The deafening silence of the MSM on the invalid renunciation of Pope Benedict XVI

English translation by FromRome.Info

by Mirko Ciminiello

The discovery that Pope Ratzinger may not have abdicated, but “only” declared the (Holy) See impeded, would be the journalistic story of the millennium. But the press ignores it… deafening silence,

In grammar, a rhetorical figure such as “deafening silence” is defined as an oxymoron: the juxtaposition of two terms with opposite or strongly antithetical meanings. In the media, this expression is sometimes used to indicate the absence of an action – and more often a reaction – that could have been expected. Like, for example, the mutism of certain feminists in the face of the destruction of rights (especially women’s) perpetrated by the Taliban in Afghanistan. Or that of the so-called “fourth power” in the face of the succession of clues regarding the (non) resignation of Benedict XVI.

Two weeks have passed since our shock discovery that could upset the future (and even the present) of the Catholic Church. A message, found in the folds of the book-interview Ultime conversazioni, which seems to confirm a hypothesis that our colleague Andrea Cionci has been investigating for some time. The hypothesis that the famous Declaratio of Pope Ratzinger was not a declaration of renunciation, but of (Holy) See impedita.

In the first case, authoritative jurists such as lawyer Estefanía Acosta and professor Antonio Sánchez Sáez have demonstrated that it would be legally invalid. And, significantly, they have demonstrated this using the same arguments of “Bergoglian” canonists such as Monsignor Giuseppe Sciacca and Professor Geraldina Boni, simply by highlighting their contradictions.

In extreme synthesis: the Pope is only one (there are not two Popes, nor an “enlarged” Papacy). Since 1983, the papal office is considered to be composed of two entities: the munus (the divine title of Pontiff) and the ministerium (the practical exercise of power). According to Canon 332 §2, a Vicar of Christ who intends to abdicate must renounce the munus. However, in the Declaratio Pope Benedict announced that he was leaving the ministerium.

Facts and clues

These are facts – and not even isolated ones. Suffice it to consider, for example, that Joseph Ratzinger still wears the white robe, lives in the Vatican, signs P.P. (Pater Patrum) and imparts the apostolic blessing. He admits (as per our recent intuition) the possibility of being the last Pope “as we have known him until now”, as he is designated in the prophecy of Malachi. In addition, there is the small detail that the institution of Pope Emeritus does not exist, as the Vatican has noticed only now – so much so that they are now trying to regulate it.

All aspects of which Benedict XVI seems perfectly aware. And about which he seems to have been sending, for eight years, messages to those who have ears to hear. The last one was reported by the blog, which quoted a very precise question by journalist Peter Seewald, also in Last Conversations. “Is diminished physical vigor sufficient reason to step down from the throne of Peter?”

Question to which Pope Ratzinger responded by immediately speaking of a misunderstanding related to the function (i.e. ministerium). But the successor of Peter “is involved in the innermost being”, that is, at the higher level of the munus. And – added His Holiness – if a Pontiff is no longer able to carry out his (practical) office in a complete manner, he must “leave the throne free”. Not, that is, to come down from it (as Seewald ventilated), but to leave it free, unencumbered, unoccupied.

The deafening silence of the media

This, according to some distinguished Latinists, is precisely the original meaning of a verb that stands out in the Declaratio of February 2013. Vacet, which in reference to “the See of St. Peter” has been translated as “will be vacant,” but can legitimately be interpreted as communicating an impeded See.

A status provided for in Canon 412 of the Code of Canon Law, which occurs when the diocesan bishop is prevented from exercising his pastoral office. And this “by reason of imprisonment, confinement, exile or incapacity, not being able to communicate even by letter with his diocesans.”

Just the situation that Joseph Ratzinger found himself living eight years ago. Besieged by internal enemies (the Mafia of St. Gallen), external (the blockade of Vatican ATMs), and with private mail given to the press (the Vatileaks scandal).

Rebus sic stantibus (Things being as they are), it would mean that Benedict XVI is still the only true Pope, with all the (disruptive) consequences of the case. Case that would be by far the journalistic case of the millennium, but which the mainstream media, entrenched behind their deafening silence, they continue incredibly to ignore. One might wonder, Cui prodest (To whose benefit)? But in any case (and in all senses) it’s a real shame.

Italian President: “To get vaccinated is a duty, don’t invoke Liberty to avoid it!”

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

(Click the image above to read the news about this in Italian)

The Orwellian Level of the Plandemic in Italy just surged to a whole new level, when on September 5, last, the President of Italy, Sergio Matarella, who is charged with defending the Constitutional Order, insisted that no one has the right to decline to be DeathVaxxed.

The psychopathic comment was made during his official discourse for the opening of the Academic year at the University of Pavia, a state institution. Sergio Matarella is a Sicilian, the son of an infamous Mafia boss. During the Plandemic he has walked lock-step in sync withe Globalist plan to destroy the Italian economy and now appears to have fully embraced their project for the genocide of the Italian People.

Here are the words of the President, during his discourse, entitled, “On the Moral and Civil duty to get vaccinated”, given on that occasion of the 660th anniversary of the University (source here):

“Le espressioni di violenza e le minacce che affiorano in questo periodo contro medici, scienziati e giornalisti sono fenomeni allarmanti che vanno contrastati con fermezza e sanzionati con doveroso rigore per tutelare coloro, e sono la stragrande maggioranza, che hanno adottato comportamenti responsabili”.

“Chi sceglie di non vaccinarsi in nome della propria libertà limita la libertà altrui di tornare ad avere una vita normale. Se l’economia sta ripartendo e anche gli atenei ripartiranno con le lezioni in presenza, è solo grazie allo strumento che in grande velocità la comunità scientifica ci ha consegnato per sconfiggere il virus”.

Here is my English translation:

“The expressions of violence and the threats which are breaking out in this period against doctors, scientists and journalists are alarming phenomena which are to be opposed with firmness and sanctions, with dutiful rigor, to safeguard them, and they are the overwhelming majority, which has adopted responsible conduct.

He who choses to not get vaccinated in the name of his own liberty limits the liberty of others to return to having a normal life.  If the economy is starting up again and if the Schools will start up again with in person classes, it is only thanks to the instrument which with great speed the scientific community has given us to defeat the virus.”

The words of the President have gravely impugned the Constitutional right of every Italian resident, which in Article 32 reads thus:

La Repubblica tutela la salute come fondamentale diritto dell’individuo e interesse della collettività, e garantisce cure gratuite agli indigenti.

Nessuno può essere obbligato a un determinato trattamento sanitario se non per disposizione di legge. La legge non può in nessun caso violare i limiti imposti dal rispetto della persona umana.

Which in English reads:

The Republic safeguards health as a fundamental right of the individual and of common interest, and guarantees free care to the needy.

No one can be obliged to a determinate sanitary treatment if not through the disposition of law. The law cannot in any case violate the limits imposed by respect for the human person.

Matarella has made a grave political error, however, if it is his intention to see everyone vaccinated. Because since against the threat of death, there is no greater threat in the natural order, and since no law has force without threat of penalty, by threatening all with death via the DeathVaxx he has in fact undermined the threat of every other law. And since a law which cannot be enforced, because its threat is de facto annulled, is no longer a law which must be observed — as the Angelic Doctor St. Thomas Aquinas observes in his Tract on Law– by these comments, the President of Italy has effectively removed the obligation from every citizen to observe any and all laws of the Italian Republic.

By this means the Republic has been dissolved. Nor is there any question of a Constitution, since for 18 months no one in the State has made anything more than a pretense of its observance.

Today’s news confirms once again the report by FromRome.Info in May, despite all the trolls to the contrary: that it is the intention of this government to DeathVaxx everyone.

The repercussions for Materella have just begun. Two Italian jurists have filed today a Criminal complaint against the President for “incitement to hatred” against others on account of their personal beliefs regarding the utility of the Vaxx. To read the news about this in Italian, click the image below: