Editor’s Note: It was catastrophic that the Cardinals and Bishops allowed a heretic remain in his claim to be the Pope. But, it’s always better late than never, that a Cardinal speak more plainly. Only that, here, he is going to cause a lot of confusion: because a formally condemned heretic cannot be elected, and a man who has not formally been condemned, can be rebuked and give up his heresy. So the Cardinal is talking about individuals who are manifest and formal heretics, but not yet public or pertinacious, in a canonical sense.

And yes it would be a catastrophe, a continuing catastrophe. But if the Cardinals do something more than talk about such problems, every such catastrophe in the Church can be repaired, if a Provincial Synod in the Roman Province be called and the errant pope be remonstrated with to give up such errors.

However, if the election be valid juridically, Christ’s prayer will intervene and prevent the worst from happening, as we have seen in the last 2 years in the case of Pope Francis, who stepped back and withdrew all requirements that ‘Fiducia supplicans’ be implemented. The backlash he received from Bishops opposing him on that document’s heretical teaching, was a sure sign of the presence of the Holy Spirit working among the Bishops, which is the result of Christ’s High Priestly prayer.

Editor’s Note: This press release says that the Cardinals began today to discuss the problems of the Church. — Translation: The Cardinals who arrived as soon as they could objected to the beginning of these General Congregations without their consent and presence, and for the first time objections were allowed to be made.

Editor’s Note: In a certain sign of disfavor, since the Jubilee year is a year of mercies, that Pope Francis died without finishing it through, shows that God gave the Church the greatest mercy He could, in this Jubilee. And that He did this on Easter Monday, shows that it is a fruit of His Resurrection, of triumph over death and darkness.

As I remarked earlier this year, it is also the best thing that could happen as far as Papal revenue, since if the Cardinals elect someone who would be wildly popular with those Catholics who can afford to pilgrimage to Rome, having a new Pope in a Jubilee year, would bring massive crowds of pilgrims to the Eternal City.

For this reason, I think that if we get a Pope to “Make the Church great again”, all the circumstances i which the Vatican finds itself with cause auto-ignition in his popularity and make this Jubilee Year a year to remember in the life of the Church until the end of time. Let us pray that God will give us a Pope, to begin the Great Catholic Reset, which Pope Benedict XVI prepared by his fake abdication, making the first 10 years of Pope Francis’ papacy easily and canonically able to be invalidated.

Editor’s Note: In the plethora of reports about the Vatican in these days some major factual errors are being made. The greatest, is calling the Camerlengo of the Apostolic Chambers, the Cardinal, who runs the Vatican during the sede vacante, and until the new Pope accepts his election, a “U. S. Cardinal”, when he is in fact a native born Irishman. He did acquire U. S. Citizenship, but that does not change his ethnicity or origins. — He is a former Legionnaire of Christ, and while member of that religious Order, while serving in Washington, D. C., he transferred to that Diocese and left that order. — His major resume problem is that while he was a roommate in a four bedroom house-apartment, with Cardinal McCarrick, who regularly slept with his seminarians, he is reported to have “seen nothing”.

Cardinal Farrel, who was recently appointed by Pope Francis, to save the unfunded Pension Fund for Vatican workers, will undoubtedly be asked by many Cardinals to explain the financial problems of the Apostolic See, and as a former financial professional, he will be able to give them a lot of information about the issue.

Editor’s Note: If anyone on this list is elected, the Church is doomed to be entrapped in the every increasing ideological system of control spread worldwide by the Zionists who rule in Israel.

Editor’s Note: If there is any honest man among the Cardinals, then in one of the General Congregation, being held before the Conclave opens, he should cite this article and demand that Cardinal Farrel and the 3 cardinals assisting him, produce the documents requested by Attorney Yore, so that no one say that the Vatican is more corrupt than the W.E.F.. — Among the questions to be asked is where the missing 4 billion euros, which were in the Vatican Bank during the reign of Pope Benedict XVI went to?

Editor’s Note: While you are being psychologically manipulated by thousands of clergy who insist you pray for Pope Francis, Attorney Elizabeth Yore, an internationally recognized expert in the prosecution of sex-traffickers, reminds us that Pope Francis headed an international syndicate of human trafficking, on all levels, and that the Vatican has been entirely taken over and has become a sanctuary for the worst perpetrators in the clergy. — This article will help all Catholics snap back into reality.

Editor’s Note: It is not my attention to weary the eyes of the readers of FromRome.Info by reporting or even commenting on very article speculating who might be elected the next pope, but it is sufficient to cite only a few, which give a clear picture, though unintentionally, of who the Globalists and Freemasons want. — The above article is a case in point: it’s one of those elegant slop-propaganda pieces, which no serious Catholic would give credence to, since it opens with a leader which imagines, that being “anti-Francis” is something rare in the Catholic Church and is some sort of new novelty. It also seems to think that the greatest threat to the Catholic Church are those who want the Church to continue teaching the same things as Jesus and the Apostles taught!

The Guardian is one of the leading newspapers of a fallen Kingdom, which chose its own King to be head of the English Church in the 16th century, and where their national church has become such a joke of the woke ideas it pushes, that the number of Catholics in the country now outnumbers the members of that fake church.

In addition to being slop-propaganda (generic anti-Catholic propaganda) it is disinformation, because it attacks not the Cardinals who are the most Catholic, but the Cardinals who spoke out against Pope Francis, but who themselves are some of the most compromised, for having insisted that Pope Francis was a Catholic (Cardinal Mueller), or that he was certainly the Pope, when Benedict XVI had not abdicated (Cardinal Burke), or who attended the Pachamama procession into Saint Peter’s Basilica on Oct. 4, 2019 (Cardinal Sarah). Naively, the Guardian thinks that by attacking the weakest candidates they will convince Catholics to urge the election of the weakest candidates. And in that, the article is also a psyop. Whereas the best candidates are the Cardinals of whom we know nothing, because international freemasonry wants us to know nothing of them: for they are the true candidates which Globalists fear and hate the most.

Editor’s Note: If you want to know why the College of Cardinals never did anything in public to protest Pope Francis’ ruinous pontificate, here you have it, in this address by the Dean of the College, before the Rosary offered in suffrage for Pope Francis’ soul: he basically asserts, in a most blasphemous manner, that Pope Francis has gone to Heaven, despite his manifest godless character, in all the years of his “pontificate”.

Catholics, however, imagine the scene where God the Father, at the gates of Heaven, says to Saint Peter the Apostle, “What am I going to do with a man who changed the Our Father, written by My Eternal Son, because, as he said, it is wrong and needs correction? And, what am I going to do with the prayers of all these Catholics, who accepted the change in the Our Father, and still want me to be merciful and hear their prayers for this creep?”

Thankfully, the Cardinal Dean is too old to vote in the Conclave, and thus will not remain in the Sistine Chapel once the Conclave begins its secret sessions and the election of the next pope.

Editor’s Note: If you want objective proof that Pope Francis is not in heaven, try this article, which quotes the leading Italian Freemason, from the Lodge which has declared the destruction of the Catholic Church as its top priority.

Editor’s Note: This article from “The Pillar” — a website stared by a group of Canon lawyers, but which nearly always reads the law wrongly or incorrectly — says that Cardinal Becciu insists on attending the Conclave, but that “the Vatican” has denied this.

This is the first clue that the article is worthless, because “the Vatican” means nothing as a legal term. Did the Secretary of State, Cardinal Parolin, deny Becciu’s request?

Seemingly no.

All that happened is that the Vatican website published a list of Cardinal Electors, which does not include the name of Cardinal Becciu.

So Cardinal Becciu is correct in saying that this list has no canonical value.

Also, since Cardinal Becciu claims that there is no written document removing his right to vote in a conclave, he has the right, if his claim be true, and it would be a grave violation of the Papal Law to exclude him.

Furthermore, he claims that when he verbally renounced his rights, prior to his prosecution for mismanagement and theft of Vatican funds, he never put it in writing.

It remains to be seen if his “renunciation” was made before a Vatican tribunal or if before the Pope. If it was made privately before the Pope and no rescript was written to document the “renunciation”, then the Cardinal must be presumed to keep his voting rights, because, when it regards a question of rights, one never presumes that they have ended, one needs documented and testified evidence.

“The Pillar”, therefore, has struck out three times on this report. And the facts of the case are still not clear.

A professional news site, L’Unione Sarda reports that Cardinal Becciu will attend the Conclave:

If the facts are as the Cardinal claims, then his exclusion from the Conclave will be the first definitive sign that the Conclave will be canonically irregular and perhaps invalid. The Cardinals cannot refuse another Cardinal who has not renounced his rights in a due manner, that is documented way: either before witnesses who gave witness or before a tribunal. If they do refuse him, without such evidence, it appears that the Conclave’s election will be invalid, if the “winning” candidate does not obtain the 2/3+1 votes which would have been necessary had Becciu been admitted. However, since the papal law requires that the Cardinals not discuss anything after the Conclave, it seems difficult to admit how such a case could be verified, if all the Cardinals agree to exclude Becciu regardless of his rights.

Cardinal Becciu will have to find another Cardinal, elector or not, who will take up his cause in one of the General Congregations and demand that it be heard: that is, demand that evidence be brought forth that Pope Francis deprived him of his right to participate in the Conclave. If he merely willingly forwent his rights so that he could be prosecuted in a Vatican tribunal, but gave no written renunciation, even his verbal “renunciation” would be doubtful: and then, it must be presumed that he kept his rights.

At least, he should be allowed to attend the General Congregations, because even Cardinals who are not electors, are allowed to attend. And as a matter of fact, Cardinal Becciu is still listed as a Cardinal in the Annuario Pontificio, it appears, since Catholic-Hierarchy.org still lists him as a Cardinal.

Editor’s Note: The fervor here is great. But the information she is asking is not publicly available. And if the Trump Administration is dragging its feet about other revelations of information, certainly gutting the narrative that Conclaves are free acts not influenced by the U.S. Government is probably something that Trump’s National Security Advisor would not advise right now.

But it would be good if the U.S. government admitted its role in the Conclave of 2013 and the “resignation” of Pope Benedict XVI. — As for the Vatican releasing information, I think the entire idea of Cardinal Re calling the First Congregation of the Conclave yesterday, and getting insiders elected to “assist” Cardinal Farrel — McCarrick’s former room-mate, who “saw nothing” — is about something entirely different: destroying evidence. — But I do agree, the Bergoglian party will stop at nothing to keep their revolution going.

A Divided or Deadlocked Conclave?

We Catholics need to prepare ourselves for a bitter fight among the Cardinals. It may be that they divide into two factions and each claims to have elected the true pope, with one holding the Vatican and one holding the Diocese of Rome.

However, I want to make it clear, that according to the Papal Law, if the Conclave becomes divided and each side claims to have elected a true Pope, the presumption is first of all that neither side has elected a true pope, because the Papal Law requires that the entire College of Voting Cardinals by a 2/3+1 majority agree upon the same man, and in the case of a division in the Conclave, if one side has 1/3+1 of the votes, then no side has 2/3+1. Also, they cannot change the place of the election without 2/3+1 of the votes. Thus if each group claims to have elected the pope in another place than the Sistine Chapel, the presumption is that the election is invalid. Moreover, if the Swiss Guard or Vatican Police intervene in any manner, the presumption is that the election is invalid on account of the use of force, unless otherwise be determined by sound testimonies.

As for us Catholics, who are not Cardinal Electors: in the case of two different men being elected by two different factions, WE CANNOT adhere to either faction, we must work to convince both candidates to renounce and that the entire College of Cardinals return into Conclave to follow the Papal Laws, even if this reconciliation takes several years. In such a case where both candidates are canonically invalid popes (because neither got 2/3+1 votes), we can and ought to adhere to neither, and we should follow clergy who do the same: not adhere to either. But in such a confused case, I think it would not be a sin to attend mass of either faction, if you have need to receive the Sacrament, because Our Lord is a God of mercy and not rigor, for us laity, when the problem is caused by two factions of the entire clergy, who are both at fault.