Rome, May 24, 2016: The recent revelations by Archbishop Georg Gänswein point to a stunning possibility, that during the Conclave of 2005, which elected Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger as Pope Benedict XVI, Jorge Mario Cardinal Bergoglio and his supporters consented to his rival’s election, on the condition that after a fixed number of years, he would resign, and the next conclave elect himself Pope.
This theoretical postulate is based on the following reasoned speculations:
- There is precedent in the history of Conclaves for deals among rival factions: As we noted in the article, “Team Bergoglio” and the legacy of Cardinal Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro, during the Conclave which elected Saint Pius X, there was the curious consequence that Rampolla’s supporters were consecrated Bishops by Pius X following his election, and Pius X’s supporters, bishops, by Cardinal Rampolla.
- Archbishop Gänswein confirms the existence of the St. Gallen group, a self-named “mafia” organization in the Church which worked actively to promote the election of Cardinal Bergoglio in 2005. This confirmed what Vaticanist Paul Baade admitted last year.
- Pope Benedict XVI explained his reason to retire for reasons which do not seem credible: namely for poor health, even though he has not lost the capacity to speak, think, walk or make decisions.
- Pope Benedict XVI planned his retirement well in advance: according to Cardinal Bertone, as much as 7 months in advance; according to publish reports, the former Cardinal of Palermo knew more than 2 years before, a fact which he revealed during a dinner in a restaurant in China.
- Pope Benedict XVI has not issued one word of criticism of Pope Francis’ outrageous statements and scandalous actions.
- The supporters of Pope Benedict XVI have not personally criticized Pope Francis in public for any of his heretical, erroneous or scandalous words or actions during the latters’ pontificate.
- There is constant emphasis, by Pope Benedict XVI and now Archbishop Gänswein that in some way both Benedict and Francis share the Petrine ministry.
None of this seems possible to From Rome without there having been a formal agreement among the Cardinals in the conclave of 2005 to share the Papacy among the 2 rival candidates.
Finally, if such a pact were made, it is not clear whether it would violate UDG 81 or canon law. But seeing that there is yet no firm evidence of the existence of such a pact, we will omit speculating as to its effect in law on the basis of UDG 81 (read more about this in the series of articles published here).
However, if this pact to elect Bergoglio did in fact happen, it would be more than sufficient explanation why none of the Cardinals have made any objection or heard any petitions regarding the Team Bergoglio scandal, in which it appears that up to 20+ Cardinals canvassed for votes for Bergoglio, most likely with his consent, in the 2013 Conclave, in violation of UDG 81, the violation of which is an excommuncate-able offense. For, if the College made an pact regarding votes in 2005, they might very well have been excommunicated, in virtue of the Papal Law, since that time. This might explain the utter breakdown of public virtue and faith which is spreading like a wild fire among the Sacred College, as a spiritual punishment for that most occult crime.
6 thoughts on “Archbishop Georg Gänswein’s revelations point to Conclave Pact to elect Bergoglio”
A link to your source for those “recent revelations by Archbishop Georg Gänswein,” please.
Its all over the net, but, yes, we should have given at least one link….so we have added it to the first paragraph, a link to Pentin’s article on the matter.
Surely if Ratzinger intended to retain some of the prerogatives of the papacy – as Ganswein suggested – then his “resignation” was never valid in the first place. You can’t resign from the papacy all the while you are intending to remain part of the papacy. and that would mean that Bergoglio’s election was invalid from the get-go……
Here one must distinguish between the office which is to be the successor of St. Peter and its perogatives; again, one must distinguish between a public act and what one says about it after the fact; again, one must distinguish between form and matter in the abdication. For these reasons, the claim in words and in deed to some of the perogatives of the office, such as wearing white and using the name “Pope Emeritus” (which means ex-Pope), since these regard improper accidents of human custom, not powers essential to the office as Christ and Apostolic Tradition understands it, it is not probable at all, that the doing of these things by Cardinal Ratzinger (yes, he remains a Cardinal, because the Pope is a Cardinal, a chief member of the clergy of Rome), means that Cardinal Ratzinger is still the Pope.
Something is so very wrong that it is becoming more and more believable that Bergoglio is not pope. This evil man is trashing the Church’ most sacred aspects and the damage he is effecting cannot be measured. If he is not stopped, there will be no going back. The Church will be overtly split and She will be underground. Shame on these men who should stand up for Her and who will not. Shame on them!
Comments are closed.