Stanfill Benns | Jan 26, 2026 | New Blog

+St. Paul’s Conversion+

(Catch the new comment a reader made on Robert Robbins’ misogyny HERE. Please keep the Robbins’ in your prayers. Now onto this week’s topic.)

Introduction

As most readers know and some have lamented, I have been following Candace Owens’ coverage of the Charlie Kirk assassination from day one.  The Zionism angle and her realization that this group corresponds to the Apocalypse quote regarding the Synagogue of Satan intrigued me.  Then of course there were the conflicting reports that before his death Kirk had been considering conversion to the Novus Ordo. “Considering” here is the important word. When over the years I have been prompted to pay attention to things like this I have learned not to ignore these promptings; we all know where they come from. Following the guidance of the Holy Ghost is what led me to realize at age 19 I would witness in my lifetime what others had never seen; that Traditionalists were never Catholic; that David Bawden could never have become a pope; that LibTrad pseudo-clergy were invalid.

One reader commented not long ago that Owens was running a psyops and I was being pulled into it. Yes, she is running her own brand of psyops while exposing others, but I realized this was a possibility early on. I simply wanted to give her the benefit of the doubt, and no, I am not falling for it. The reason Catholics in the past were pulled into one LibTrad sect and scheme after another is that they did not sit back and evaluate the position of the ones running the scheme — try to figure the angle, point out the pros and cons, make note of any errors. It takes time and some head work, but eventually taking notes and paying attention pays off. Finally all that has paid off now, and a shadowy outline of what may be going on here is emerging. Things could change; there may be some positives, but I highly doubt it. Owens may think she is looking for the truth but I am afraid that her British husband — her priests and their Latin Mass — will make sure she never finds it.

Lately she has been advertising the magisterium AI site, as if AI is any vehicle from which to learn true Catholicism. That was red flag number one. She wants the easy way out, for herself and her readers. You don’t learn the faith from a conglomeration of true and false “papal” documents mashed into a nice little mental sandwich; it doesn’t work that way. This is exactly the reason readers on this site were cautioned about Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. But compression of Catholic theological truths is dangerous. The book review on Dr. Ott’s work written by John J. King, O.M.I. for the January 1956 issue of the American Ecclesiastical Review states: “The publication of this volume by Dr. Ott should bolster the argumentation of those who protested the use of the ‘digest’ approach to the study of sacred theology. Dr. Ott has attempted to compress the entire field of dogmatic theology (including fundamental, special and Sacramental dogma) into a single volume of 519 pages… Very often in the scientific exposition of the dogmas of the Church conciseness can be attained only at the expense of clarity and accuracy…”

But it is her failure to provide her listeners with the WHOLE truth that is most disturbing, although we know she cannot do that without questioning her Novus Ordo “faith.” She talks about infiltration of non-believers into the TPUSA organization and other non-Catholic groups; she warns parents to take their children out of even private schools and home school them; she warns of those in the military industrial complex erasing and rewriting history, but she fails to note the beginning of this effort and track it to its initial source. She warns of sex trafficking and pedophilia in the ranks of government and the military, as well as in Protestant sects, but she omits the sex scandals that have rocked the Novus Ordo since the 1960s. These scandals began when what was once the Catholic Church was successfully infiltrated by Modernists and Freemasons, beginning in the late 1800s.  She talks of conspiracy facts, but ignores the most glaring conspiracy of all — the usurpation of the papacy from 1958 on.

What may really be going on with Owens became clear recently. She reported in one podcast that TPUSA is now reorganizing, firing a good chunk of employees to head in a “new direction.” And as always happens with such reorganizations, on the heels of these firings follow also a departure of further employees and a realignment of loyalties.  A new conservative patriotic group will most likely rise now, she predicted, and while it remained unsaid, it will possibly be headed by Owens herself. This splinter group will cater to conservative Novus Ordo catholics, especially the young among her audience, who have recently flocked to the Latin Mass that she also attends. Disillusioned TPUSA “Christians” will be reminded that Kirk eventually embraced Catholicism and that the Novus Ordo and its Latin Mass should be what they are joining and attending, because it would be what Charlie wanted for them. One of Owens’ dreams might even suggest this. Who killed Kirk and why will eventually fall to the wayside, as the new brand he left in his last days takes shape. This by way of contrast to what Owens rightly characterizes as the corporate Christianity TPUSA now hypocritically promotes.

It is time Owens’ audience hears the rest of the story, or rather the true beginning of the story, and where it really leads. In The Phantom Church in Rome, I touched on the Knights of Malta, an organization that turned the Catholic Church in America on its head and contributed to everything Owens has mentioned as destroying America today in her broadcasts — the military industrial complex, Freemasonry, Zionism, child trafficking, espionage, and much more.  It was in an e-book I wrote in 2006, however, that I first addressed this topic at length, and the following excerpt from that book gives the history of what paved the way for events today. Owens presents as though they were just now emerging, something far from the truth. They are part and parcel of her church, the dark past of an American secret society that helped topple the true Church and usher in ecumenism and the false Vatican 2 council. And Owens can’t abandon ecumenism because without it she lacks the hook to draw in former TPUSA members who don’t identify as Catholics. Below we read the real story, the background she failed to provide.

The Sovereign Knights of Malta finance the Church

Once upon a time, Francis Cardinal Spellman, a friend of Pope Pius XII referred to by some as the American Pope, ran his own little kingdom right in the U.S:  the Knights of Malta, suspected heir apparent of the Templar legacy. In the early 1950s, Spellman and fellow Cardinals Nicola Canali and Angelo Roncalli, later John 23, were implicated in a money scandal that shook the order in the early 1950s, and eventually came to the attention of Pope Pius XII. Spellman had been accepting thousands of dollars in “contributions” for bestowing knightly titles on American members, and the Vatican was receiving only a minute fraction of the monies collected. The ensuing investigation was little more than a whitewash, author Paul I. Murphy recorded in his La Popessa, a biography of Sr. Pascalina. And not a whisper of conspiratorial conduct issued concerning the knights.

Pius XII trusted Spellman implicitly and this trust may have been his undoing. In appropriating the Knights of Malta for pro-active ventures on behalf of the Church, it seems that Spellman and other Cardinals took advantage of the K of M’s shadow-lands existence as an organization. If no heads turned at Spellman’s recourse to the K of M for financial assistance, it was due to the fact that for centuries the Holy See officially sanctioned the Knights and the Order conducted its activities under the watchful eye of the Church.  According to the DeMontor’s Lives and Times of the Popes, this was to ensure that the Hospitallers would not experience the same “fate as the Templars,” (Vol. IV, under Pope John XXII). When the Knights acquired Malta, it appears that the Church agreed to honor a promise made to the Grand Master Follques de Villaret — that the Order would be granted sovereignty so that they might continue to protect the Holy Land. The Church had reason to be concerned — already Pope Gregory IX in 1238 had rebuked the Hospitallers for “living scandalous lives” and betraying their vows of poverty and chastity. He also accused them of being “greedy and corrupt” and in communion with the schismatic Eastern Orthodox.

That the K of M loyally defended the faith for many centuries is a matter of fact, first as Hospitallers and later under the title Knights of St. John, Jerusalem, Rhodes and Malta. The Order sent three galleys to fight the Turks during the Battle of Lepanto and distinguished themselves for their bravery. They tenderly cared for the wounded personally and established many hospitals for this purpose. But shortly after Lepanto, the Order deteriorated and eventually fell prey to numerous moral and spiritual disorders. “There can be no doubt whatsoever that after 1530, the Order was no longer independent and sovereign,” (Ernle Bradford). This certainly had some connection to the Protestant Reformation, as all Europe was abuzz with the heresies of King Henry VIII and Martin Luther. The order was expelled from Malta in 1798 by Napoleon, and for some time Czar Paul of Russia held the Grand Mastership.

The Czar established a Russian Orthodox Priory in 1798, although he was not considered the official head of the order. “De facto, though not de jure, Paul I was the 72nd head of the Order,” (Bradford, from the work, A Modern Crusade,). In 1801, Czar Paul was murdered after a falling out with Britain. The British eventually gained control of Malta in 1814 and Bradford states that they “became to all intents and purposes, successors to the Order.” Pope Pius VII approved Grand Master Tommasi in 1803, but from thereon the order entered a lengthy period of inactivity and disorganization. Pope Leo XIII revived the order in 1879, but at this time it was headquartered in Rome and enjoyed relatively limited influence. Prior to this period of inactivity, a schism in the group splintered the knights and would later give rise to speculation concerning which group was rightly descended from the original order.

The Sovereign Military Order of Malta’s official website states that in response to a special request by Pope Pius XI on behalf of the official headquarters of the order in Rome, an American Chapter of the Knights of Malta was created April 28, 1927 with headquarters in New

York. During Pius XI’s reign, the Knights came under fire from the Vatican sometime before World War II, although the reasons for the Vatican’s suspicions remain unknown. From that time on, it seems, there were questions concerning knightly activities. Spellman, who served as the group’s spiritual advisor, undoubtedly quelled such suspicions. The investigation later launched at the insistence of Sr. Pascalina, Pope Pius XII’s housekeeper and assistant, centered on a struggle for control of the group by Spellman and Nicola Cardinal Canali, who urged the Pope to rein in the Knights under Canali’s direction. (One of the issues involved Bp. Angelo Roncalli’s appointment of a 33rd degree Freemason, Marsaudon, to the French K of M Grand Master position.) Pius XII entrusted the K of M investigation to Cardinal Tisserant, not well respected by Sr. Pascalina. Murphy reported that Pius met her objections with the comment that his cardinals were not to be held suspect and should be treated with respect. Nevertheless, Pius XII declined to personally endorse the Knights or grant them any sort of confirmation as an order.

The outcome of this investigation is detailed in the article John XXIII and Masonry – The Pope of the Council, (Sodalitium, Oct.- Nov. 1996): “On November 14, 1951, Ludovico Chigi Albani della Rovere, Grand Master of the Order of Malta died in Rome. Normally, the Knights would have then convened to elect a successor; but they did not do so. They were unable to do so: Pius XII formally forbade them to do so. The Pope appointed a commission of Cardinals [Papal Commission] charged to reform (or suppress) the Order of Malta, and for the rest of the days of Papa Pacelli, the Knights would not have a Grand Master. All of that changed on June 24, 1961. On that date, the feast of Saint John the Baptist, patron of the Order (and of Masonry), John XXIII received the Knights at the Vatican, and to their great satisfaction, publicly issued the Brief by which the Commission of Cardinals instituted by Pius XII was suppressed.”

Author Penny Lernoux asserted that the branch headed by Cardinal Spellman “pledges allegiance to the pope,” (People of God). She noted, however, that neither the pope nor the order’s grand master in Rome “has real control over SMOM’s (Sovereign Military Order of the Knights of Malta) various associations, some of whose members have been involved in fascist plots and CIA covert wars.” Lernoux’s statement is important, because several organizations claiming to be the true successors of the Knights of Malta have been confused with the branch of the Knights created by Pope Pius XI. When referring to the K of M in this section, only the papal order is indicated.

The true origin of SMOM has been obscured by the many splits within the order itself throughout the centuries. The only mention of the Knights Malta made in Arthur Preuss’ book Dictionary of Secret and other Societies refers to the English (Orange) and strictly Protestant branch of this order, headquartered in Philadelphia. Preuss dated the founding of this order back to 1889. It claimed 75,000 members in 1923. The only other reference Preuss made to the Knights of Malta is the Masonic Knights, a rite within the American Knights Templar degree. In his The Knights of the Order, author Ernle Bradford stated that the English (non-denominational) order did not establish itself in America until 1960. A historian for the 1960 group claimed it is “the only Order of St. John which admits Christians of all denominations.” And yet one Malta organization claims to be THE Catholic successor of the (initially Catholic and papal) order, although it holds itself above the pope.

The Knights of Malta and the war years

The diplomatic immunity accorded the papal K of M order, a privilege accorded this group from the time of the medieval ages was especially useful to Church and state during the war years, particularly where espionage was concerned. Had this usefulness been contained to certain necessary activities directly flowing from the war, that would have been one thing. But in many ways, World War II was the coming of age for the Knights, helping them gain a foothold in the brave, New World Order that lie ahead.

Like the Priory, the Knights claim the membership of European nobility, the heads of international finance and business, high-ranking heads of state and military figures, as well as prelates of the Catholic Church. Initially the American knights opposed the New Deal, and at least one of their members, Cardinal Spellman’s good friend Ambassador Joseph P. Kennedy, opposed the war in Europe. As stated above, the Knights generated millions of dollars for the Church and Cardinal Spellman regularly forwarded these funds to Cardinal Canali in Rome for disbursal. Mgr. Montini performed a like function in using same-source funds for Catholic Action activities, handled by Cardinal Pizzardo. It was said that Pope Pius XII trusted Spellman to keep his Knights in order. During the war years, Spellman also acted as a go-between for the Vatican and the White House, also the American government and other entities. It was Spellman who first advised the Vatican to cooperate with the British-inspired OSS, headed by his old friend William “Wild Bill” Donovan. In terms of the 1958 conclave, this cooperation would prove to be a disaster.

One K of M aristocrat, von Papen, made Hitler’s rise to power in Germany possible. This is yet another indication that generally the Knights favor nationalism and National Socialism versus other forms of government because these can admit of an absolute ruler and constitute the closest thing to monarchy. We also hear echoes in this philosophy of the Gallican liberties, the continuity theory and rule by Divine right. Former teacher-turned-author John Taylor Gatto confirmed that this rule already exists internationally, (whether its source is the K of M specifically, the Priory, the modern-day Illuminati aka Pilgrim Society or some other organization). Describing the ownership of children by the state as “parens patriae,” Gatto credits its origin to the very creation of America’s government. He notes that the principle represents a radical departure from later European views of the family, reflecting instead the power of “old-time, absolute kings,” (“The Under-ground History of American Education”).

Gatto and other authors have observed that this belief that children are owned by the state has a precedent-setting legal history in America dating back to 1796. Gatto pointed out that it is a calculated attempt by the state to manipulate family life, society as a whole and shape the future according to its own agenda, without mentioning the current philosophy of the Department of Human Services nationwide acting “in the best interests of the children.” He also documented the Germanization of American schools following the War of 1812 and generally concluded that beginning with Ben Franklin, the model for America was Prussian National Socialism, the very mode of government preferred by the Knights. And overall, Gatto styles compulsory education as “a global movement.”

This preference for fascism is reflected time and time again in the K of M’s dealings during World War II. The American government suspected the K-of-M-affiliated W.R. Grace Co., a manufacturer of chemicals, of trading with the Nazis during the war. The order was directly involved in “Project Paperclip” following the war’s end, importing hundreds of Nazi scientists and even war criminals into the U.S. from Germany. As an exalted member of the Order, Argentina’s Juan Peron also smuggled Nazi war criminals into South America. Msgr. Montini was the principal contact for the OSS in Rome. Through the offices of the Vatican, he arranged the escape of thousands of German war criminals with the help of Donovan’s organization, working with the order. It was the OSS who set up Germany’s postwar intelligence department, using money from the newly established Central Intelligence Agency in America, another offshoot of the OSS. Pope Pius XII’s medical advisor, Dr. Luigi Gedda, assisted Montini in this effort. Gedda, also the head of Italian Catholic Action, organized committees among Catholic Action cells during the 1948 elections to help secure victory for the Christian Democrats headed by Montini’s father.

In 1948 the Vatican, the Knights of Malta, the OSS and the CIA funded the Italian elections in which the Christian Democrats, Montini’s father’s party, played a key role. Penny Lernoux reports that Montini and Spellman “funneled huge amounts of New York money into clandestine Church activities in Italy,” (People of God); already Montini was building his empire. Alicide De Gasperi, who had worked with the elder Montini and Sturzo to form Populare headed the post-war group. Once again using the hammer of Communism to pound home their message, the various agencies funding the effort were able to secure the election of a Christian Democrat candidate. During a hearing conducted by the House of Representatives in the 1970s, it was reported that overall the CIA funneled $65 million into conservative Italian organizations between 1946 and 1972, (Lernoux). During this same time period the K of M attempted two unsuccessful government takeovers in Europe.

Years later, several K of M members would be found on the rosters of those connected to the Michele Sindona (P2) banking scandal. Sindona was a friend of Montini’s from the 1950s on, “a top financier for the international Mafia, laundering drug profits for the Gambino brothers and their Sicilian counterparts… He [also] functioned as a financial conduit for numerous CIA operations, passing funds, for example, to the Greek colonels before they seized power in 1967. He later channeled millions of CIA dollars to centrist and right-wing political parties in Italy, including the ruling Christian Democrats” (Mother Jones article, 1983 July/August). Cardinal Francis Spellman seems to have been the common denominator in the involvement of CIA and K of M affiliates in P2, according to Lincoln, Leigh and Baigent, (Messianic Legacy). And seeing that Sindona was to Montini what Nogara had once been to Pius XI and XII, only on a more sinister scale, it would not be surprising to discover Spellman was the man behind the scenes who held the purse strings.

K of M rosters are a virtual Who’s Who in American government and business, with a heavy membership emphasis on former directors of the CIA. Many of these same players either founded or joined other spin-off support groups traceable to the OSS, CIA, or K of M. Lincoln, Leigh and Baigent even speculate that the Priory and the Malta knights rival each other for control of top-level operations governing world finance and politics. But the many interconnecting and subsidiary organizations relied upon by these same individuals are as fascinating if not more so than the actual parent organizations. And in many ways, they represent the bigger picture, the completion of some unspoken work understood by the orchestrators, but hidden from public view.

ACUE, Pro Deo and the K of M

In the 1920s, Dr. Joseph Retinger began spreading the gospel of European unity, working with aristocrats promoting a European Economic Community then called Pan Europa. Europeans active in this endeavor included Count Coudenhove-Kalergi (who helped establish the OSS) and later Merovingian descendant Archduke Otto von Hapsburg. A friend of Italian Catholic Action head Dr. Luigi Gedda, Retinger shared sensitive information during the war with Gedda, who in turn passed it on to Montini and the CIA. While his efforts were focused on Europe, others in the U.S. simultaneously pursued similar goals. Following the failure of the League of Nations project promoted by President Woodrow Wilson and Col. House, American financiers, politicians and educators favoring formation of the League founded the Council on Foreign Relations in England, first known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs, (Reinventing Government, by Robert Hillmann).

One of the Institute’s projects was the rewriting of American history to reflect global pursuits, gradually leading youth into the one-world, new order lair. In 1948 the American Committee for a United Europe (ACUE) was created to complement Pan Europa’s efforts. Former OSS head Donovan was chairman, future CIA chief Allen Dulles, also a Knight was co-chairman, and George Franklin, director of the Council on Foreign Relations and later instrumental in forming the Trilateral Commission was elected its secretary. (Dulles’ son, Avery, was a “cardinal” in the Novus Ordo church.) The formation of this American committee was entirely in line with the Priory’s goals for a stronger Europe.

In a May 1954 meeting partially financed by the CIA, Retinger, then CIA chief Walter Bedell and former British Special Operations Execution (SOE) director Sir Collin Gubbins, among others, met at the Hotel Bilderberger and founded the Bilderbergers. At about the same time the John Birch Society (JBS) first broke on the American scene. Although no evidence exists to suggest the K of M established the JBS, its creation was in keeping with the non-denominational orientation of the Knights, and many traditional Catholic “priests” later would direct their Catholic followers into its ranks. It oriented its members solely to the political face of the “conspiracy” to the exclusion of its religious origins. All who tried to digress from the stated position of the Birchers and link modern-day manifestations of secret societies to those Pope Leo XIII and other pontiffs condemned were accused of acting as “neutralizers.” This decidedly intolerant attitude only reinforced Traditionalist tendencies to follow blindly and let others do their thinking for them. It defused fears and curiosity concerning the crisis in the Church by explaining it solely in terms of Communist infiltration and nothing else. Later it was revealed that the Birch Society’s top members were high-degree Freemasons.

Prior to World War II, Rev. Felix Morlion established an intelligence agency, The Center of Information Pro Deo in Lisbon, Portugal. Morlion’s agency was actually the brain child of Goncalves Cardinal Cerejeira, Patriarch of Lisbon, who requested that Morlion operate it to train his staff in the journalism techniques the priest had developed while instructing Catholic Action members in propaganda techniques. Prior to his Pro Deo work, Morlion operated an anti-Communist, anti-Nazi offensive in Belgium, a press service specializing in film subject matter, and opened an additional Catholic Press Center in Belgium. After he was driven into Portugal by the Nazis in 1941, OSS head William Donovan, who was awarded the Grand Cross of St. Sylvester for his services to the Vatican during WWII by Pope Pius XII, brought Morlion to the U.S. Shortly after the Allied victory in Europe, Donovan and Morlion succeeded in establishing Pro Deo in the Vatican itself, guaranteeing that “The City” would rule as the system of the Beast from Rome.

“Donovan had served as a chief of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the wartime predecessor of the Central Intelligence Agency, or CIA. Early in the war, in 1941, Donovan had already forged an alliance with the founder of a Catholic intelligence agency, called Pro Deo (Felix Morlion) . The two agencies collaborated during and after the war, to such an extent that eventually they amalgamated. This resulted in the de facto integration of the CIA and of the Vatican intelligence, into a global USA-Vatican apparatus, whose operations now encompassed the globe. The amalgamation operated in favour of the advancement of the Catholic Church in the political fields, at home and abroad. And indeed, in joint USA-Vatican promotion of their respective objectives. It helped in the promotion of Presidential candidates in the USA, and in the promotion of potential papal candidates in the Vatican.

After the war, Morlion dropped his anti-Nazi stance to adopt the anti-Communist hard line. At first his technique drew from the Jocist method of Catholic Action, which relies on the principles observe, judge and act. Later his emphasis shifted to highlight the “business-like spirit of America” to better effect an international redirection of public opinion. Pro Deo’s first shot at the effectiveness of this technique came with the Italian elections in 1948 and the barrage of propaganda aimed at the Italian people for two years prior to those elections. This seems to have been a test run for his new propaganda machine, and it performed well.

Grand Master Mason Albert Pike, in his Morals and Dogma (1871) explains how useful it is to those in power to mold public opinion, a practice we have seen shamefully exhibited (primarily) by the liberal media over the past several decades. Pike writes: “Public opinion is an immense force, and its currents are as incomprehensible as those of the atmosphere. Nevertheless, in free governments it is omnipotent; and the business of the statesman is to find the means to shape, control and direct it. According as that is done, it is beneficial and conservative or destructive and ruinous” (pg. 90). This of course is to be expected from the powers that be whose intent it is to secretly shape and control government before overturning it completely. What Catholics would not expect is to see it inserted by an international Catholic organization into Catholic publications, in any form, and yet this is precisely what happened, and in the name of Catholic Action no less.

The Jesuit Father Robert Graham confirmed that Morlion was a CIA agent. He was quoted in an Italian article from La Repubblica titled “The Pious Friar Working for the CIA”: “Yes, Father Felix Morlion was from the CIA, he was a big point of reference for American intelligence”. And Graham was ranked as one of the most qualified espionage history scholars. (Avro Manhattan, in his 1985 book Murder in the Vatican ). Later it would be Morlion who served as Vatican facilitator in the Cuban crisis. He also was responsible for providing the exact wording in the Vatican 2 document “revising” the Church’s official teaching on the role the Jews played in Christ’s Crucifixion, (How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking, Look magazine). This alone should have merited a mention by Owens from a Zionist point of view.

Conclusion

Owens can easily find her military industrial complex actors enrolled in the K of M, among them CIA directors. Lernoux lists some of them as William Casey, John McCone, Gen. Alexander Haig, William Simon, Jeremiah Denton. Other military and intel types include James Angleton, George Bush Sr., William Buckley, Allen Welsh Dulles, John Foster Dulles, Oliver North, Clay Shaw, John Poindexter and Zibignew Brzezinski, to name a few. It has even been rumored that Erika Kirk is a Grand Dame of Malta. Who knows how many more CIA officials are members today. There also are many intersecting points, some of them quite disturbing. And that does not even begin to list the K of M members who are/were captains of industry, which is a lengthy one. David A. Wemhoff reports in his book John Courtney Murray: Time/Life and the American Proposition that Spellman was a CIA informer (p. 20). He also notes that the wife of Time Magazine owner Henry Luce, Clare Booth Luce was a K of M member as well, and that Spellman and Luce were quite close. In one of his magazine’s articles, the author portrayed Spellman as a good guy regarding the subject of Americanism and Pope Leo XIII as the bad guy, for holding a false opinion on the subject (!).

Henry Luce supported Murray, a Jesuit, who was chosen by liberals to promote “the American version of Church-state relations, the very same religious views condemned by the popes of the 19^th century” (p. 20). Msgr. John Ryan, Rev. Francis J. Connell and Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton fought him tooth and toenail until their deaths.  It was the Protestant elites and an association promoting better relations between Catholics and Jews that pandered to Murray, Wemhoff relates. Imagine that. And Morlion’s Pro Deo was the vehicle that was used to control public opinion among Catholics to promote Murray’s ecumenism, later enshrined at Vatican 2. It was Morlion who wrote How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking, featured in the Jan 25, 1966 issue of Look magazine, another Luce publication.

And of course, then reigning was the Jew Montini, with his ephod and teraphim fully in view. Zionism and its king were already among us then.

As noted above, the rewriting of history began in the 1920s. The military industrial complex invaded the Church and took over in the 1940s, 1950s. The infiltrators made it appear that the Church began to rot within since they spread their filthy doctrines and sex practices far and wide. It is thought that even Spellman was a homosexual. This war was fought and lost long ago, and we can’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again. If truth is what Owens is really seeking, it cannot be puzzled out from the chaos that surrounds us today. You can’t be a part of the very thing you pretend to be exposing. Christ IS King. But He is not the king of Owens’ kingdom.

Spiritual survival manual update, Unity Octave prayers

by T. Stanfill Benns | Jan 16, 2026 | New Blog

(Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls, Rome.)

+St. Marcellus, Pope, Martyr+

In past blogs we have spoken about the katechon, a Greek word for the restraining power mentioned by St. Paul in 2 Thess. 2: 6-7: “He who withholdeth,” what and who prevents the arrival of Antichrist. LibTrad pseudo-clergy have acted as the katechon for decades, pretending to perpetuate the Church and provide the Mass and Sacraments, so it will appear as though they still exist and Antichrist has not yet come. For if they once admitted that the Mass could no longer be validly offered, then the question of how it could cease would need to be answered, even though that question was raised and answered long ago. And that Antichrist alone could take away the Sacrifice was answered in the same breath as the disappearance of the papacy.  Had Catholics consulted approved sources and not those false christs and hirelings sent to deceive them they would have known this.

It has been pointed out that various political entities are now vying for the katechon title, but the katechon is not a political entity. And he is not future tense, but past tense. For Antichrist has already come and gone; what we see today is the destruction wrought by his antichrist successors in the false papacy and their associates now running the world. But to appear as though one is the restraining power and Antichrist is yet in the future is a useful tool to promote the idea of some man on a white horse, riding in to save the day and promote world peace, the “Great Monarch,” fable we have spoken about before. But private prophecy and pagan fables won’t save us either. Nothing in Holy Scripture speaks of a such a thing.

Why are so many podcasters and so-called intellectuals so anxious to voice opinions about who Antichrist might be?  Is it in order to position their katechon and appear to have prevented his coming? Given the current pseudo-Christian climate, that would not be difficult to do. Or is it because they know full well who Antichrist was and they are trying to see if anyone else has identified him, anyone, that is, who could establish the fact with reasonable certainty that he has already reigned? What is baffling is how so many non-Catholics dedicated to sola scriptura or even those identifying as Catholic believe the Second Coming is just around the corner.  This could scarcely be the case if what precedes Antichrist’s coming has not yet occurred (great apostasy, removing of restraining power or katechon, Antichrist’s actual reign). It is absolutely nonsensical, for if Antichrist is living today, and we must identify him, the katechon has already been taken out of the way. So much for Holy Scripture!

Those trying to determine the meaning of Holy Scripture from political events have it backwards. It is the spiritual happenings in the Church that determine the course of political events in these times. Some think I am playing into the scenarios spun by Candace Owens (and others), but it was my intention from the beginning only to see where she is taking her investigation and it has highlighted quite a few things that needed to be pointed out. I have noted that she missed the real reason Kirk was murdered — his identification of the current “popes” as Commies.  She identifies as (an NO) Catholic who is at odds with Israel and Jewish belief and practice, even identifies Zionists as the synagogue of Satan, yet fails to acknowledge Paul 6 and her church as the reason for Jewish ascendency. I will continue to monitor her podcasts, because I want to see where she is going with all this and correct her errors for those who may be watching. But this should not be taken by readers as any endorsement of her assessment of the chaos, since she takes the political over spiritual approach. Spiritual must come first, because it alone explains the chaos.

Among other things, Owens stresses the alternative reality in which we now live. Alternative reality is defined as: A state of things that does not really exist (Cambridge Dictionary); or any[thing] that deviates from the [Catholic-Ed.] perception of reality” (VocabDictionary). As we have pointed out often in the past, only the laws generated by the scholastics teaching formal logic can put us in touch with reality (Rev. Michael J. Mahony, S.J, Essentials of Formal Logic, 1918). All other presentations of reality are false. This is why false forms of logic among LibTrads have been repeatedly exposed here; they are attempting to justify their alternative reality. Another thing noted by Owens is the omission or change in essential wording regarding historical and other events (“all” for “many; Holy “Spirit” for Holy “Ghost,” etc). But that began long ago in the Church, not the secular world and only accelerated with the false Vatican 2 council. The same can be said of certain pronunciations such as “pahpacy” rather than “paypacy,” first noticeable in the early days among LibTrads. The traditional pronunciation is the latter, as all dictionaries show. I consider it a form of disrespect to pronounce it otherwise.

Why do I bother trying to “interpret” it? Because young people genuinely seeking the truth are listening to her. Some of them are even Traditionalists, and yes, there are pray at home Catholics among her audience.  Owens claims to attend a Latin Mass, and yet we know the Mass ended long ago. She consults her “priests.” She complains of handlers, not realizing her own spiritual advisor is most likely one of them. She mentions CIA psychological warfare ops by name, but fails to mention the CIA’s “Psychological Strategy Plan for the Use of Doctrinal Warfare,” PSB D-33, launched June 29, 1953, on the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul. The program goal was “to breakdown worldwide doctrinaire thought patterns…” and “foster a worldwide understanding and sympathetic acceptance of the traditions and viewpoints of America and the free world… paving the way from deviations from and schisms in totalitarian thought patterns.”  It was to be applied to a group “likely to include priests as commissars” (David Wemhoff, John Courtney Murray, Time/Life and the American Proposition, Ch. 33).

This was the prelude to Vatican 2, undertaken during the very year Pope Pius XII found himself near death’s door after being poisoned for months. Coincidence? I don’t think so.  This was the final blow, after decades of Modernist poison had coursed through the veins of the Church and Communists and Freemasons had infiltrated Her ranks. We know that the coming of Christ is near because we have seen all of the signs in Holy Scripture fulfilled.  The only way that the chaos and descent into the pit of depravity in the world today can possibly be explained is by admitting the Holy Sacrifice has ceased, and no longer can any reparation be made on earth for the sins of men. That explains all. But these pseudo-intellectuals want to entertain their own explanations, products of their own Godless minds, so lacking in discernment, true knowledge and spirituality.

Satan is most active now because he knows his time is short. He cannot escape the fact that Christ will come to end it all and send him back to hell forever, bringing to a close his failed attempt to destroy the last vestiges of the Church. For we must be those vestiges, and the only thing left for us to do now is to try and leave our children and grandchildren instructions on what they must believe and how they must conduct themselves after we are gone, at least as far as we are able to assemble them. We cannot anticipate every possible development, but we can give them the basics of the faith to cling to after we have left this earth.

Several years ago, I wrote When There Is No Priest, a Survival Guide for Remnant Catholics. It is in desperate need of updating, and on the request of readers I am slowly accomplishing this. Please review the contents page below and feel free to suggest in the comments section any additions, changes or corrections to any subject you feel should be included.  It is vital that this guide be complete, as a legacy to our children. Many on this site are in their 70s and even 80s. We are the ones who best remember what our Church once was, what She taught and what happened to Her in the 1960s. As Owens notes, the entire history of this country is being rewritten and omitted by the powers that be to introduce the age of Satan. We must do what we can, while we can, to see that a printed copy of the truth is available to all.

Part I — Flocks Without Shepherds —————————-13

How Catholics kept their Faith without clergy, Arianism and St. Hermenegild,

The Protestant Reformation, No Mass or Sacraments on the American frontier,

The Japanese Church, The French Revolution, Kulturkampf, Ruthenians

refused to receive Sacraments from schismatics, Romanians warned by Our

Lady about schismatic priests, Even Orthodox refused to attend Communist

church services, Catholic Uniates in Ukraine, We ARE the Church of today

Part II — The Sacraments and Their Substitutes ———— 32

Baptism

Valid baptism, Illicit Baptism, “Of the Time and Place of Baptism”  

Confirmation ——————————————————————————– 37

Holy Eucharist/Spiritual Communion ——————————————– 38

The Saints on Spiritual Communion “The Spiritual Combat” by Fr. Dom Lorenzo Scupoli “The Blessed Eucharist,” by Rev. Michael Mueller, The Blue Army,

St. Michael and the Fatima children  

Penance/Act of Perfect Contrition ————————————————— 42

Obligation of eliciting the Act of Contrition, Heaven Open to Souls, No

forgiveness with Perfect Contrition a Jansenist heresy

Extreme Unction —————————————————————————- 49

Plenary indulgence at the hour of death, Spiritual and practical aids for the dead and dying *

Matrimony ————————————————————————————- 51

Comments on the matrimonial decrees of the Holy Office, Why Traditionalists kept these decrees from the faithful, circumstances that nullify marriage, what constitutes invalidity, Canon Law provides a remedy, documenting invalidity, separation and divorc 

Part III — The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

Cessation of the Continual Sacrifice

and the Abomination of Desolation ————————————- 63 

The Abomination, what or who is the abomination? The cessation of the Continual Sacrifice, consequences of fruitless sacrifices

But what about the Mass? ————————————————– 73

General comments on the Mass, St. Thomas Aquinas on the Sacraments, dry Mass, home church, history of home church

How do I explain to my family we must say Mass at home?

They Have Taken Away My Lord —————————————– 82

Sacraments, Rule of Conduct, Confession, The Holy Eucharist, Last Sacrament

Part IV — Three Methods of St. John’s Mass ——————- 95

Examination of Conscience,* Methods one, two and three

Part V — The Rosary, Fast and Abstinence, the Scapular — 114

            How to say the Rosary, Fast and abstinence laws, The Brown Scapular

Part VI — Catechetical Instruction and Homeschool ——— 120

Part VII — The Lay Apostolate ———————————— 121

Epilogue ——————————————————————- 124

Appendix I – Child’s Examination of Conscience ————————— 125

Appendix II – Marriage Decree from Canon Law Digest, Can. 1098 — 128

Appendix III – Lay Exorcism and Possession ——————————— 134

Appendix IV – Practical and Spiritual Preparation

for Death and Burial ——————————————————————- 143

Please begin the Unity Octave here on January 18.

(Scroll to bottom of this article for the Unity Octave prayers.)

May 2026 bring us ever closer to the coming of Christ the King

by T. Stanfill Benns | Dec 31, 2025 | New Blog

+Feast of the Holy Innocents+

The following is an interesting post that gives statistics regarding the views of different sects on abortion. It becomes very clear early on what sects are promoting this atrocity in America. We are only a few days past the feast of the Holy Innocents and in their honor we wish to present this since these aborted souls are the “sacrifice” a wicked world offers to Moloch, just as the Holy Innocents were slaughtered to satisfy the jealousy of a power-mad god-emperor.

Wishing all a peaceful and blessed New Year, and may God soon come to punish the wicked and end this madness on earth.

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

The goal of this post is to highlight different views on personhood (when someone becomes a person), to encourage people to think about how these different views could create conflict, and to provide some discussion on whether, given the percentages, it is appropriate to use taxpayer money to fund abortions.

First it is interesting to note the differences between the beliefs of Catholics, most Protestants, most of those of the Hindu and Buddhist faiths (a fetus becomes a person at conception); many people of the Islamic faith (a fetus is not a person until it has a soul); and most people of the Jewish faith (a fetus is not a person until birth). Then the use of abortion as a ritual, as in the Satanic faith, creates another layer of complexity.

It is also fascinating to note that people of the Christian and Jewish faiths started with the same base belief system (both use the Old Testament of the Bible) and radically departed in their viewpoints on things like abortion when the Jews adopted the Talmud in the 3rd – 6th Centuries AD (CE).

Here are some summaries on how different religions, denominations, and sects view life and abortion.

When Fetus Becomes a Person Is Not Important (<1% U.S. Population)

Satanic

• Abortion is a religious ritual.
• The ritual involves the recitation of two of the Satanic Tenets and a personal affirmation that is ceremoniously intertwined with the abortion.

Unitarian Universalist

• All individuals should have the autonomy to make decisions about their own bodies and reproductive health.
• They affirm the right to choose abortion and advocate for reproductive justice, which includes access to safe, legal, and affordable abortion care.

Fetus is not a Person Until Birth (2% U.S. Population)

Jewish 

• A fetus is not considered a person under Jewish law and therefore does not have the same rights as a person who is already alive.
• Abortion is not only permitted but is required should the pregnancy endanger the life or health of the pregnant woman. “Health” is commonly interpreted to encompass psychological as well as physical health.
• The Talmud says that the fetus is “mere water” before 40 days of gestation.
• Jewish values compel full access to safe and legal abortion care as basic health care.

Fetus is a Person When it Gets a Soul (1.5% U.S. Population) 

Islam

• Hanafi schools – Discuss abortion related to the timing of ensoulment, which Islamic scholars generally agree occurs at approximately 120 days post-conception. These scholars permit abortion up to 120 days.
• Maliki schools – Strictly oppose any form of abortion once pregnancy commences.
• Hanbali and Shafi’i schools – Have a blended view which allows abortion up to 40 days, primarily when justified by a pressing need.
• After 120 days, abortion becomes impermissible across all schools of thought, except in situations where the mother’s life is endangered.

Fetus becomes a Person at Conception (66% U.S. Population) 

Buddhist

• <1% U.S. population
• Buddhism generally views abortion as a negative act, due to the principle of non-harming and the belief that life begins at conception.
• Abortion is generally considered to create negative karma.

Catholic

• 20% U.S. population
• The Catholic Church unequivocally opposes abortion, teaching that it is a grave moral evil from the moment of conception.
• The Church believes that human life is sacred and should be protected from conception until natural death.

Hindu 

• 1% population in the U.S.
• Abortion is generally viewed as a grave sin, primarily due to the principle of ahimsa (non-violence) and the belief that the soul enters the body at conception.
• Abortion is a worse sin than killing one’s parents.

Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

• 2% population in the U.S.
• Believes in the sanctity of human life and opposes elective abortion for personal or social convenience, and counsels its members not to submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions.
• Exceptions are granted when the pregnancy results from rape or incest, when the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy, or when there will be severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.

Protestants

• 43% population in the U.S.

Protestant – Assemblies of God

• View the practice of abortion as evil.
• Abortion is a morally unacceptable alternative for birth control, population control, sex selection, and elimination of the physically and mentally handicapped.

Protestant – Baptist

• Southern Baptist Convention – This is the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S. It has a strong stance against abortion, viewing it as “murder”.
• American Baptist Churches USA – American Baptists oppose abortion, as a means of avoiding responsibility for conception, as a primary means of birth control, without regard for the far-reaching consequences of the act.

Protestant – Lutheran

• Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) – Views the developing life in the womb as a “neighbor” and recognizes the moral agency of the pregnant person in making decisions about their pregnancy. Supports abortion access.
• Missouri Synod (LCMS) – Views abortion as the taking of a human life, contrary to God’s Word so they oppose abortion. They believe abortion is not a moral option, except in rare cases where it is necessary to save the mother’s life.

Protestant – Methodist

• United Methodist Church – Believes in the sanctity of unborn human life which makes us reluctant to condone abortion, but recognize that tragic conflicts of life may justify decisions to terminate the life of a fetus.
• Global Methodist Church – Belief in the sacredness of all life compels them to resist the practice of abortion except in the cases of tragic conflicts of life against life when the wellbeing of the mother and the child are at stake.

Protestant – Presbyterian

• Presbyterian Church in American (PCA) – Has a very strong stance against abortion, considering it the taking of a human life and therefore morally wrong. They believe that life begins at conception and that abortion is a violation of God’s law.
• Evangelical Presbyterian (EPC) – Holds a pro-life stance on abortion, viewing it as the taking of a human life.
• Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) – Believes abortion “is a matter of careful ethical decision” by each person and “should not be restricted by law.”

Obviously, there are some radical differences in how people view the world. Interestingly, the vast majority of people believe a fetus is a person at conception. Given this information, should we have laws that allow taxpayer dollars to be used for abortion?

(Printed with permission; southdakotavoices.substack.com/p/abortion-and-belief-systems)