Procinctu Press | THE BLOG

1958-2018: Sixty Years since the Death of Pope Pius XII

from Novus Ordo Watch

Sede vacante since Oct. 9, 1958…

Sixty Years since the Death of Pope Pius XII

The body of Pope Pius XII is blessed with holy water by Cardinal Eugene Tisserant on Oct. 9, 1958
(Keystone Pictures USA / Alamy Stock Photo)

Pope Pius XII, R.I.P.

Mar. 2, 1876 – Oct. 9, 1958
elected Pope Mar. 2, 1939

It has now been 60 years since the death of the last known true Pope, His Holiness Pius XII, born Eugenio Pacelli, reigned 1939-1958. To honor and remember him, we are sharing with our readers the following select videos and some photos of the pontificate of Pius XII.

It is beneficial to recall that when Pope Pius XII died, the Novus Ordo religion was as yet unknown to the world. What a blessed time it was, when no one — no one! — who called himself a member of the Catholic Church, knew anything yet of “Catholic” ecumenism or religious liberty, a New Mass, interreligious dialogue, a Second Vatican Council, exaggerated notions of human dignity, endless blather about the rights of man, liturgical dancing, apostate New Age “eco” nuns, rainbow banners, opposition to the death penalty, luminous Rosary mysteries, and so forth. All of these things were set in motion only with the invalid election of Cardinal Angelo Roncalli as “Pope” John XXIII later that month in a most bizarre conclave, whose first white smoke two days prior announced the election of an unidentified (and possibly suppressed) Pope, who was never presented to the world.

As we commemorate today the 60th anniversary of the passing of the (so far) last Vicar of Christ, and thus the fulfillment of the prophecy of 2 Thess 2:7 that the Pope would “be taken out of the way” to allow the mystery of iniquity to prevail for a time, just as the enemies of our Lord were allowed to prevail for a short while during His Sacred Passion, let us beg God to send us once again a true Pope so that we who have witnessed the Church humiliated in her Passion may also see the happy day of the her triumphant Resurrection.

The last known true Pope:
His Holiness, Pius XII

(Sueddeutsche Zeitung Photo / Alamy Stock Photo)

See Also:

Image sources: alamy.com
Licenses: rights-managed

New Rite of Unholy Orders

FROM NOVUS ORDO WATCH

Unholy Orders: Paul VI’s Modernist Ordination Rite

paul6-pontificalis.jpg
On June 18, 1968, Bp. Giovanni Battista Montini — then the head of the Vatican II Sect and known as “Pope” Paul VI — signed an “apostolic constitution” to change the Roman Catholic rite of ordination. These changes touched not only some of the more peripheral ceremonies but the very substance of the sacrament itself. The very words which Pope Pius XII, in 1947, had definitively decreed were necessary for the validity of the sacrament of holy orders, were changed by Paul VI in such a way as to render the ordination of priests doubtful and the consecration of bishops definitely invalid. (Even a doubtful rite, however, must be considered invalid in practice, per Catholic teaching.) Since all sacraments (other than baptism and holy matrimony) ultimately depend on valid bishops, invalidating the rite of episcopal consecration was all the Modernists needed to do to ensure Catholics would eventually be deprived of most of the sacraments, especially the Holy Mass and absolution in the confessional.

We provide links to prove the invalidity of Paul VI’s ordination rite below, but just to give you a sneak preview, see for yourself how badly Montini butchered the essential form of the consecration of bishops, thus totally destroying the sacrament:

Traditional Roman Catholic Form, per Pope Pius XII (1947):

  • Comple in Sacerdote tuo ministerii tui summam, et ornamentis totius glorificationis instructum coelestis unguenti rore santifica.
    [Translation:] “Perfect in Thy priest the fullness of thy ministry and, clothing him in all the ornaments of spiritual glorification, sanctify him with the Heavenly anointing.”

Modernist Novus Ordo Form, per Antipope Paul VI (1968):

  • Et nunc effunde super hunc Electum eam virtutem, quae a te est, Spiritum principalem, quem dedisti dilecto Filio Tuo Iesu Christo, quem Ipse donavit sanctis Apostolis, qui constituerunt Ecclesiam per singula loca, ut sanctuarium tuum, in gloriam et laudem indeficientem nominis tui.
    [Translation:] “So now pour out upon this chosen one that power which is from you, the governing Spirit whom you gave to your beloved Son, Jesus Christ, the Spirit given by him to the holy apostles, who founded the Church in every place to be your temple for the unceasing glory and praise of your name.”

Not only does the bogus Novus Ordo form totally replace the words decreed by Pius XII as essential to validity, they do not even in any way express that what is taking place is the consecration of a bishop! They do not even ask the Holy Ghost to make the ordinand into a bishop! Instead, even if one were to say that the totally abstruse phrase “Spiritum principalem” (“Governing Spirit”) is a clear reference to the Holy Ghost, the fact remains that it is not stated just what the Holy Ghost is supposed to be doing. God the Father is being asked to “pour out” the Holy Ghost (or at least that “Governing Spirit”) – but to do what? To what end? We’re not told. The Holy Ghost is poured out also in baptism, in confirmation, and in ordinations of deacons and priests. Paul VI’s claim that he was introducing these changes “in order to restore the texts of the rite to the form they had in antiquity, to clarify expressions, or to bring out more clearly the effects of the sacraments” (Pontificalis Romani) is beyond laughable; it is, in fact, insulting to the intelligence of the informed reader.

A sacramental form that does not express what it is supposed to accomplish is definitely invalid, as the articles about the invalidity of the Novus Ordo holy orders below demonstrate.

In addition to changing the sacramental form of priestly and episcopal ordination, in his document Pontificalis RomaniPaul VI abolished the major order of subdeacon and all of the minor orders (acolyte, exorcist, lector, and porter), none of which are sacraments, but whose denial was condemned by the Council of Trent and flies in the face of the Modernists’ favorite lie to seek to restore things to “antiquity”:

  • “…from the very beginning of the Church the names of the following orders and the duties proper to each one are known to have been in use, namely those of the subdeacon, acolyte, exorcist, rector, and porter, though not of equal rank; for the subdiaconate is classed among the major orders by the Fathers and the sacred Councils, in which we also read very frequently of other inferior orders” (Council of Trent, Session 23, Ch. 2; Denz. 958)
  • “If anyone says that besides the priesthood there are in the Catholic Church no other orders, both major and minor, by which as by certain grades, there is an advance to the priesthood: let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, Session 23, Canon 2; Denz. 962)

Rome has spoken; the case is closed.

But before anyone suggests that somehow Paul VI’s document “isn’t binding”, we must point out that in it he clearly invokes his supposed (but non-existent) “apostolic authority” and requires that this new rite be used in place of the prior, Catholic one:

  • By our apostolic authority we approve this rite so that it may be used in the future for the conferral of these orders in place of the rite now found in the Roman Pontifical. It is our will that these our decrees and prescriptions be firm and effective now and in the future, notwithstanding, to the extent necessary, the apostolic constitutions and ordinances issued by our predecessors and other prescriptions, even those deserving particular mention and amendment.” (Paul VI, Pontificalis Romani)

According to a decree of the Novus Ordo “Sacred Congregation of Rites” dated August 15, 1968, Montini’s new rite of ordination became obligatory for the entire Latin church as of Easter Sunday, April 6, 1969. So we know for sure that since this date, the Novus Ordo church has not validly consecrated a single bishop in the Latin rite, and probably not ordained a single valid priest, either.

The repercussions are unfathomable – but they explain a lot about the state of the New Church. The sacraments are largely gone, so there is simply no grace there, and it shows. But the true Catholic Church cannot give evil or harmful or invalid sacramental rites to her faithful. Such an idea would contradict the promises of infallibility and indefectibility by Our Blessed Lord. This is further evidence that the Vatican II Sect in Rome is not the Catholic Church of Pope Pius XII and his predecessors. Consider the following clear teachings:

  • “Certainly the loving Mother [the Church] is spotless in the Sacraments, by which she gives birth to and nourishes her children; in the faith which she has always preserved inviolate; in her sacred laws imposed on all; in the evangelical counsels which she recommends; in those heavenly gifts and extraordinary graces through which, with inexhaustible fecundity, she generates hosts of martyrs, virgins and confessors.” (Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Mediator Dei, par. 66)
  • “The Church is infallible in her general discipline. By the term general discipline is understood the laws and practices which belong to the external ordering of the whole Church. Such things would be those which concern either external worship, such as liturgy and rubrics, or the administration of the sacraments…. If she [the Church] were able to prescribe or command or tolerate in her discipline something against faith and morals, or something which tended to the detriment of the Church or to the harm of the faithful, she would turn away from her divine mission, which would be impossible.” (Jean Herrmann, Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae, Vol. 1, 1908, p. 258)
  • “If anyone says that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety rather than stimulants to piety, let him be anathema.” (Council of Trent, Session 22, Canon 7)

Try to apply this to the Novus Ordo Church, and you realize very quickly that it’s impossible. The Vatican II Church has defected, has given evil, has destroyed the sacraments, has been a scandal to the faithful rather than the embassy of salvation. In the Catholic Church, however, the Pope is “the citadel and bulwark of the Catholic faith” (Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Qui Nuper, par. 3). No one could seriously say this about the Antipopes of the Vatican II Church. Paul VI – Giovanni Montini – was not a true Pope, but an impostor, as well as his predecessor John XXIII, who started the false church, and his successors John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis I.

The many links we provide below will help you as you research these issues.

As the late Fr. Carl Pulvermacher, OFM Cap., is sometimes quoted as saying, “Once there are no more valid priests, they’ll permit the Latin Mass.” Think about that!

Invalid: The Unholy Orders of the Vatican II Church

  • Absolutely Null and Utterly Void: The 1968 Rite of Episcopal Consecration [PDF] by Fr. Anthony Cekada
    Examines the criteria for validity, Eastern Rite formulas, ancient Christian texts, early doubts about validity, “governing Spirit” vs. “fullness of the priesthood,” substantial change, arguments from context, papal approval. Answer to SSPX/Angelus and Sel de la Terre articles by Fr. Pierre-Marie favoring validity. Extensive bibliography.
  • Why the New Bishops are Not True Bishops [PDF] by Fr. Anthony Cekada
    A two-page summary of the above-linked study “Absolutely Null and Utterly Void”.
  • Still Null and Still Void: Replies to Objections [PDF] by Fr. Anthony Cekada
    Replies to objections from Br. Ansgar Santogrossi, OSB, Fr. Pierre-Marie de Kergorlay, OP, and Fr. Alvaro Calderon, SSPX, against the above-linked study “Absolutely Null and Utterly Void”.
  • New Bishops, Empty Tabernacle [PDF]
    Response to an editorial by Abbé Grégoire Celier which employs some novel and bizarre principles to defend the validity of the 1968 Rite of Episcopal Consecration.
  • Saved by Context? The ’68 Rite of Episcopal Consecration [March 2012]
    Rejoinder to the popular objection that the larger context provided by the 1968 rite of bishops’ ordination gives clear expression to the sacramental form and hence suffices for validity.
  • The New Ordination Rite: Purging the Priesthood in the Conciliar Church [PDF] by Fr. William Jenkins
    A response to certain arguments advanced by Michael Davies in his book The Order of Melchisedech, this article examines the Novus Ordo rite of priestly ordination in light of Catholic theology and concludes that it is doubtful at best and therefore must be considered invalid in practice. Contains shocking information about how the “reform” of the rite came about.

What many may not know: The Society of St. Pius X considers the Paul VI rite of episcopal consecration to be valid (for proof, see their Angelus article on the matter here [PDF], but be aware that it has been refuted in the articles we link above). This means that if a Novus Ordo priest converts to the SSPX and does not seek conditional ordination, he will not be re-ordained by the SSPX. So, beware if you attend SSPX Masses!

Relevant and Related Documents:

Conversion Stories From the Church After Vatican 2 into the Catholic Church

These are the stories of conversion to the Catholic Church from the Novus Ordo / Vatican 2 church. The intention is the hope that the Holy Ghost may work through these stories, in helping to win souls to the Holy Catholic Church.

If you are currently in the Novus Ordo, and consider yourself Catholic, but know that something is not right, then it is Divine Providence that you made it here. We were all once where you are… have hope. As you read these conversion stories, pay attention for similarities in your own life. It will help knowing that others have asked the same questions and had the same struggles ….and have found the answers. These stories are dedicated to Our Lady of the Most Holy Rosary, and is launched on October 7 in honor of the feast day. The Rosary is something that we believe aided us in being led to the true Catholic Church, and something that those in the Novus Ordo can pray as well. By the infinite merits of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, in union with the Immaculate Heart of Mary, may the Holy Ghost guide you.

 

The Conversion Stories will be added as they are completed.

Viganò Reloaded: In new 4-Page Testimony, the “Great Accuser” Doubles Down

from Novus Ordo Watch

He’s back with more!

Viganò Reloaded:
In new 4-Page Testimony, the “Great Accuser” Doubles Down

Just as we were preparing our post on the new bombshell report that some Vatican sources haveconfirmed the Vigano Testimony but with the added caveat that things are even worse than alleged, yet another major development broke in the case:

The former Vatican nuncio to the United States, “Abp.” Carlo Maria Viganò, has just released a new four-page letter in which he reasserts the truth of the accusations of his original Testimony, justifies his decision to go public, and responds to Francis’ attempts to ignore, dismiss, and defame him. This second Testimony, which is printed on official stationery bearing his episcopal coat-of-arms, is entitled Scio Cui Credidi, “I know whom I have believed” (2 Tim 1:12). Vigano submitted it for translation and publication to the same media outlets as before, where the text can be accessed:

Although the letter is dated Sep. 29, 2018, it was released on Sep. 27. It is worth reading in full because it contains lots of nuggets and puts Francis into an even greater quandary than before. Life Site has summarized the essential points as follows:

Given the symbolic date of September 29, the liturgical feast of St. Michael the Archangel, and bearing the Archbishop’s episcopal coat of arms and motto, Viganò:

  • explains why he believes he had a duty to come forward despite his oath to keep the “pontifical secret,” adding that “the purpose of any secret, including the pontifical secret, is to protect the Church from her enemies, not to cover up and become complicit in crimes committed by some of her members”;
  • restates with vigor his central charge that “since at least June 23, 2013, the Pope knew from me how perverse and evil McCarrick was in his intentions and actions, and instead of taking the measures that every good pastor would have taken, the pope made McCarrick one of his principal agents in governing the Church, in regard to the United States, the Curia, and even China, as we are seeing these days with great concern and anxiety for that martyr Church”;
  • points to the Pope’s initial response that he would “not say a word” but then notes that he contradicts himself, in comparing “his silence to that of Jesus in Nazareth and before Pilate,” and Viganò to “the great accuser, Satan, who sows scandal and division in the Church, though without ever uttering my name”;
  • raises concern over revelations that Pope Francis played a role in covering up for or blocking investigations into other priests and prelates, including Fr. Julio Grassi, Fr. Mauro Inzoli, and Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor;
  • and says it was Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, who told him of Pope Benedict’s sanctions against McCarrick. Addressing the Cardinal, he writes: “You have at your complete disposal key documents incriminating McCarrick and many in the curia for their cover-ups. Your Eminence, I urge you to bear witness to the truth…”

(Diane Montagna, “Viganò releases new ‘testimony’ responding to Pope’s silence on McCarrick cover-up”Life Site, Sep. 27, 2018)

Other highlights of this new text include Vigano’s affirmation that “I declare with a clear conscience before God that my testimony is true” and his slamming of Francis’ silence as an admission of guilt: “How can one avoid concluding that the reason they do not provide the documentation is that they know it confirms my testimony?” the former nuncio asks. He challenges by name both “Cardinal” Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston and Marc Ouellet of Quebec to provide information they have, so it will be most interesting to see how they react. Even good ol’ Amoris Laetitia makes an appearance in the second Vigano Testimony!

Meanwhile, the Twitter account of the Austrian web site kath.net reports that Francis has canceled his daily homilies for the next few days. He probably needs some time to figure out what to say now since the passive-aggressive “Look at innocent Christ-like me being persecuted by the satanic Great Accuser”demagoguery won’t fly anymore.

As we’ve said in a recent podcast: Don’t be surprised if at some point we’re going to see a dead body dangling from a bridge over the Tiber. If Vigano’s charges are accurate and things are “even worse” as some sources in the Vatican have reportedly disclosed, then this is not out of the question, unfortunately. A lot is at stake, and Vigano has now shown that he isn’t going away. Moreover, he has already said he fears for his life.

Oh, and tomorrow, Sep. 28, marks the 40th anniversary of the strange and untimely death of “Pope” John Paul I. Remember?

The Divine Maternity

By Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas, CMRI

Feast of the Divine Maternity of the Blessed Virgin
October 11, 1995

Dearly Beloved in Christ,

The feast of the Divine Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary was instituted by Pope Pius XI to commemorate the 1500th anniversary of the Council of Ephesus, the third Ecumenical Council of the Church. How appropriate it was for this feast to be instituted on such an anniversary, for it was at the Council of Ephesus that the doctrine of the Divine Motherhood of Mary was defended against the heresy of Nestorius and his followers, who denied that there was one Divine Person in Christ with two natures, and in consequence of this denial, refused to recognize Mary by the title — Theotokos — Mother of God. For Nestorius and his followers falsely believed that in Christ there were two Persons — one divine and the other human, so that Mary was only the mother of the human person.

In our times, we may not find very many Nestorians, but there are many who call themselves Christians, but who deny to the Blessed Virgin Mary this title, Mother of God. Let us consider in this pastoral letter the Divine Maternity of Mary, in order to be able to better defend the Mother of Jesus Christ and to increase our esteem, love and devotion to her.

When we consider the Divine Maternity of the Blessed Virgin, we must begin by a study of the Person of Jesus Christ. In the Nicene Creed which we recite every Sunday at Holy Mass, we profess our firm belief in the Divinity of Jesus Christ:

“…And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God. Born of the Father before all ages. God of God; Light of Light; true God of true God. Begotten not made; consubstantial with the Father….”

And this belief in Christ’s Divinity is firmly rooted in divine revelation. In Sacred Scripture, we find a multitude of passages which manifest the Divinity of Jesus. St. John the Evangelist tells us in the first Chapter of his Gospel:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God; and the Word was God… And the Word was made flesh….” (John 1:1-14).

On this passage from St. John’s Gospel, St. Cyril of Alexandria, who staunchly defended the Faith at the Council of Ephesus, maintained in wonderful agreement with the Catholic Church:

“In no wise, therefore, is it lawful to divine the one Lord Jesus Christ into two Sons… For the Scripture does not say that the Word associated the person of a man with Himself, but that He was made flesh; that means nothing else but that He partook of flesh and blood, even as we do; wherefore, He made our body His own, and came forth man, born of a woman, at the same time without laying aside His Godhead, or His birth from the Father; for in assuming flesh He still remained what He was” (Mansi, 1.c.4. 891).

Furthermore, our Divine Lord Himself clearly claimed to be the Son of God, equal to the Father:

“I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).

“Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham came to be, I am” (John 8:58).

To the questions put to Him by the High Priest, Caiphas:

“I adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou art the Christ, the Son of God” (Matt. 26:63-64).

Jesus answered simply and emphatically,

“Thou hast said it.”

And St. Paul reiterates the same belief in his Epistle to the Philippians:

“Have this mind in you which was also in Christ Jesus, Who though He was by nature God, did not consider being equal to God a thing to be clung to, but emptied Himself, taking the nature of a slave and being made like unto men and appearing in the form of man” (Phil. 2:5-8).

Thus, Pope Pius XI, in his encyclical Lux Veritatis of December 25, 1931, which commemorated the 1500th anniversary of the Council of Ephesus, reiterated the Catholic Faith in this doctrine:

“For we are taught, by Holy Scripture and by Divine Tradition, that the Word of God the Father did not join Himself to a certain man already subsisting in himself, but that Christ the Word of God is one and the same, enjoying eternity in the bosom of the Father, and made man in time. For, indeed, that the Godhead and Manhood in Jesus Christ, the Redeemer of mankind, are bound together by that wondrous union which is justly and deservedly called hypostatic, is luminously evident from the fact that in the Sacred Scriptures the same one Christ is not only called God and man, but it is also clearly declared that He works as God and also as man, and again that He dies as man and as God He arises from the dead. That is to say, He Who is conceived in the Virgin’s womb by the operation of the Holy Ghost, Who is born, Who lies in a manger, Who calls Himself the son of man, Who suffers and dies, fastened to the cross, is the very same Who, in a solemn and marvelous manner, is called by the Eternal Father ‘My beloved Son’ (Matt. 3:17; 17:5; 2 Peter 1:17), Who pardons sin by His divine authority (Matt. 9:2-6; Luke 5:20-24; 7:48; and elsewhere), and likewise by His own power recalls the sick to health (Matt. 8:3; Mark 1:41; Luke 5:13; John 9; and elsewhere). As all these things show clearly that in Christ there are two natures by which both divine and human works are performed, so do they bear witness no less clearly that the one Christ is at once both God and man because of that unity of person from which He is called ‘Theanthropos’ (God-Man).”

Having considered that Jesus Christ is one Divine Person with two natures, let us continue in the Nicene Creed. We profess that Jesus Christ “was incarnate by the Holy Ghost from the Virgin Mary.” This also is clearly found in Sacred Scriptures.

In the Old Testament, the Prophet Isaias predicted:

“Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and His Name shall be called Emmanuel (God with us)” (Isaias 7:14).

In the Gospel of St. Luke, we find that the Angel Gabriel announced to Mary:

“Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb and bear a Son, and thou shalt call His Name Jesus” (Luke 1:31).

“The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35).

And further on in the same Gospel, St. Elizabeth, “filled with the Holy Ghost,” cried out to the Blessed Virgin:

“And how have I deserved that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:44).

Not only do we find the reference for the Divine Maternity in Sacred Scripture, but also in Sacred Tradition. In the early Christian Church, there was no misunderstanding in the matter, for the early Fathers of the Church were very clear and firm on the Divine Motherhood of Mary.

In his Epistle to the Ephesians, St. Ignatius of Antioch (circa 110 A.D.) wrote:

“Our God Jesus Christ was born by Mary in her maternal womb.”

At another time, St. Ignatius wrote:

“There is only one Healer, composed at the same time of flesh and spirit, begotten and not-begotten… of God and of Mary, Jesus Christ, our Lord.”

St. Irenaeus (202 A.D.) taught:

“This Christ, Who as the Word of the Father was with the Father… was born of a virgin.”

Tertuillian (220 A.D.) said:

“God is born in the womb of a mother.”

St. Athanasius (373 A.D.) taught:

“We confess that the Son of God became Man by the assumption of flesh from the virgin Mother of God.”

St. Gregory Nazianzen (circa 382 A.D.) declares:

“Let him who will not accept Mary as the Mother of God be excluded from God.”

These references from the early Fathers reflect the doctrine which was always held in the Catholic Church. And it was for this reason that when Nestorius had presented his false innovations, they were immediately rejected by the Catholic faithful of Constantinople. This rejection of the Nestorian heresy by the faithful manifests to us that even before Pope St. Celestine I and the Council of Ephesus formally deposed Nestorius from his See of Constantinople and condemned his errors, the faithful had already professed the true doctrine of the Divine Maternity of Mary.

All that has been quoted above from Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition on the Person of Jesus Christ and the Divine Maternity of Mary, was neatly summarized by Pope Pius XI in his encyclical, Lux Veritatis:

“And, indeed, if the Son of the Blessed Virgin Mary is God, assuredly she who bore Him is rightly and deservedly to be called the Mother of God. If there is only one Person in Christ, and this is Divine, without any doubt Mary ought to be called, by all, not the mother of Christ the man only, but Theotokos, or God-bearer. Let us all, therefore, venerate the tender Mother of God, whom her cousin Elizabeth saluted as ‘Mother of my Lord’ (Luke 1:43), who, in the words of Ignatius Martyr, brought forth God (Ad Ephes. 7:18-20); and from whom, as Tertullian professes, God was born; whom the Eternal Godhead has gifted with the fullness of grace and endowed with such great dignity.”

Let us never cease to honor the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, especially when we repeat that most ancient, simple and profound prayer of the Catholic Church to her — “Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee… Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.”

In Christo Jesu et Maria Immaculata,
Most Rev. Mark A. Pivarunas, CMRI

Bitcoin into 2019 | $100,000 (and $300,000) Bitcoin is Coming

As the last quarter of 2018 begins, what is a realistic price to expect for Bitcoin going into 2019, and why? The current price of Bitcoin is $6,652 …… but just how far away is $100,000? What about $300,000?!

In 2016, I published an article Bitcoin and Gold in 2017 | $10,000 Bitcoin is Coming. At the time, Bitcoin was only trading for $959, so the call for $10,000 seemed outlandish to many….just like $300,000 may seem outlandish today. Back then, it took 3 years for bitcoin to meet the territory of its previous all time high from 2013, and then another 11 months for bitcoin to go from $959 to $10,000.

$100,000 Bitcoin

Looking at the history of the price swings in Bitcoin, $100,000 is not that far away. Though in truth, neither is $3,000! Bitcoin is still regarded as ‘speculative’ by many, and there are a great number of people who have still never heard of it! Despite the advances and developments in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, mass adoption has NOT yet been realized.

Again, avoiding the discussion of decentralized money, and all the risks and rewards of cryptocurrencies, this article is to serve as a price forecast, so we will begin with the same market capitalization breakdown as in the 2016 article. Let’s illustrate why $100,000 Bitcoin is coming.

$100,000 Bitcoin and Market Capitalization

Market capitalization is the total value of something. In the case of Bitcoin, the market cap is currently about $115.37 billion dollars.

This is calculated by taking the current total number of Bitcoins in existence 17,281,987 and multiplying it by the current price of $6,676. (note: Bitcoins will cease to be mined at 21 million, here you can track the market capitalization of all crypto currencies)

As Bitcoin is traded globally, (even though the current market cap dwarfs the $15.4 billion from 2016) $115.37 billion dollars is still not much at all. Consider that Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) alone has a market cap of $1,051 billion dollars…and consider that there is nearly $90 trillion in global equities in general!

*note: Since 2016 article.. Bitcoin market cap has increased from $15.4 billion to $115.37 billion. 
Apple from $625 billion to to $1,051 billion. Global equities from around 70 trillion to 90 trillion.

 

$100,000 Bitcoin would equal a market cap of $1,728 billion dollars. That is still less than the combined size of Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) and Microsoft Corp (NASDAQ: MSFT). Those two companies combine for a market cap of $1,810 billion. We must also consider that those are companies, and Bitcoin has a potential as a global currency.

For another perspective, if Bitcoin market cap were to reach the level of capitalization as Apple is currently, one Bitcoin would be valued at $60,800.

Bitcoin’s all time high was $19,891 at the end of 2017. That price was achieved in spite of it still being an unproven commodity. We are still talking about a 10 year old currency, which challenges the modern day central banking system, in a world with a $135 trillion GDP!

Now you can see, it’s nothing at all to get Bitcoin to $100,000. It’s all a matter of sentiment and mass adoption, and there are developers and advocates working around the clock to ensure that very eventual mass adoption.

Another perspective, the United States Monetary base peaked in 2015 at $4,167 billion. For one bitcoin to be valued at $300,000, its market cap would be near $5,184 billion. Therefore, $300,000 is a reasonable eventual price if bitcoin were to gain equal footing with the US dollar and other global currencies. Then, you can really start to blow your mind if you contemplate it’s price if it were to gain dominance over the other global currencies. But first thing is first.

This section was to help you conceptualize the potential of value of Bitcoin. The eventual price of $100,000…$300,000…$1,000,000 for one bitcoin is not outlandish, but a very real possibility…and for many, it is an expectation.

And now….the real reason why you are here…. WHEN?

 

Bitcoin! When Moon, When Lambo?

There are those who unfortunately only buy into bitcoin manias to ride the rocket to the moon, to get rich quick, to buy lamborghinis….They make the price bubbles possible, and oftentimes are parted with their money. There are others who day trade cryptocurrencies as a stocktrader trades stocks. There are others who are true believers and “hodl” at any price, in hopes of an unimaginable wealth in the future. All of these groups of people must utilize the story told in the chart. And that is the story we will predict here.

I’m not ignorant of the fact that many have travelled down the ‘price prediction’ trap. It’s a dangerous territory putting one’s trustworthiness, credibility, and authority at risk. Also, consider these dates and prices as entertainment purposes. Don’t remortgage your house because you read on a blog that bitcoin would be worth $300,000 … you know? With that, here we go…

 

The first point to make is that bitcoin is a creature of habit. As you can see from the charts above, the bubble from 2017-2018 has an identical structure as does the bubble from 2013-2015. One major note is that bitcoin is moving almost twice as fast this time when compared to last time. The above chart is a weekly chart, and the current chart is a 4 day chart. IF we see a higher high in the very near future, I count the next bull run as being activated. If the higher high is delayed, this entire prediction will be off.

A few other things to look for… We should see price break through the 50 day moving average line, and we should see volume really pick up on a bullish move.

 

 

Another fact worth considering, is that the ‘bubble crash’ followed by a ‘cup and handle’ formation is not unique to bitcoin. This happens to many stocks as well. While some companies never recover from such a crash, others, like Amazon, soar exponentially. For example, after the dot com bubble in 1999, Amazon lost over 90% of its value, and bottomed at nearly $10 a share. Today, that $10 share is now valued at nearly $2,000!!

Again, current bitcoin price is moving even faster than Amazon. The Amazon chart is a 2 week chart, and the current bitcoin chart is a 4 day chart.

Now for the price predictions! Please take these as approximates. Bitcoin is so volatile, that I don’t pretend to KNOW what exactly is going to happen. This is merely my best guess based on previous bitcoin price movement…. here is what we get…

 

This current $6,000 – $7,000 price level is a great spot to accumulate in my opinion. Could there be a capitulation and a dump in price? Sure. But I would expect such a dip to be followed by a violent rip upwards in price. This is a great spot for long term positions considering the potential long-term prices.

The key potential prices and timelines:

  • End of 2018 – $10,000
  • New all-time high over $20,000 by July 2019
  • $100,000 level reached in December 2019
  • Bubble top up to $330,000 in December 2019
  • Crash down to near $100,000 accumulation in 2020
  • Wild card: next bubble top before 2022 near $5 million!

As before, when Bitcoin popularity grows, euphoria takes hold, prices skyrocket, then FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) is interjected, people will panic, the price will fall, there will be an accumulation period, then people eventually start using it again, then it’s popularity grows, euphoria takes over, and on goes the cycle….albeit with a new floor and support.

Regardless of how accurate these price predictions are, it is not a bad move to add Bitcoin to your cash and tangible assets. The potential of bitcoin, cryptocurrencies, and blockchain is real. $100,000 Bitcoin is not that far away.

Lastly, here is an interview I gave in March 2018. This is the part of the interview in which we spoke of the future price of bitcoin…

How do I buy some? How can I trade it?

The easiest way for a beginner to buy bitcoin is through Coinbase. The link is my referral link. Upon buying or selling $100 worth of bitcoin, we both get $10 worth of bitcoin added to our accounts. Coinbase is FDIC insured for it’s cash deposits, and you set up your account much like you would a bank account. However, there is no branch you need to go to, you submit everything digitally. It’s fairly easy and a decent option for beginners.

To trade bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies), you first should be a competent trader with a trading plan! There are some exchanges which allow highly leveraged positions, with forced liquidations, and its just an all around bad recipe for beginners. That said, I personally use Kraken, Binance, Coinbase, and Bittrex.

If you need any help, feel free to reach out to me. I will help you free of charge as much as is reasonable. And if you need help setting up accounts or anything requiring more time, I’ll just ask for a nominal fee.

Also, I recommend Real Life Trading’s Crypto Course if you would like to start from scratch with a 5 video intro series to bitcoin, blockchain, and trading.

Conclusion

Heading into 2019, the Trump Rally may be nearing it’s end, and many emerging markets are already showing signs of a correction. As money flows out of equities, it very well may end up in cryptocurrencies.

Consider taking advantage of, or at least studying, the current opportunities in Bitcoin, other cryptos, and even the much maligned silver and gold. Oh, and instead of Lambos, may you be good stewards of your future crypto wealth. If you found this article helpful, or even entertaining, please consider throwing me a few satoshis. I don’t have nearly as many as I should, but that’s a topic for another article.

34uRmHJKD6FDYEgAsrGZk5jkcLNYeDruEG

Here are some useful tools:
Bitcoin Wallet – Coinbase
Bitcoin Charts
Real Life Trading Crypto Course

Crytpo Currency Market Capitalizations
Bitcoin real time flow

-Travis

JMJ – UIOGD