Bergoglio to change Canon Law to hide the invalidity of the Renunciation

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Bergoglio is about to promulgate a new Code of Canon Law for his fake Church. This has been in the work since he was elected. The fake news is that Pope Benedict XVI started this revision. But the truth was told to me, by Bishop Arrieta, when I met with him on Dec. 11, 2019, that the problems in the Penal Section of the Code — like canon 1331 §2 n. 4 which shows conclusively that a renunciation of ministerium does not renounce dignitas, officium and munus — will be “fixed”.  Mons. Arrieta explicitly confirmed in my presence that canon 1331 will be changed.

Bergoglio’s Anti-Church will probably also abolish excommunication for anyone who is a heretic, criminal or schismatic. But increase penalties for Catholics who refuse and resist his apostasy, sodomy, clericalism and globalism. Get ready for an Anglican-Like takeover of your local diocese and parish.

There is more news about the Anti-Church’s new code of canon law here.

Needless to say, the Code of Canon Law of 1983 remains and will remain the law of the Church, since an Antipope has no authority to change the laws of the Church. But the change is being introduced to ideologically imprison those who do not have the courage or integrity to call Bergoglio out as an antipope or heretic.

I would not be surprised the changes allow everything the Bergoglians have done in the last 7 years.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

With Globalist Censorship growing daily, No one will ever know about the above article, if you do not share it.

18 thoughts on “Bergoglio to change Canon Law to hide the invalidity of the Renunciation”

  1. This is what we have been expecting & it’s past time the prelature stopped playing waiting games on the fence with the entire faithful followers of Christ. We have had enough of pandering to a Marxist Dictator who categorically is not the Vicar of Christ or Holy Father or Supreme Pontiff. The CC is in schism whether Cardinals Burke, Mueller, Brandmueller, Eijk etc. publicly accept this or not so they had better make a move to detach themselves & traditional Catholics from this Regime. Not only Canon Law but Civil Law as well must be implemented in these horrific circumstances. We will not accept a godless NWO church!

  2. Sounds about right. Bergoglio will align the law with what he perceives as the reality of the Church. Nearly all Catholics will be taken in and support his actions. We need divine intervention as a sign to the majority of Catholics. How well even that will work is an open issue.

    1. Those stupid enough to keep naming the AntiPope and Heretic in the Canon of the Mass are very stupid indeed. Bergoglio recognzies that. When you buy one lie, the devil feeds you worse lies. Each is a chain to drag you to hell, and into a state of soul from which you cannot escape. Look what Henry VIII did to the Catholic of England. Look at what Luther did to the Catholics of Germany. Bergoglio wants to out do them all.

  3. Who can we send to protect our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI from those Baptized Catholic who deny that sin done in private is sin.

    “If there is a union of a private nature, there is neither a third party, nor is society affected. Now, if the union is given the category of marriage, there could be children affected. Every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help shape their identity.”- Jorge Bergoglio, denying The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and the fact that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage, while denying sin done in private is sin.“

    Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, has not denounced The Gift Of The Holy Ghost in regards to our Catholic Faith, to not err in matters of Faith and morals, in regards to what Holy Mother Church teaches, because “It is not possible to have Sacramental Communion without Ecclesial Communion”, due to The Unity Of The Holy Ghost. Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI must be moved to a safe location NOW. He is in grave danger!

  4. The National Catholic Register article you linked to ended with: “Dictatorships are born and grow without rights. In the Church this cannot happen,” Pope Francis said.

    Straight from the horse’s mouth! He also invites us “to love canon law”. Ha! Enjoy mocking us while you can, Dictator Bergoglio, because…

    “The Lord wins in the end.” Pope Benedict XVI (still reigning!)

  5. “Get ready for an Anglican-like takeover of your local Diocese and Parish”.

    The comments I hear most from fellow Catholics, good hearted Catholics of good will – but also Catholics who are profoundly mistaken, is:

    “What happens in Rome stays in Rome”;
    “My Catholic Faith is local and does not depend on the Pope”;
    “Nothing I can do, only the Hierarchy can fix this”;
    “It’s above my pay grade, not my responsibility or my problem”;
    “God will fix this in time, I will just keep going to Mass as always”;
    “Who do you think you are! presuming to tell your superiors what is true!”

    I could go on.

    It boils down to variations of what the Hobbits told Gandalf who warned them of their approaching doom: “Too bad about the rest of Middle Earth, but I’ve got secondsies to eat and a hot pot of tea … and after all, I am only quite small; nothing I can do! Sorry. Find some great hero to fix this problem far away that doesn’t affect me anyway”.

    Except, it was coming for them too. They just didn’t know it. Hobbit on was doomed.

    Except, only a Hobbit *could* fix this problem! The solution to the evil of Middle Earth was not in great wizards and elves and kings and knights. Only a Hobbit. According to the will of Ilúvatar – it must be a Hobbit, or it is the end. Someone in Hobbiton had to leave their hot tea on the stove and save the middle-earth world.

    And so, your comment. It is coming to your local Diocese and Parish. It is coming for your home altar. It is coming to your confessional. It is coming into the midst of your marriage and how you raise your children.

    What happens in Rome does *not* stay in Rome. There is great evil in Rome, right now, and the gates are opening and they are coming to insist you do here what they have decided there. And sometimes, not always, but *sometimes*, victory and the fate of Christendom depends upon the insignificant and the small.

    Come to think of it … in God’s scheme it is almost always thus. Rise up, little people! As if your salvation and that of those you love depend on it.

    1. @Aqua: Recent conversation at a new-to-me blog, Complete Christianity:
      Yes. This is dubbed the Beneplenist position, because it’s not technically sedevacantist, as the position is that the Chair of Peter is occupied, just not by the man they say it is.

      It’s a very formidable argument, but simultaneously unprovable, as the only man who truly knows the mind and intent of Benedict XVI is Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger). So for all the theories and speculation, we are stuck with no clear answer.

      In such cases we are forced to default to what is known, which is that the college of cardinals did indeed elect Jorge Bergoglio as Pope Francis in 2013. The one and only man who could authoritatively say to the contrary is Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger) and he’s done nothing but kiss Francis’ ring and call him “Holy Father.” This, early on, forced me to dismiss the Beneplenist argument.

      Bishop Athanasius Schneider, in his recent book, has assured us that there is nothing left for us to do but assume Francis is the pope, resist his perceived heresies, and pray for him. Cardinals Sarah, Müller and Burke have said as much too. So this is all we have, and it is enough.

      I long ago considered the possibility of “what if” it’s all true and Francis is not the pope. My conclusion was simply: “now what?” Obviously, there is nothing we can do about it even if it is all true. We’re just as powerless as we are otherwise, so why go there?

      I came to the conclusion that this is Christ’s Church not mine, therefore Pope Francis is ultimately Christ’s problem not mine. My job is simply to remain humble, prayerful and orthodox, which is easily enough obtained by sticking to the historic teachings and practices of the Church, which are well recorded for us in previous catechisms and reverent liturgies, as well as the rosary and other private devotions.

      History will sort all of this out for us. We only need resist, pray and wait to catch up with future historical records about our own time.

      Thank you for noting that this formidable argument for Benedict is Pope (BiP) is not a sedevacantist one. I really, REALLY appreciate that.

      You say that while the BiP-argument is formidable, it is simultaneously unprovable and I agree with both of those observations, but that is exactly why unlike you (and I understand your position) I strongly recommend that the faithful of Christ’s Church (as you rightly say) request an examination during the lifetime of both Francis and Benedict because as more than one pope existed in St Bernard of Clairvoux’s time the situation exists now.

      Men make mistakes and as much as I appreciate and follow Bp Schneider and Cdl Burke very Catholic teachings, they could be mistaken about what actions are left to the faithful in this time of two living popes. BTW: Did you note that Pope Benedict in his recent cover photo on the book he co-authored with Cdl Sarah is again wearing the simar? Might be nothing.

      I do not fault either yours or Mr. Steven O’Reilly’s or others’ similar “wait for a future pope to decide” position, but for me and others it comes down to a matter as simple as the short definition of schism found in LaRavoire Morrow’s catechism My Catholic Faith. Namely, Schism is the refusal to submit to the authority of the Supreme Pontiff (p. 152). I admit that you and others have figured out a way to Recognize and Resist, but I for one cannot submit my moral agency or conscience to former Cdl Bergolio’s authority. I ask myself, “How can the source of unity as defined by the Church herself be at the same time the vector of schism?” My answer is, “Can’t be.”
      There are probably lengthier definitions for schism with more details than the one that I cite, but that one sums up for me why requesting an examination of the evidence underpinning this formidable BiP-argument is sufficient to make a request that per my baptism I have the right to make. Knowing of this right and the existence of the formidable argument based on canonical evidence that now exists allows me to heave a sigh of relief. Isn’t it a relief knowing that evidence for such a formidable argument even exists and that there is a growing number who are publicly requesting an examination of it including Bp Emeritus Rene Gracida and Msgr Nicola Bux? Again, thank you for your articulate and TRULY charitable conversation.

      Have you seen Mr. O’Reilly’s blog, Roma Locuta Est? You share the virtue of generous hospitality. Thank you again.

      BTW: Are you aware that there are plans to change Canon Law including but not limited to 1331.2 n. 4? Could be an attempt to cover up or at least make less obvious the whole munus/ministerium controversy. If not us, who? If not now, when?

  6. Ever heard of the phrase, “Possession is 9/10ths of the law”?
    Basically, it’s a waste of time, energy and intellect to keep going over and over the question of who is the true pope. It doesn’t matter if Benedict XVI is the real pope. The man at the head of the table, the one making all of the decisions, who cannot be removed from office by law the Church is Francis, like it or not. He is in control of the Vatican and all of its affairs. A strangle hold, granted, but a hold, none-the-less. Move on, people. Use your passion to fight against him, not about him.

    1. Dear Cat Gravaitate,

      Yes, possession is 9 tenths of the law. And Since Pope Benedict was elected first and never renounced the petrine munus, then we all must presume that he still holds it and that all other claims are illegal, illegitimate, immoral and should be corrected, by law or force of arms or any other legitimate means. Your difficulty seems to be that you do not know what legal possession means.

Comments are closed.