Br. Bugnolo defends the probity of Substantial Error in Benedict XVI’s Renunciation

Editor’s Note: What I say here will surprise both sides of the argument.

Note Well:  I misspoke twice in this video: first, when referring to Archbishop Ganswein’s phone call to me, I said “Benedict” when I intended to say, “Bergoglio”, and second, when referring to the international group which could meet with Benedict XVI, I intended but mindlessly forgot to name Miss. Barnhardt.

13 thoughts on “Br. Bugnolo defends the probity of Substantial Error in Benedict XVI’s Renunciation”

  1. Very wise words and a welcome de-escalation of rhetoric.

    Just learnt that Ecuador recently delivered a sovereign manifesto to WHO declaring that under no circumstances will Ecuadorian people tolerate the sovereignty of their homeland being put at risk to anyone.

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/bZ2TtIWDVebA/

    It seems this relates to apparitions by Our Lady of Quito / The Good Event / Nuestra Señora del Buen Suceso with prophecies about specific corruptions in the Church after 1950.

    The last prophecy was written down in late 1634 or early 1635.

  2. The biggest problem with Ann Barnhardt’s position is not that it is irrational but that it is deeply uncharitable.

    Without knowing his mind she has gone so far as to label Benedict the “worst pope ever”.

  3. According to Wikipedia it says that Emperor Charles of Austria relinquished participation in the administration of the empire on November 11th.

    1. I was mistaken, it was Nicholas II, Tsar of Russia who gave up authority on Feb 28, 1917 (Julian Calendar), and abiciated 2 dsys later.

    1. Mr.O’Reilley, you are an ex CIA employee. No one here believes or will ever believe anything you say, especially since Bergoglio was installed by CIA agents and assets. You are simply doing your job of disinformation and misinformation. And your arguments are nearly always laughable sophisms, and when they are not they are simply ad hominums. So try to beat your head against the wall of truth, and if you want readers of From Rome.Info to engage you, beware as some of them are good dialecticians…

    1. Bishop Gracida did write a forward to the book. But I personally know Radelli and I know that he is a man to judge by appearances and jump to conclusions. The writings of Ratzinger in Italian and English do not represent his authentic thought which in German is very precise and has been shown by Cionci to mean quite otherwise than many want it to mean. Radelli is taking the translations at face value, which is very unsound academic method.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.