Category Archives: Church History

Documentary: A Message in a bottle (Arabic subtitles)

This is the now internationally acclaimed documentary on what really happened on Feb. 11, 2013, when it was announced to the world that Pope Benedict XVI had resigned. Did he? Watch, “A Message in a Bottle”, in Italian/English, now with Arabic subtitles. — There also exists a short canonical explanation in Arabic of why the renunciation if invalid (here)

There are many versions of subtitling for this video, including:

Original Italian:

Corrected English subtitles: https://www.fromrome.info/2021/06/15/a-message-in-a-bottle-the-mystery-behind-the-resignation-of-pope-benedict-xvi/

Polish voice over:

French subtitles:

Spanish subtitles: https://www.fromrome.info/2021/06/25/un-mensaje-en-la-botella-2/

Russian subtitles:

German subtitles:  I ask for  volunteer to do the translation from the corrected English version.

Portuguese subtitles: I ask for  volunteer to do the translation from the corrected English version.

At La Salette 175yrs ago: a prophetic warning of 2 Popes

REPRINTED FROM SEPT. 19, 2020

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

This prophecy is contained in a commentary by the Abbe Combe, on the full secret given to Melanie (Read full secret here).

The passage of the secret, commented on, is this:

28. ‘Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the antichrist.’

29. ‘The demons of the air with the antichrist will perform great wonders on the earth and in the air, and men will corrupt themselves more and more. God will have care of His faithful servants and men of good will; the Gospel will be preached everywhere, all peoples and all nations will have knowledge of the truth!’

30. ‘I address a pressing appeal to the earth: I call upon the true disciples of God living and reigning in the heavens; I call upon the true imitators of Christ made man, the only and true savior of men; I call upon my children, my true devotees, those who have given themselves to me so that I may guide them to my divine Son, those whom I carry so to speak in my arms, those who have lived by my spirit; finally I call upon the Apostles of the last times, the faithful disciples of Jesus Christ who have lived in a contempt for the world and for themselves, in poverty and in humility, in contempt and in silence, in prayer and in mortification, in chastity and in union with God, in suffering and unknown to the world. It is time that they go out and come to enlighten the earth. Go, and show yourselves as my dear children; I am with you and in you, provided that your faith be the light which enlightens you in these days of woe. May your zeal render you like the starving for the glory and honor of Jesus Christ. Fight, children of light, you the small number who can see; for behold the time of times, the end of ends.’

31. ‘The Church will be eclipsed, the world will be in consternation. But behold Enoch and Elie filled with the Spirit of God; they will preach with the strength of God, and men of good will will believe in God, and many souls will be consoled; they will make great progress by the virtue of the Holy Spirit and will condemn the devilish errors of the antichrist.’

Abbé Combe, the editor of the 1904 edition of this secret, adds the following note after this paragraph:

‘I have from Melanie that the Church will be eclipsed in this sense, that 1) one will not know which is the true pope; 2) for a time: the holy Sacrifice will cease to be offered in churches, and also in houses: so there will be no more public worship. But she saw that yet the holy Sacrifice would not cease: it would be offered in caves, in tunnels, in barns and in alcoves.’

I would say that Melanie spoke of our own days….

Here is my 3.5 hour documentary to help Catholics discern which of the 2 Popes is the true Pope and which is the servant of the Antichrist:

 

 

Pope St. Pius X foresaw Pope Benedict XVI as the true Pope until his death

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

REPRINTED FROM FEB. 8, 2020 A. D.

In 1909, during his audience with the Franciscans, Pope St. Pius X fell into an ecstasy.

When he came out of it, he was asked, “What I have seen is terrible! Is it I or one of my successors. I do not know. I saw a pope flee from the Vatican, walking upon the cadavers of his priests.”

Of a second vision, sometime before his death on August 20, 1914, the Saintly Pope said again, now with more precision: “I saw one of my successors, with my same name, who fled, walking upon the cadavers of his brothers. He will take refuge in a hidden place. But after a short rest, he will die a cruel death.”

The source of this testimony is repeated by several Italian authors, such as Antonio Socci, as something which was considered credible by even those who work in the Vatican, but I can find no certain person or source for it.

As for what these words of the Saintly pope mean. First, let me explain that the term, “brothers” in the mouth of the Pope in those times refers to his brother Cardinals. Second, the Italian, which I have translated as “with my same name”, means one who has the same name. This could be Pius or his baptismal name, Joseph.

Well since Pope Pius X there have been 2 popes named Pius: Pius XI and Pius XII, but neither of them had to flee the Vatican, nor did either die a cruel death — a phrase which I translated literally from the Italian, and which means a death in which there is a shedding of blood.

But Pope Benedict XVI’s baptismal name is Joseph.

So if this vision pertains to him, then it not only foretells a horrible end for him, but signifies that in the mystical visions of Pope Saint Pius X, God had revealed that Pope Benedict XVI will be the true successor of Saint Peter unto the very day of his death. And that means Bergoglio was never the pope.

What Pope Benedict XVI’s Declaratio of Feb. 11, 2013 really meant

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

I have previously published two translations of Pope Benedict XVI’s Declaratio of Feb. 11, 2013, which is the basis of the claims of the Vatican that the pope has abdicated. In addition, published a 7 part documentary on Youtube (here) which explains the canon law, logic, linguistics and philosophical considerations which arise in its regard.

As for my previous two translations, in my former, I attempted a better version of the Vatican translation, presuming it was correct.  In my second, I showed that the Latin does not mean what the Vatican translation makes it say it to mean.

But since in my second translation, I myself criticized the papal text presuming it intended to say what the Vatican translation made it say, I owe it to Pope Benedict XVI and to history to translate it again, leaving aside all presuppositions as to what it means, and letting the Latin speak for itself.

To show the true and authentic meaning, I will intersperse the English among the Latin, and explain where and how the Latin may mean 2 different things at the same time. This is the style of the great Latinists of the ancient world, just as Juvenal, Virgin and Cicero.  And since Cionci has discovered that Pope Benedict XVI in German and Italian always speaks in a way which can be read in two different senses, this may in fact be the true sense of the Latin in this document too.

But we must remember, that this text was written by Benedict XVI, according to what he was allowed to say to Peter Sewald his official biographer, and then corrected by the Secretary of State personnel. So in truth it has two authors, both of whom may not have had the same intention or mind in making it signify the same thing.

Since this translation would take a long time to explain, I will constrain my remarks here to only three phrases, the first, the renunciation and the last prayer, which frame it in such a way that only one reading is logically and grammatically consistent.

Literal Translation of Pope Benedict XVI’s
Declaratio of Feb. 11, 2013

The Opening Shot

Non solum propter tres canonizationes (1) ad hoc Consistorium (2) vos convocavi (3), sed etiam ut vobis decisionem magni momenti pro Ecclesiae vita communicem (4.

Not only for the sake of the three acts of canonization have I called you together for this Consistory, but also so that I may communicate a separation from you of great moment for the life of the Church.


NOTES:

(1) I have previously criticized this construction, proper tres canonizationes, because propter is not used this way in Latin. Rendering it as, “for the sake of the three acts of canonization” preserves its awkward signification.  The correct Latin should be a dative of purpose such as tribus canonizationibus or better celebrandis his tres canonizationibus, that is, “to celebrate these three canonizations”, the “these” (his) being required on account of the act having just taken place. But perhaps this omission indicates that the timing of the reading of the text was not determined before the text was composed or at the time of its correction.

(2) This should be, in my judgement, in hoc Consistorio, since it is an event, not a place, and thus should not be introduced by ad, which can only be used for places and purposes. Those who think in modern languages cannot see or understand such distinctions.

(3) Here the document shows its first canonical error, since the verb should be in the first person plural, “have We called you together” (convocavimus), since the act of convening a Consistory is a juridical act of the Roman Pontiff, not of the man who is the Roman Pontiff.  This error implies the possibility that this entire sentence was added to the core text of the Declaration as a clumsy sort of introduction to set the context, once the time and place of the declaration was determined and by someone either totally ignorant of the distinction between the Roman Pontiff and the man who abdicates, or someone who intentionally wanted to draw our attention to the fact that this text is not by the Roman Pontiff but by the man who is the Roman Pontiff and thus cannot be read as valid by recourse to an appeal to papal power, being above canon law.

(4) This next phrase is, in my opinion, the entire key to the whole Declaration. It is written in a very exact and subtle style which only a true Latinist can see, who is familiar with the classical forms and knows its rules. The rude or clumsy reader will render it as the Vatican translations have rendered it, but that is not what it means.  For decisio, is the Bonaventuran and Augustinian word for a physical separation, a falling off, a falling away, a dying.  And vobis cannot be a direct object of the main verb, communicem (inasmuch as there is no known usage of this kind in the entire history of the Latin tongue to my knowledge and to that of all the Latinists who have argued with me in vain on this score).  Therefore, it must be a dative with decisio, and thus either a dative of reference, agent or a dative of possession. So it must be either “a separation from you”, “a separation for you”, or “your separation”. This reading, as a “separation from you”, is in my opinion the most sound one. It is  based on the usage of Tacitus in his Germania, chapter 10, where he uses the verb decido, “to cut off” with virgam arbori “a branch from a tree”. This is a very important theological and ecclesiological concept used by Our Lord Himself, in regard to the Divine vineyard owner Who must trim the vines to make it produce fruit.  The construction with communicem is in turn suggested by the Roman Historian Suetonius, in his book on Caligula, n. 56: consilium communicaverunt perfeceruntque, where consilium is replaced by decisionem. The entire phrase is constructed to show the decisive authoritative sentence of Pope Benedict XVI in making a determination and announcing it to the world and to the Cardinals.  His declaration of separation from them, obviously, is a meaning that they will never admit to, and the entire text of his Declaratio shows in what this consists and when it will begin and what the consequences of it will be. Benedict omits in this phrase, “my” with “separation”, so give emphasis that it is the separation of the whole Church from the cardinals. And he uses “moment” (momentum) not “importance” (importantia) to show that the entire weight of history will be struck and moved by his decision. By adding  pro “of the life of the Church”, he is showing that his act will enliven and save the true Church from that which is grasping its deadly hands around Her. As such, this one phrase is a masterpiece of Latinity, which hides its true meaning from the ignorant, who read vobis as an error for vobiscum and decisio in the juridical modern sense commonly used, as the official Vatican translations render it.

There follows in the Declaration, the preamble which explains the Pope’s motivations for public consumption and serves to deflect analysis of the text by the power hungry cardinals. I will simply republish my translation of this from this version here.

Having scouted out my conscience again and again before God, I have arrived at certain cognition — my strengths by my worsening age are no longer apt — to administer the Munus petrinum equitably. I am well conscious that this Munus according to his spiritual essence ought to be pursued not only by doing and speaking, but no less by suffering and by praying. Yet, however, in the world of our season, subjected to hasty acts of change, and perturbed by questions of great value on behalf of the life of faith, a certain vigor of body and soul is necessary to steer the Barque of Saint Peter and the Gospel to announce, which (strength) in me in these furthest months is lessening in such a manner, that to well administer the ministry committed to me, I ought to acknowledge my incapacity.

And now for the key phrase regarding the Renunciation:

Quapropter (5) bene conscius ponderis huius actus plena libertate declaro me ministerio (6) Episcopi Romae, Successoris Sancti Petri, mihi per manus Cardinalium (7) die 19 aprilis MMV commisso (8) renuntiare ita ut a die 28 februarii MMXIII, hora 20, sedes Romae (9), sedes Sancti Petri vacet (10) et  Conclave ad eligendum novum Summum Pontificem ab his quibus competit convocandum esse (11).

On which account (5), well conscious of the weight of this act I declare in full liberty, that I renounce the ministry (6) of the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of Saint Peter, committed (8) to me  through the hands of the Cardinals (7) on the 19th of April, 2005, to leave unused (10) from the 28th of February, at 20:00 hours, Rome time (9), the See of Saint Peter, and that a Conclave to elect a new Supreme Pontiff is to be convoked by those who are competent (11).


NOTES

(5) Pope Benedict opens this key section with the significant word, “On which account”, (quapropter) which refers to all which has been said above from the first key phrase onward as his motivation.

(6) Then he declares — he does not renounce — he declares that he renounces.  This utterly voids the act of any juridical value since a declaration is not a juridical act, it is merely an administrative act of informing others about an action taken or being take or to be taken. In this case the second and latter. He furthermore does NOT fulfil canon 332 §2, which requires the renunciation of the papal munus. He renounces instead the ministerium.  By doing so he withdraws all possibility of the Cardinals and the Roman Curia of sharing in its exercise. And thus separates his office from them! And thus nullifies in advance all canonical acts made after his departure.  He thus also separates himself ecclesiologically from the Cardinals and all the Bishops, since the petrine ministry is to confirm them in the Faith.  Such a decision is an apocalpytic one. And it is explained by the last words in this section.  This is the explanation of the vobis decisionem magni momenti pro Ecclesia vitae of the first phrase.

(7) The ministry received through the hands of the Cardinals is not even the Petrine Ministry, which flows naturally from the Office which is conferred by Christ directly upon the one who accepts his canonical election. In this, Benedict seems to be saying, I am giving back to you what you gave me, nothing. I am not going to be a puppet leader in your hands any longer. I want nothing more to do with you.

(8) When Benedict read his Declaratio aloud, at this point he said commissum, not commisso.  This was seen as an error by all, but it actually says something profound. By saying commissum he is saying, that he committed himself to his Papal office from the day of his election.  And thus implies that the Cardinals are the ones who have betrayed Christ, not he. He did his duty inasmuch as he was able.

(9) There are still those who follow the others translations and get this wrong. So I repeat it here, that it refers to time zones, not to the papal office.

(10) To leave unused the see of St. Peter.  Here the Latin does not speak of a sede vacante, it uses rather the root verb, “to leave unused” (vacet). This explains his renunciation of minsterium rather than of munus. It also shows exactly what is going on in the Church for 8 years.

(11)  And that a new Conclave is to be called — sometime in the future — by those who are competent. That is, not by you who are in my presence, since as I have said, I have declared that you are cut-off from me.

The Declaration finishes thus:

Dearest Brothers: from my whole heart you I thank for all your physical love and the work, by which you bore with me the weight of my ministry and I ask pardon for all my failings. Moreover, now We completely trust the Holy Church of God to the care of the Most High Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and We implore His holy Mother, Mary, to assist with Her maternal goodness, the Cardinal fathers in electing a new supreme pontiff. As far as regards myself, I would also wish to serve with my whole heart in a future by a life dedicated to prayer for Holy Mother Church.


COMMENTARY

Finally, at the end, by using the subjunctive, the Holy Father shows that he is speaking contrary to fact. Because he has not abdicated, so there is no need for him to ask what to do after Feb. 28, 2013, as Pontiff he can do as he pleases, and indeed no one has dared disturb him in that.

In conclusion, I believe the above translation which is faithful to Latin grammar is the only one fully consonant with the facts of history before and after Feb. 11, 2013, in which Benedict XVI was hated and opposed by all inside and outside of the Roman Curia and thus declared his separation rather than renounced his office, so that with the help of the Holy Spirit, the effects of being separated from the Successor of St Peter might show themselves in the Church and reveal to all the faithful both the comploters and the conspiracy against Her in act.

This translation also explains why Benedict XVI refuses to speak with nearly all the Cardinals and Bishops after Feb. 28, 2013.

Canonically, the Declaratio of Pope Benedict XVI on Feb. 11, 2013 is to totally uproot the College of Cardinals as an institution which participates in the election of the Roman Pontiff, since now that they have elected an antipope and adhered to him they are excommunicate in virtue of canon 1364 and separated from the Church completely. Therefore, they lose all their offices and thus their right to elect the Pope.  And this means, that the actual result of the Declaratio is to sanction as legitimate the election of his successor by the Faithful of the Church of Rome, as St. Peter determined so long ago: these are the ones who are competent to elect his successor. — This is something the Roman Pontiff could not have achieved by a direct declaration, because in the very preparation of such a document he would have been opposed or assassinated. And that explains his cleverness and subtlety in acting as he has done.

On the Coming restoration of Pope Benedict XVI

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

July 9, 2021 A. D.: While things look darker and darker every day, the facts and events bear out an inexorable process which has manifested the election of Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio as a complete canonical fraud and his claim to the papacy not worth a shred of used toilet paper.

While seemingly irrefutable in his apparent claims to the Papacy, the doubts have ever been growing, from the indiscrete admissions of his own allies such as Cardinal Danneels and Austin Ivereigh to the persistent inquiries into the canonical invalidity of Pope Benedict XV’s Declaratio of February 2013.

The major waypoints in this process were Ann Barnhardt’s declaration of war against the substantial error implicit in the Declaratio, which she launched in June of 2016. Though many notable commentators had previously pointed out problems, Barnhardt was the first to unequivocally and notoriously call the act invalid to remove the Papal office (munus) from Pope Benedict.

When Msgr. Niccolo Bux in October 2018 publicly affirmed that it would be easier to demonstrate the Renunciation invalid that to canonical determine that Bergoglio was a heretic, a stormy and vivacious debate burst out in the English speaking world from November 2018 to February 2019.

That debate ended with a hands down victory for the party of Pope Benedict, when every possible canonical, logical, linguistic, philosophical and theological objection to the assertion of invalidity was refuted. I gathered up the arguments in my Scholastic Question, which so far has never been refuted by anyone anywhere with or without a degree in Canon Law, Theology or Philosophy.

Since February 2019, a series of objectors and journalists have rehashes these arguments in diluted form only to be slapped down again and again with facts, laws and the testimonies of public witnesses.  Here at FromRome.Info, which has documented these feeble attempts at counter-attack, readers have the near weekly occasion to read critiques of all the major interlocutors on this issue, who hold that Bergoglio is the Pope.

Following this debate, in 2020 it became publicly known, world-wide, that Archbishop Lenga and Bishop Gracida held that Benedict XVI is the pope and that Bergoglio is a manifest pertinacious heretic. Yet, neither of these Bishops were canonically censured or suspended.

Finally, in this year of Our Lord 2021, in the weeks prior to the 70th Anniversary of the Holy Father’s ordination to the priesthood, the battle here at Rome was begun in earnest, with Andrea Cionci’s numerous articles appearing at the beginning of March and going uninterrupted until the present day:  all of which have never been refuted by anyone in the Vatican or in Italy, Cardinal, Bishop, monsignor or canonist, theology or philosopher.  All of which prove without a doubt that Benedict XVI is still the pope.

The crucial fact which came to fore in these articles and investigations by Cionci are these:

  1. That Benedict XVI has always said, “There is only one pope”, but has never identified Bergoglio as that man.
  2. That Benedict XVI has denied that he has abdicated.
  3. That Benedict XVI still comports himself as the Pope and that no one in the Vatican can dissuade him or dare to stop him.
  4. Benedict XVI has undertaken a very wise, clever and discreet plan of maneuver to save the Papacy from the St. Gallen Mafia: the Plan B.

In terms of Canonical precedence, these facts and arguments being published in newspapers here at Rome and receiving no rebuttal for the space of 90 days thereafter, constitute canonical prove of the facts and conclusions and canonical tacit consent of all opponents.

At the same time, voices which are willing to be quoted in print, are increasingly found who insist Bergoglio is not the pope and that Benedict XVI never renounced the papacy.  This is a sea change. The momentum is now with the truth, not with the fake news hearsay.

Stunning were the revelations, too, that Cardinal Burke doubted the validity of the Renunciation from the first days following Feb. 11, 2013 and that he spoke openly of this to all his acquaintances at least until 2016.

Significant too was the independent film documentary, Il Messaggio nella Bottiglia, which explained in careful detail the historical fraud committed in Feb. 2013.  It has now been published with subtitles in Italian, English, Spanish and French, and is being distributed throughout the entire world to the Sacred Hierarchy and on multiple platforms.

But the final coup de grace came just the other day, when it was reported that even Archbishop Ganswein, the personal secretary of the Holy Father, cannot bring himself to publicly declare that Benedict XVI has ever identified Bergoglio as “the one and only pope”, even while he himself, calls both popes, and insists that Bergoglio is the only true pope.

The narrative which has foisted Bergoglio into the Papacy and sustained his claim is now totally destroyed. Like the waning health of the Argentine upstart, there is now nothing standing in the way of the full restoration of Pope Benedict: God’s call to Bergoglio to leave this life, will put an end to his imposture and leave a void in which there can be no rational or canonical basis not to recognize that Benedict XVI has always been the only true pope.

Thank you, Holy Father! for Summorum Pontificum!

IN REMEMBRANCE OF THE 14TH ANNIVERSARY OF ITS PUBLICATION

FROMROME.INFO REPRINTS BR. ALEXIS BUGNOLO’s

ENGLISH TRANSLATION

OF

The Apostolic Letter

“Motu Proprio data”

Summorum Pontificum

 of His Holiness Pope

Benedict XVI

Gloriously Reigning

EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION — In this the present Holy Father, Benedict XVI, affirms the immemorial principle of interpreting Papal pronouncements:  what is not explicitly mentioned is not enacted, abrogated, derogated, or obrogated.  It also refutes the erroneous opinion published by the Congregation for Divine Worship (On 28 October 1974), which claimed that the Apostolic Constitution of Paul VI obrogated that of St. Pius V, and that the New Missal was obligatory for all clergy.

 English translation © 2007 Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The Supreme Pontiffs’ care has been, now and ever, that Christ’s Church would offer a due worship of the Divine Majesty, « to the praise and glory of His Name » and « for the utility of His entire Holy Church ».

From time immemorial just as even unto the future, the principle to be kept is « in accord with this that each particular Church ought to concord with the Universal Church not only in regard to the doctrine of the Faith and the sacramental Signs, but even in regard to the uses universally accepted by Apostolic and continuous Tradition, which are to be observed not only to avoid errors, but even to hand down the integrity of the Faith, because the Church’s law of praying may respond to Her law of believing ».1

Among the Pontiffs, who employed such a due care, the name of Saint Gregory the Great stands out, who cared to transmit to the peoples of Europe as much the Catholic Faith as the treasures of the worship and culture accumulated by the Romans in the preceding ages.  He commanded that there be defined and conserved the form of the Sacred Liturgy as much of the Sacrifice of the Mass as of the Divine Office.  He fostered most of all the monks, who serving under the Rule of St. Benedict illustrated with their life everywhere that most salubrious sentence of the Rule together with the annunciation of the Gospel, « that nothing is to be placed before the work of God » (chapter 43).  In such a manner the sacred liturgy according to the Roman custom made fecund not only the faith and piety but even the culture of many nations.  It is established, indeed, that the Latin liturgy in its various forms stimulated very many of the Saints of the Church in the spiritual life in all the ages of Christian history and strengthened all peoples in the virtue of religion and fecundated their piety.

Moreover so that the Sacred Liturgy more efficaciously fulfill this duty, several other Roman Pontiffs during the course of the ages expended peculiar solicitude, among whom Saint Pius V stands out, who with great pastoral study, at the exhortation of the Council of Trent, innovated [innovavit] the whole worship of the Church, took care to emend the liturgical books and « restore [instauratorum] them to the norm of the Fathers » and granted to the Latin Church that they be used.

Among the liturgical books of the Roman Rite it is clear that the Missale Romanum stands forth, which grew up in the City of Rome, and assumed (its) forms gradually with the passing of ages, which (books) have a great similarity to that in force in more recent generations.

« Which same proposal with the progress of time the Roman Pontiffs have pursued, when they accommodated the liturgical books of the rite to, or determined them for, new times, and (when) they then at the beginning of our century embraced (their) now more ample restoration [redintegrationem] ».2  Thus, indeed, did Our Predecessors Clement VIII, Urban VIII, St. Pius X,3 Benedict XV, Pius XII and Bl. John XXII act.

Moreover, in more recent times, the Second Vatican Council expressed the desire, that due observance and reverence would again be restored [instauraretur] toward divine worship and that it would be adapted to the necessities of Our age.  Moved by which desire, Our Predecessor the Supreme Pontiff, Paul VI, approved for the Latin Church the restored and partially innovated liturgical books in the year 1970; which having been converted into the very many vulgar tongues of earth, were received by the Bishops and priests and faithful willingly.  John Paul II, recognized the Third Typical Edition of the Roman Missal.  Thus the Roman Pontiffs have worked so that « this liturgical edifice » might appear « again splendid in dignity and elegance ».4

But in some regions not a few of the faithful adhered and continued to adhere with great love and affection to the antecedent liturgical forms, which imbued their culture and spirit so profoundly, such that the Supreme Pontiff, John Paul II, moved by the pastoral care of these faithful, conceded in the year 1984, by the special Indult “Quattuor abhinc annos”, issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship, the faculty of using the Missale Romanum of John XXIII, published in 1962; moreover in the year 1988 John Paul II again, with the Apostolic Letter “Ecclesia Dei”, given as a Motu Proprio, exhorted the Bishops to employ such a faculty broadly and generously in favor of all the faithful petitioning for it.

With the pressing prayers of these faithful pondered over for a long time by Our Predecessor John Paul II, (and) heard also in the Consistory held by Our Father Cardinals in the month of March of the year 2006, being all maturely pondered, having invoked the Holy Spirit and confiding in God’s help, we decree with the present Letters Apostolic those (things) which follow:

Article 1.  Let the Missale Romanum promulgated by Paul VI be held as the ordinary expression of the “Law of prayer” of the Catholic Church of the Latin Rite.  But let the Missale Romanum promulgated by St. Pius V and published anew by Bl. John XXIII be held as the extraordinary expression of the same “Law of prayer” of the Church and let it enjoy due honor on account of its venerable and ancient use.  Let these two expression of the Church’s “law of praying”, lead, least of all, to a division in the Church’s “law of believing”; for they are two uses of the unique roman rite.

Next, it is licit that one celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass, according to the typical edition of the Missale Romanum promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in the year 1962 and never abrogated,* as the extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church.  However, the conditions established by the antecedent documents, “Quattuor abhinc annos” and “Ecclesia Dei” for the use of this Missale, are substituted as follows:

Article 2.  In Masses celebrated without the people, any catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or religious, is able to use either the Missale Romanum published by Bl. John XXIII in the year 1962, or the Missale Romanum promulgated by the Supreme Pontiff Paul VI in the year 1970, and indeed on any day, except the Sacred Triduum.  For such a celebrated according to one or the other Missal, the priest needs no permission [nulla licentia], neither from the Apostolic See nor from his own Ordinary.

Article. 3. If the communities of the Institutes of consecrated life and of the Societies of apostolic life of pontifical or diocesan right desire to have a celebration of the Holy Mass according to the edition of the Missale Romanum promulgated in the year 1962, in their own oratories, as a conventual or communal celebration, it is licit for them. If each community or the whole Institute and/or Society wants to perform very frequently and/or permanently such celebrations, let the matter be discerned by the major superiors according to the norm of law and their own particular laws and statutes.

Article 4.  The Christian faithful, who ask for this on their own initiative, can also be admitted to the celebrations of the Holy Mass which were (spoken of) above in Article 2, having observed what is to be observed according to the law

Article 5, §1.  In the parishes, where a gathering [coetus] of the faithful exists adhering as a group [continenter]1 to the antecedent liturgical tradition, let the pastor freely [libenter] take up their petitions to celebrate the Holy Mass according to the rite of the Missale Romanum published in the year 1962.  Let him see that good of these faithful be harmonized  with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the rule of the bishop according to the norms of canon 392, by avoiding discord and by fostering the unity of the whole Church.

  • 2. The celebration of the Missal of Bl. John XXIII can take place on ferial days; but on Sundays and Feasts there can also be one celebration of this kind.
  • 3. With the faithful or priests asking for this, let the pastor permit celebrations, in this extraordinary form even in additional particular (circumstances), such as are weddings, funerals and occasional celebrations, v. g. pilgrimages.
  • 4. Priest using the Missale of Bl. John XXIII, ought to be fit and (ought) not be impeded.
  • 5. In churches, which are neither parochial nor conventual, there is a conceding of permission concerning what was (mentioned) above to the Rector of the Church.

Article 6. In Masses according to the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, celebrated with the people, the Lectiones can be proclaimed also in the vernacular tongue, by using the editions (of the readings) recognized by the Apostolic See.

Article 7.  Where any gathering of the lay faithful, does not obtain from (their) pastor by a petition made in accord with Article 5, § 1, let the diocesan Bishop make certain of the matter.  The Bishop is eagerly asked to hear out their wish.  If he cannot provide for a celebration of this kind, le the matter be referred to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”.

Article 8.  The Bishop, who wants to provide for petitions of this kind by the Christian lay faithful, but who is impeded on account of various causes, can commit the matter to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, which will give him counsel and assistance.

Article 9, § 1.  The pastor, likewise, having considered all (things) well, (and) having been persuaded to it for the good of souls, can concede permission to use the more ancient ritual in the administration of the sacraments of Baptism, Matrimony, Penance and the Anointing of the Infirm.

  • 2. Moreover the faculty is conceded to the Ordinaries, (who) have been persuaded to it for the good of souls, of celebrating the Sacrament of Confirmation by using the ancient Roman Pontifical.
  • 3. It is allowed to clerics constituted in sacred (orders) to use also the Roman Breviary promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in the year 1962.

Article 10.  It is allowed to the Ordinary of the place, if he would judge it opportune, to erect a personal parish according to the norm of canon 518 for celebrations according to the more ancient form of the roman rite or to nominate a rector and/or chaplain, having observed what is to be observed according to the law.

Article 11.  The Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, erected by John Paul II in the year 1988,5 continues to fulfill its duty.

Which Commission is to have the form, duties and norms of acting, which the Roman Pontiff willed to attribute to it.

Article 12. The same Commission, besides the faculties which it already enjoys, will exercise the authority of the Apostolic See, by being vigilant for the observance and application of these dispositions.

On the other hand, we command that all these, whatsoever has been decreed by Us in these Letters Apostolic, given as a Motu Proprio, be firm and ratified and (we command that they) be observed from the 14th day of September of this year, on the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, not withstanding any contrary things.

Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s, on the 7th day of the month of July, in the year of Our Lord 2007, in the third (year) or our Pontificate.

Pope Benedict XVI.

[1] Institutio generalis Missalis Romani, Editio tertia, 2002, 397

[2] Ioannes Paulus Pp. II, Litt. ap. Vicesimus quintus annus (4 Decembris 1988), 3: AAS 81 (1989), 899.

[3]Ibid.

[4]S. Pius Pp. X, Litt. Ap. Motu proprio datae Abhinc duos annos (23 Octobris 1913): AAS 5 (1913), 449-450; cfr Ioannes Paulus II, Litt. ap. Vicesimus quintus annus (4 Decembris 1988), 3: AAS 81 (1989), 899.

[5] Cfr Ioannes Paulus Pp. II, Litt. ap. Motu proprio datae Ecclesia Dei (2 iulii 1988), 6: AAS 80 (1988), 1498.

———-

*  Translator’s Note:  The Missale Romanum promulgated by Pope St. Pius V, by his Apostolic Constitution, Quo Primum, is only a liturgical book, as such it cannot be abrogated, because it is not a legal document.  In saying, therefore, that it was “never abrogated,” H. H. Benedict XVI testifies solemnly that the Apostolic Constitution by which it was promulgated remains in force with all its effects, thus clarifying the great confusion sown by the enemies of the Apostolic See and the partisans of discord, who falsely claimed and claim that the Apostolic Constitution, Missale Romanum of Pope Paul VI, touched the Apostolic Constitution of he saintly predecessor, and in some manner either totally or in part abrogated, derogated, or obrogated it.

—————

TRANSLATORS FOOTNOTES

1 – The Latin continenter is being variously rendered by unofficial English translation as continuously, stable, uninterruptedly; but these are all faulty because they contradict the historical and pastoral context of the document, which is to provide for the faithful who request the Ancient Rite, who do not have access to this Rite.  The more general notion of continenter is “as in a manner held together”, that is, “as a body”, “as a group”, “commonly”, “together”, and thus the sense is who petition for this as a group.

Did Pope Benedict XVI receive instruction from St. Hildegard of Bingen for his faux resignation?

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

FRENCH VERSION

In the quest to understand the events surrounding Feb. 11, 2013 A. D., many writers have so far explored nearly every aspect of the events leading up to and following.  But one event which has not yet been explored may have been a crucial influence on the decision making of Pope Benedict XVI.

And it is this.

On October 7, 2012 just 4 months and 4 days before he read out his Declaratio, Pope Benedict XVI declared St. Hildegard of Bingen a Doctor of the Church.

That he chose to do this on the Feast of Our Lady of Victories, a. k. a., the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary, which commemorated in that year the 441st anniversary of the Catholic victory at the Battle of Lepanto, cannot be a mere administrative detail.  Nay, it shows that the doctrine and teaching of St. Hildegard, for Pope Benedict XVI is intimately associated with Our Lady’s Mediation and Intervention in history.

Moreover, on May 10, 2012, in the Month of May, two days after the Feast of St. Michael the Archangel and 3 days before the Remembrance of the First Apparition of Our Lady at Fatima, 95 years before, Pope Benedict XVI extended the feast of St. Hildegard to the entire Church, making her a de facto Saint.

But just what this connection could be, needs to be explored.

Who was St. Hildegard of Bingen?

Lauded even by seculars as the most learned woman of the Middle Ages, St. Hildegard was born around 1098, the year before the Crusaders, at the behest of Bl. Urban II, took Jerusalem in the First Crusade. She died at the age of 81, in 1179, on September 17th, about 7 years before the birth of St. Francis of Assisi.

Her feast day, therefore, September 17th, is the same as the Feast of the Stigmatization of St. Francis, which is celebrated on that day, though it occurred on Sept. 14th.

At the age of 14 she took vows as a Benedictine Nun at the monastery of Disibodenberg, in 1112 A. D.. Twenty four years later, her fellow nuns elected her Abbess, a title and office she held for the rest of her life.

St. Hildegard was a mystic, that is, from her earliest years she experienced extraordinary mystical graces. Hers being a habitual participation in the Beatific Vision regarding that lower level of knowledge of human affairs present and future.  Our Lord, as a Man, had this habitually also, but very few are the Saints who shared this carism with His Sacred Humanity. The other, I know of, is Bl. Anna Maria Taigi, a third order member of the Trinitarians.

By means of this habitual vision, St. Hildegard was helped to become one of the most learned women of her day and wrote on a large variety of topics, even though she never spoke of it and was ashamed that others would think her strange if she admitted to having it.

St. Hildegard’s Visions of the End times

But the topic which seems to have the most to do with Pope Benedict XVI is this, that she wrote more than any other Saint of her age about the Antichrist and his coming, and seems to be relating what she saw of the future.  That she did this some 800 years ago, adds to the credibility of her prophecies, because there is absolutely no human way she could have known or guessed of the events of our own days, by mere human wisdom.

As a demonstration of the validity of her powers of prevision, she predicted accurately the following events which have shaken the Catholic world:

  1. The dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire
  2. The abolition of Catholic Monarchies by a diabolic sect which dedicated itself to the destruction of the Church
  3. The loss of the Papal States and the confinement of the Popes to a small territory at Rome with a number of small jurisdictions scattered round about.
  4. The Industrial Revolution, during which time the supply of food, medicine and sane laws would improve the daily life of the poor throughout the world.
  5. The rise of a world empire ruled by the Kings of England
  6. The rise of nation states ruled by their own leaders who are not monarchs.

These prophecies are contained in her tract on the Antichrist, in part III, Vision 5, of her monumental work, The Book of Divine Works, or the Liber Divinorum Operum.

But what she says of the Antichrist is completely astounding, and A. J. Baalman who has a copy of this book in hand, and I, will be discussing it in a series of programs at Ordo Militaris Radio, this week.

St. Hildegard prophesied the Two Popes

But for now I want to speak of only one of her prophecies, of which no one heretofore has spoken: the prophecy of 2 popes, one of whom would be a deluded servant Satan and antipope.

This prophecy is founded in the stated book, in the edition published by the Catholic University Press, on page 464, n. 29, and the words of it are as follows:

Take care too that no one dispose you to being misled in any circumstance by illusory or fantastical deeds. For only when that time has come when the Church’s sublimity has been squandered and the truth faith crushed underfoot — this is what is understood to be the revolt that will happen in the time of the accursed son whose mother is unclean, since she knows not by whom she (here begins p. 465) conceived — then he will be revealed who will be the man of sin, for he will be wholly infused from his beginning by sin, so that as a sinner he will collect and then boast of his sins. …

… For in the age of the son of perdition, the faith, already falling away from its strength, will be toppled over and enfeebled. For the one who keeps the Church’s sublimity in God and holds the right faith keeps something great, because it is through those things that he will enter the heavenly kingdom. But the one who does not keep the faith holds on to nothing, for he will go to perdition.

Here I will give an exposition, or explanation.

When St. Hildegard of Bingen speaks of the future she does so in very abbreviated manner placing emphasis as she does on virtues and vices. Though she speaks in chronological order, she is thus more interesting in spiritual causes.

In this passage she uses a phrase which needs to be understood properly to unlock the meaning of her text. And this is, the phrase the “sublimity of the Church” or the “Church’s sublimity” as it is here translated. In Latin, that which is sublime is that which is most exalted, highest and most superior. As such it is a term which refers to the supreme order of dignity in some measure or office.

So in one sense, this term can refer to the exalted nature of the Church’s virtue or grace. But in another sense it can refer to the highest hierarchical office, that of the Papacy.

In the passage above. St. Hildegard is explaining the text of the Letter of St. Paul in his Second Letter to the Thessalonians, chapter 2, verses 2 to 4, which regards St. Paul’s own prophecy regarding the Antichrist and his coming. So since St. Hildegard is commenting on this precise passage of St. Paul we can be sure that she is referring to the end times and not merely commenting on corruption in the Church at any time.

So, in this sense, when the Saint speaks of “the Church’s sublimity has been squandered and the truth faith crushed underfoot “, she can be understood to be speaking of the seizure of the Papal Office, since to squander a thing, is to misuse a precious thing, and all who have no right to a thing, misuse it inasmuch as they use it without the right to hold and posses and exercise it.

The Saint then ties this to the great revolt, spoken of by St. John in the Apocalypse, when the tail of the Dragon will strike out of the heavens a third of the stars therein — a passage that the Fathers of the Church refer to the mass apostasy of the Clergy at the end of time.

Now this is what we have seen precisely in these 8 years and more manifestly in these last 15 months. Because all the clergy have followed the antipope, being deceived willingly or not by liars, who are the sons of the Dragon.  In fact, in exorcisms, Satan has called Freemasons his “beloved children”, and so Freemasons in the Hierarchy can rightly be understood to be his tail. Moreover, at the request of Bergoglio, all the clergy of the world stopped offering public mass, which is the sign of the times of antichrist foretold by the Prophet Daniel when he speaks of the cessation of public sacrifice.

And the truth of the Faith has most certainly been crushed underfoot during this time in which Bergoglio has squandered the sublimity of the Faith.

Then, after speaking of the Antichrist and his mother, the Saint speaks of our own age clearly, when she says, For in the age of the son of perdition, the faith, already falling away from its strength, will be toppled over and enfeebled. —  This is a most accurate description of the post Vatican II era.  The verb, toppled, means to knock over or strike down, and this is clearly what Vatican II did. And the Aggiornamento clearly weakened the faith everywhere.

Then she speaks of 2 popes, the true and the false.  First of the true:

For the one who keeps the Church’s sublimity in God and holds the right faith keeps something great, because it is through those things that he will enter the heavenly kingdom.

Here she is speaking, in my opinion, of Pope Benedict XVI, who as pope is at the sublimity of the Church’s earthly hierarchical order. He keeps the right faith, not the false preached by others, and keeps something great, that is the petrine munus. And his meek suffering of persecution and imprisonment as Pope, will merit him eternal salvation.

But then she speaks of the antipope:

But the one who does not keep the faith holds on to nothing, for he will go to perdition.

Here, in identifying Bergoglio with the masculine singular , “the one who” and ” does not keep the faith” — as is obvious to everyone who believes — does NOT hold the petrine munus, (“holds on to nothing”), and will go to damnation for his usurpation.

Pope Benedict XVI and St. Hildegard

Clearly Pope Benedict XVI was cogniscent that the Faith had been gravely weakened and damaged after Vatican II. In fact, he spoke precisely about this on Feb. 14, 2013, just 3 days after reading his Declaratio.

He declared St. Hildegard a Doctor of the Church, for which we can be certain that he not only had read these words of the Saint which we just read, but that he had the greatest appreciation for them.

Finally, as a theologian who had written many articles on the Petrine munus, as a thing held, and the Petrine ministry as a thing to be done, we can say with a high probability that Pope Benedict XVI may have understood this same passage in the way I have proposed, as referring to a future time in which there would be 2 popes. One with the Petrine Munus and the Catholic Faith who was promised by God through St. Hildegard of eternal salvation, and one without the Munus and the Faith, who would go unto perdition.

So is Pope Benedict XVI by declaring St. Hlidegard of Bingen a Doctor of the Church on the feast of our Lady of Victories, sending a sign to the whole Catholic world — in this distinction between munus and ministerium, of a Pope who remains faithful and retains the former, and a false pope who has neither — that he has found in her writings the great stratagem by which he will overthrow the work of Freemasonry? unmask it to the world? and protect Holy Mother Church in Her truth faithful ones, and separate Her from the corrupt College of Cardinals and Bishops who have preyed upon children and faithful for some many decades?

Seeing that Pope Benedict XVI as a theologian was a firm supporter of the necessity of the Church in the end times to separate herself from the church of the Antichrist, this possibility appears to be something which we can no longer ignore.

Remembering a true Son of St. Francis, Father Angelo Barbin

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

On June 20, 2021, the friends and acquaintances in life of a great Franciscan, will remember the third anniversary of his passing from this life.  His name was Father Angelo Barbin, and having been born on March 20, 1941, during the high tide of World War II, it was his to bitterly experience the downward spiral of the Catholic Church in the 20th century.

He passed at 4 A. M. three years ago.

His funeral was celebrated on June 22, 2018, at the Church of San Daniele, in the Franciscan Convent of Lonigo, in Northern Italy.

He was ordained a priest on May 23, 1968, at Verona, during the turmoil of the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council, while the old rite for ordination was still enforce, but the horrid, cobbled on a restaurant napkin, new Mass was being composed. He had the joy in this life to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of his priestly ordination, therefore, just weeks before his own passing, in the 77th year of his life.

So much did he touch the hearts of the faithful, that he was remembered in several TV reports:

Father was known for staying all day long in the Confessional, giving his 100% attention to whoever was confessing, without any worry about the lines waiting. Devoted the Most Blessed Sacrament, the Holy Rosary, and the Divine Mercy, he served others forgetful of his own personal needs.

For this he was sought out for spiritual counsel by the faithful throughout the province of Veneto.

Of many a devout priest, the same could be said, but what brings Friar Angelo to my attention is his honestly in recognizing the truth of the present state of things.

In his interview with Samuel Colombo, a noted Catholic singer and apologist, he went beyond the measure of virtue of what many such devout priests, who are excessively discrete to the point of leading souls astray by their silence.

Here below, if you lick the image, you can see the full interview in the original Italian.

But here are some excerpts, by which to remember this man of God and son of St. Francis:

Samuel Colombo: Can we figure also that this new church which Bergoglio is creating is the same church which Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich prophesied long ago? right? Can you confirm this?

Father Angelo:  Certainly, …

Samuel Colombo: But when you say, the Pope, do you do so to recognize Bergoglio as the Pope even though he be a heretic or for you is Benedict XVI the pope?

Father Angelo: Eh, yes, eh.. at Mass I never use the name.

Samuel Colombo: You never say the name of Pope Francis?

Father Angelo: No.

Samuel Colombo: So, you consider Benedict XVI as the pope?

Father Angelo: Eh, yes.

Samuel Colombo: Can you repeat that?

Father Angelo: Certainly.

What does a valid Papal renunciation look like? — St. Celestine V shows the way

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

For more than 8 years Catholics have discussed and debated the  Declaration of Pope Benedict XVI, what it means and the peculiarities of its formulations.

Now after 8 years, it is more and more clear that it is not a Papal Abdication, but only an act of retirement, which renounces service but retains all power, authority, office, title and dignity.

This becomes clearer if we look to what words a canonized Saint, Celestine V, used to renounce the Papacy.

Here is the Latin text of his act, taken from His Papal Bull of December 13, 1294 A. D.:

Ego Caelestinus Papa Quintus motus ex legittimis causis, idest causa humilitatis, et melioris vitae, et coscientiae illesae, debilitate corporis, defectu scientiae, et malignitate Plebis, infirmitate personae, et ut praeteritae consolationis possim reparare quietem; sponte, ac libere cedo Papatui, et expresse renuncio loco, et Dignitati, oneri, et honori, et do plenam, et liberam ex nunc sacro caetui Cardinalium facultatem eligendi, et providendi duntaxat Canonice universali Ecclesiae de Pastore.

Here is my own translation into English:

I, Celestine V, Pope, moved out of legitimate causes, that is, for the sake of humility, and for a better life, and for a wounded conscience, by the debility of body, by the defect of knowledge, and by the malignancy of the plebs, by infirmity of person, and so that I might repair to the quiet of my past consolation: voluntarily, and freely cede the Papacy, and I expressly renounce the position, and Dignity, the burden and honor, and I do give full, and free faculty from hence forth to the sacred assembly of the Cardinals to elect and provide for the Universal Church a Pastor, so long as (it be done) in a canonical manner.

Discussion

Notice how the Saint does not renounce insignificant parts or details of the Papal Office. He does not renounce the execution of his office nor his clothing, because he understands that when you renounce the cause or root of power, you have renounced all rights and duties which flow from it.  Thus he renounces the the position (locus) in which he was placed above all (this is the office), the Dignity, which exalted him above all (this is the superior quality which is inextricable from that), the burden (onus) which is the totality of duty not in its execution but in its imposition — this is one sense  of the munus — and the honor, that is the quality which demands from all other recognition.

Thus he has named all the essential parts of the Papal Office. And he renounces all of them.

That is how to renounce. And a canonized Saint has shown the way.

For anyone to claim therefore, that to say, “I declare to renounce the ministry which I received from the Cardinals”, is sufficient for a papal renunciation, makes a joke of the papacy and a very bad argument.

Benedict XVI’s Masterstroke against Globalism & Freemasonry — Part IV

FromRome.Info presents here Br. Bugnolo’s authorized English translation of Andrea Cionci’s Article

La possibile ricostruzione del “piano B” di papa Benedetto XVI

which was published by the Libero, on April 6, 2021, in Italian.

Due to the length of the original, FromRome.Info publishes the translation in 4 parts.

PART IPART IIPART III

A Reconstruction of Ratzinger’s possible Plan B

to cancel the church of Bergoglio with a complete purification of the Church

A Purposefully invalid Resignation? — We investigate the thesis of Attorney Acosta and various theologians

by Andrea Cionci

PART IV

20. The first results of Plan B

Moreover, only two years after, in 2019, the subtle input of Benedict XVI obtained its first result: the Italian-American Franciscan, Br. Alexis Bugnolo, an outstanding latinist and expert in canon law, takes note of the errors in the Latin of the Declaration and declares that they were inserted precisely to attract attention to the canonical invalidity of the document. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/23247982/benedetto-xvi-ratzinger-rinuncia-bergoglio-declaratio-2013-dimissioni-abdicazione-munus-ministerium-bugnolo.html

The Libero had the exclusive report on his study and news of it went viral world wide, but in reply, from the Vatican there was only silence and from the Avvenire ( the national Catholic newspaper published by the Italian Bishops’ Conference) only insults. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/23298928/silenzio-declaratio-rinuncia-papa-benedetto-ratzinger-cei-insulti-fra-bugnolo-munus-ministerium-invalidita-diritto-canonico.html

21. Bergoglio goes full throttle, too much

The seasons change, and Francis in the meantime exposes himself ever the more: he enthrones Pachamama in St. Peter’s, he inaugurates a new Litany of Loreto with Mary as “support of migrants”, he declares himself in favor of civil unions, he changes the Our Father, he inserts the masonic “dew” into the Canon of the Mass, he decorates the Piazza of St. Peter’s with a strange esoteric Christmas creche, in sum, he goes excessively full throttle, so much so that the noted Vaticanista, Aldo Maria Valli, publishes a shocking article entitled, “Rome is without a pope”. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/25873974/sacrifici-umani-studiosi-spiegano-tutto-su-pachamama.html HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/23355254/papa-francesco-maria-sollievo-migranti-litanie-sfregio-oppositori.html HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/25013391/birra-fast-food-applaudono-dichiarazioni-bergoglio-unioni-civili-alcol-e-cibo-spazzatura-provocano-milioni-di-morti-nel-mond.html HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/25354748/nuovo-messale-bergoglio-domenica-prossima-in-vigore-politicamente-corretto-contro-teologia-san-tommaso-rugiada-massoneria-al.html HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/25534079/guerriero-presepe-castelli-a-san-pietro-ha-corna-e-un-teschio-in-fronte-media-censurano-pubblico-inferocito-insulti-social.html HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26278178/aldo-maria-valli-roma-senza-papa-bergoglio.html

22. Bergoglio runs for cover at the Corriere della Sera

At Santa Marta there is a panic: Massimo Franco of the Corriere della Sera rushes to interview Ratzinger and clean up the mess. Benedict XVI offers a series of further replies which are perfectly double faced: he says that “his friends, a little fanatical, did not accept his decision, made completely freely by him, he is in peace with himself and the pope is one alone”. Franco interprets his declarations in this sense: “I willingly resigned as the Pope; my fans err in considering me the Pontiff; the pope is one alone and is Francis” HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26378596/benedetto-xvi-intervista-corriere-della-sera-papa-uno-solo.html

23. The explicit subtext of Benedict

In reality, the true significance of the words of Ratzinger is: “My friends have not understood what I am fooling the modernists and that I have done this in full self awareness, on which account I am in peace with my conscience. the Pope is one alone and I am he”. This story of the pope who is one alone, but which is never specified, has already become too repetitive and urges us to examine past interviews. By doing so there emerges a meticulous and “scientific” equivocation which has lasted years. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26378596/benedetto-xvi-intervista-corriere-della-sera-papa-uno-solo.html

24. The nomination of the “ambassador” to Benin

Thus, in reply to the customary misunderstandings by the Corriere della Sera, and to encourage those who follow the right interpretation, Pope Benedict, a few days after, received the president of a charitable organization and names him, “ambassador” (even if only spiritually). Even on the symbolic level, this is indeed the act of a reigning pope. Another clear signal to his “own”: HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26582795/ratzinger-benedetto-xvi-visita-ignorata-lorenzo-festicini-ambasciatore.html

25. The mirror trick is understood

From the interviews with the Corriere della Sera, we pass to read also the book interviews by Peter Seewald and we discover that all of them have been arranged according to a coherent and opposite subtext. Every phrase has been constructed with a scientific ability to reveal — often with a tasteful irony — the reality of the invalid resignation to whomsoever wants to grasp it. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26699363/ratzinger-sottotesto-libro-intervista-ultime-conversazioni-peter-seewald.html and HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26732422/papa-ratzinger-ein-leben-nuova-versione-fatti-dimissioni-volontariamente-invalidate.html

26. The discovery of a clear historical precedent: Pope Benedict VIII

One fundamental detail merges when Benedict XVI declares in his “Last Conversations”, published in 2016, under a veiled but most precious historical reference, that he has resigned as Pope Benedict VIII, Theophylactus of the Counts of Tusculum, in 1012, was constrained to renounce the ministerium on account of the antipope Gregory VI: an unequivocable signal. Little by little, there emerges other details in his book length interview and here at the Libero we have even cited the passage from which we were able to be inspired by Ratzinger to understand his strategy “of mirrors”. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26691243/benedetto-xvi-errore-storico-messaggio-papa-antipapa.html

27. A foreseen battle

Benedict knows that his game is an extremely subtle one, but he has left alarm bells which are very evident. He knew that the pieces of the puzzle would be put back together little by little and that the false church would reveal itself, crumbling on its own, annihilating itself in scandals, doctrinal contradictions and ferocious internal conflicts. Ratzinger knew beforehand that the modernist antipope, with his masonic-environmental-globalist extravagances would fill the Catholic people with dismay. He knew that this one would not be assisted by the Holy Spirit, nor by the logic of the Logos (the Divine Word). HERE: https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/news/personaggi/25073261/papa-francesco-monsignor-vigano-questa-non-e-chiesa-cristo-ma-antichiesa-massonica.html

28. What is Benedict waiting for?

Benedict is still waiting, tranquil in his prayer and contemplation, and communicating with the outside world by means of precise and surgical terms: he awaits the Cardinals and Bishops to open their eyes. He does not speak openly: even if he would succeed in speaking the truth in public, today, he would be immediately silenced with the excuse of senile ramblings. No: it is rather the Catholic people who, in this Apocalypse, in the sense of a Revelation, have to convert, have to UNDERSTAND, and ACT. And it is the clergy who have to shake off their inertia, by rediscovering the course, the strength, and the heroism of the Faith. HERE: https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/24974299/cardinali-perche-vestono-rosso-forse-solo-fashion.html

29. The solution to the whole problem: a declaratory Synod

The solution, in the end, is a simple one: let the Bishops convoke a synod, like that which was convoked historically (such as Sutri or Melfi V) to establish with certainty which of the one or two popes is the true one.

Ratzinger knows that during such an encounter the reality will easily come forth: the anti-pope and all of his actions, nominations, doctrinal and liturgical changes, will vanish into nothingness. It will be as if he never existed. Death does not preoccupy Benedict: his resignation will remain invalid for ever by creating a historic rupture in the papal succession.

Bergoglio, in the mean time, for his own part, has already signaled the future of his new-Church by nominating an avalanche of his “own” 80 cardinals, who, being in the majority, will shut the doors to the new Conclave. After the antipope, Francis, there would be no valid successor, as some traditionalists are pointing out. Moreover, an invalid conclave, composed by invalid cardinals, might elect another modernists antipope — or a fake orthodox one — and the Catholic Church, as we know Her, would be finished forever.

The synod, on the other hand, will be the great Catholic Counter-Reset, the red restart-button which will enable the Church to be purified — according to the intentions of Ratzinger — from corruption and heresy once and for all, by reconciling Europe and the West with their own Christian roots. And in the passage from one epoch to another, as he himself said to Seewald: “I belong no longer to the old world, but to the new, which in reality has not yet begun”. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26699363/ratzinger-sottotesto-libro-intervista-ultime-conversazioni-peter-seewald.html

30. The “little ones” will be the protagonists

Benedict XVI, the sole Vicar of Christ (Bergoglio having renounced the title) knows that salvation comes from little ones, from the pure of heart, mind and body, much sooner than from prelates and the great ones of the press: from courageous priests and friars who are excommunicated for remaining faithful, from little journalists, youtubers and bloggers, translators, artists and publishers, simple readers who share articles on social media, each one of which in his own infinitesimal littleness adds his own contribution: a whole people without means and support, who sacrifice themselves and risk themselves to spread the truth as a fire, as a last “Crusade of the poor” to save the Church Herself.

No, Benedict XVI has not fled at the sight of the wolves. Nor in the face of those dressed up as lambs.

Benedict XVI’s Masterstroke against Globalism & Freemasonry — Part III

FromRome.Info presents here Br. Bugnolo’s authorized English translation of Andrea Cionci’s Article

La possibile ricostruzione del “piano B” di papa Benedetto XVI

which was published by the Libero, on April 6, 2021, in Italian.

Due to the length of the original, FromRome.Info publishes the translation in 4 parts.

PART IPART IIPART IV

A Reconstruction of Ratzinger’s possible Plan B

to cancel the church of Bergoglio with a complete purification of the Church

A Purposefully invalid Resignation? — We investigate the thesis of Attorney Acosta and various theologians

by Andrea Cionci

PART III

9. The errors in the Latin

Moreover, the game played was a subtle one: the risk is that the juridical question, upon which the entire plan B is based, is forgotten. This is why in the Declaratio Benedict inserted anomalies which would in time attract attention to the invalidity of the document, most of all two gross errors in the Latin: “pro ecclesiae vitae” (afterwards corrected by the Vatican) and one pronounced by his own voice — “commissum” — alongside the key word: “ministerium”, which should have been the dative form, “commisso”. Moreover, the typo on the hour of 29:00 instead of 20:00: errors purposefully introduced, in addition to invalidating even more the resignation inasmuch as it was not “rite manifestetur”, that is “duly” expressed, as the Code of Canon Law requires (in Canon 332, §2); most of all to concentrate the attention of future readers on the two principle juridical problems of his fake resignation: the renunciation of “ministerium” and the deferment of the renunciation. The plan succeeded: the errors of syntax in the Latin were immediately judged to be “intolerable” by Latinists such as Luciano Canfora and Wilfried Stroh, not to mention Cardinal Ravasi, and made a certain sort of splash in the press, together with the typographical error on the hour it would take effect. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26637606/ratzinger-benedetto-xvi-errori-latino-dimissioni-corriere-esperto-latinista-ennesimo-indizi.html

Errors which resulted from haste? Impossible! Ratzinger spent two weeks writing the Declaratio which was looked over in detail by the Secretary of State under the seal of the pontifical secret (i. e. the highest level of Vatican state secrecy). HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26758114/ratzinger-dimissioni-nuovi-dettagli-errori-declaratio-correzione-segreteria-stato-refusi-orario-ore-29.html

10. The Farewell at 5:30 P. M.

And so, February 28th arrived and Benedict makes his dramatic helicopter flight (he will say to Seewald in 2016 that this was part of the “stage scenery”) such that everyone will see him abandon the Vatican and, at 5:30 P. M., come out upon the balcony of the papal palace at Castel Gandolfo to bid the world a farewell. He had not casually chosen the hour of 8 P. M. (20:00 hours), the hour in which Italians are all at dinner (in front of the TV), a thing which required him to anticipate the farewell at 5:30 P. M.. There, at Castel Gandolfo, in fact, he speaks precisely: “I will be the pope until 8 P. M. and then no more”.

But then he goes inside, and 8 P. M. arrives, but he signs no document nor makes any public declaration. Some justify this by saying that since at 5:30 P. M. he said that he would no longer be the pope, that sufficed. But they are in error: because by affirming that he would be pope until 8 P. M., he could have very well changed his mind, therefore, his renunciation of ministerium, already in effective from the hour he read his Declaratio, should have been ratified by another signed or public declaration. But this never happened. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26613561/ratzinger-dimissioni-sempre-annunciate-mai-ratificate-carlo-pace-spiega.html

11. A concentrate of juridical invalidity

In summary, his Declaratio of a renunciation is absolutely worthless as a resignation, because one cannot renounce an office which has a divine origin by renouncing its administration and, in addition, such a renunciation not duly written, has no juridical value. It’s all a big joke. In fact, Benedict will admit to Seewald that the choice of February 11th for his Declaratio was connected, with an “interior connection”, to the Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes, a feast of St. Bernadette, the patron saint of his own birthday and with the Mardi Gras Monday. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26699363/ratzinger-sottotesto-libro-intervista-ultime-conversazioni-peter-seewald.html

12. The Mafia of St. Gallen elects an Anti-Pope

The anomalies were seen only by a few and the Mafia of St. Gallen went ahead full steam. Finally, on March 13th, elbowing itself forward with a fifth and irregular balloting, it succeeds in electing its own champion, the Jesuit cardinal, Bergoglio, already looked down upon in Argentina for his methods and his doctrinal extravagances. In this way, there comes to be announced to the world a new pope. Francis comes out, without the red mozzetta (cape), accompanied by Cardinal Daneel: his style is very off the cuff and, in no time, with the complicity of the Main Stream Media, he succeeds in capturing the enthusiastic favor of the crowds. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/22269917/bergoglio_papa_francesco_ratzinger_teologia_modernisti_tradizionalisti_strategia_concilio_vaticano_teologia.html

13. The attack on Catholicism begins

Immediately, he begins a gradual dismantling of Catholic doctrine to adapt it to the container of the new universalist masonic-environmental-modernist religion of the New World Order, openly augured by Bergoglio in his interview with La Stampa on March 15, 2021: “We are wasting this crisis when we close in on ourselves. Instead, by building a new world order based on solidarity …”.

Consequently, it would not surprise if Ratzinger never actually resigned, Bergoglio is an anti-pope. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/23334769/ratzinger-rinuncia-invalida-sospetti-esilio-ratisbona-gaffe-comunicative-nuovo-ordine-mondiale-avvenire-scola-massoneria.html

14. Benedict goes ahead as the Pope

While a portion of normal Catholics (insultingly defined by the Main Stream Media as “traditionalists”) began to react against Bergoglio (and not a few even to speak ill of Ratzinger), Pope Benedict XVI continued to comport himself as a pope in every detail, though without some of the practical offices of his power. In addition to maintaining the white cassock, he continues to live in the Vatican, to use the royal “We”, to sign as the Pontifex Pontificum (Pontiff of Pontiffs), and to impart the Apostolic benediction.

Indeed, even if Ratzinger had made a renunciation of administering the Barque of Peter, every now and then he comes back, signing some book, writing, prayer, or granting an interview, to correct Bergoglio on the celibacy of priests (even if, immediately afterwards, they uproot his favorite vineyard at Castel Gandolfo). HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/22458850/papa_benedetto_emerito_aborto_gay_catechismo_chiesa.html

15. The “scientific” ambiguity of the thing

In all his interviews, Ratzinger maintains a low profile and most of all an absolute, scientific double entendre in his words. He never says that he has resigned from the papacy, nor does he say that Francis is the Pope, but throughout 8 years, he has like a standing stone, repeated that “the Pope is only one”. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26597971/scritto-di-benedetto-xvi-completo-come-leggere-piu-attentamente-un-significato-opposto-il-papa-e-lui-bergoglio-e-solo-cardi.html

16. The Main Stream Media’s forced narrative

The Narrative would at all costs have it that the one existing pope of which Benedict speaks is Francis, so much that the newspapers of this party exhausting themselves to construct a narrative upon every cited word, seeking to manipulate the context. In fact, Vatican News on June 27, 2019, opened with the leader, “Benedict XVI: the pope is one, Francis”, reporting however only the personal thoughts of Massimo Franco of the Corriere della Sera. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26391704/papa-ratzinger-benedetto-xvi-da-otto-anni-tentano-fargli-dire-quello-che-non-vuole.html

17. The Mafia of St. Gall unmasks itself

While Bergoglio is devoting himself to his new giant masonic and ultramodernist-globalist church (by daily unmasking himself), in 2015 the “anti-Church” as Mons. Viganò will call it, made a faux pas: Cardinal Godfried Danneels, the primate of Belgium and the central column of the Mafia of St. Gallen (so much so that he flanked Bergoglio, when he came out on the Loggia of St. Peter’s, on the day of his election), confessed candidly in his one autobiography how the modernist lobby aimed to cause Benedict to resign and to propose in his place cardinal Bergoglio. His admissions, confirmed by what was already admitted by the journalist Austen Ivereigh, created an enormous embarrassment and have never been denied. The book of Danneels was sold out (the last used copy for sale on Amazon went for 206 euro!) but has never been republished, nor translated into Italian. The Belgian Cardinal exited the stage and died a year later. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/25566325/don-minutella-pietro-dove-sei-pamphlet-teologo-massimo-franco-enigma-papa-francesco.html

18. The defense attempted by Mons. Sciacca

In the August of 2016, Mons. Giuseppe Sciacca, the top canonist at the Vatican, in an interview with Andrea Tornielli, sustained that the resignation of Ratzinger was valid because munus and ministerium are, for a pope, indivisible. A self-contradicting argument which shows precisely how Ratzinger could not have resigned by resigning only the ministerium. In fact, the history of popes in the first millennium of the Church shows that they have at times resigned from the exercise of papal power while remaining popes, especially in the case of rival anti-popes. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26691243/benedetto-xvi-errore-storico-messaggio-papa-antipapa.html

19. Benedict’s reply to Mons. Sciacca

Three weeks later, Ratzinger, publishes a veiled response in his letter to the Corriere della Sera, taking occasion from the recent book of his interviews by Seewald, entitle, “Last Conversations”, in which he exhorts the readers by saying that he himself is an optimum latinist and that he wrote with his own hand the Declaration in Latin so as not to make any errors.

An absurdity, given that there are errors which have been publicly corrected by famous Latinists immediately after his Declaratio. This is one of those many signals of apparent incoherence which Benedict sends to the outside world precisely to recall attention to the juridical problems in his “resignation”. And so the entire interview with the Corriere della Sera can be interpreted in the exact opposite sense. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26637606/ratzinger-benedetto-xvi-errori-latino-dimissioni-corriere-esperto-latinista-ennesimo-indizi.html

Benedict XVI’s Masterstroke against Globalism & Freemasonry — Part II

FromRome.Info presents here Br. Bugnolo’s authorized English translation of Andrea Cionci’s Article

La possibile ricostruzione del “piano B” di papa Benedetto XVI

which was published by the Libero, on April 6, 2021, in Italian.

Due to the length of the original, FromRome.Info publishes the translation in 4 parts.

PART I —  PART IIIPART IV

A Reconstruction of Ratzinger’s possible Plan B

to cancel the church of Bergoglio with a complete purification of the Church

A Purposefully invalid Resignation? — We investigate the thesis of Attorney Acosta and various theologians

by Andrea Cionci

PART II

  1. An Appointment at 29 o’clock on February 28th.

Moreover, Benedict deferred the renunciation of ministerium, fixing it for February 28th, and in such a clear manner that Cardinal Sodano, immediately after His Declaratio, clarified very well to the Cardinals, almost obsessively, that He would remain Pope until the 28th.  But not only that: Ratzinger specified even the hour X after which he would be no longer the Pope, the 29th hour.. It was obviously a typographical error: He wanted to write 20:00 hours (8 P. M.), and in fact, it was corrected afterwards, but the newspapers cited the error with which He underlined how important that inconvenient hour would be, in which the people, as is their custom, would be at dinner in Italy. HERE:

  1. The Pope Emeritus is the Pope

Would he return to being a Cardinal? No: He specified afterwards (in 2016) that He will become a “pope emeritus” , making reference to the fact that, from the 70’s onward, in Canon Law there was permitted to diocesan Bishops in retirement to remain on the sacramental level Bishops, but emeriti for having resigned only from the practical functions. In the case of the Pope, however, there exists no sacramental dimension, but only a super-sacramental dimension which regards a charge which no man on earth has the power to modify or share.  Hence, he who resigns from the papal charge cannot remain in any sense the Pope, and a pope who resigns solely in part, does in truth remain in every way the Pope.  Benedict knows this, but his adversaries do not. Ratzinger, therefore, has purposefully used this camouflage of a “pope emeritus” — an expression which is inexistent in Canon Law, — to maintain himself as the Pope and, in the meantime, to leave the playing field to his enemies. HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26732422/papa-ratzinger-ein-leben-nuova-versione-fatti-dimissioni-volontariamente-invalidate.html

  1. That white garment which He keeps wearing

Behold the reason why Benedict consistently maintains the white cassock, while omitting the mozzetta (white mantle) and sash, symbols of the practical functions which He alone has in fact renounced: the administering of the Barque of Peter and announcing the Gospel.  To Andrea Tornielli, the Vaticanista, who will ask him why He would not wear the cassock of a mere Cardinal, He will reply, justifying himself with the phrase that it was “an eminently practical solution, give that he had no other changes of clothing available”.  This fact will resist all opposition for years, even the most recent stigmatizzation of it by Cardinal George Pell, who said in Dec. 2020: “A pope after his resignation should not dress in white and should not teach in public”.  Yes, but perhaps there is no “after” here? HERE  https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26620895/benedetto-xvi-veste-bianca-senza-fascia-mantella-perche.html?fbclid=IwAR1UulaYNj1LRJL-DZZU-wMp1ku38bofoIkdQ1HAWx7Apk15K5mBQimBBBQ  and HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/25518841/cardinale-george-pell-benedetto-xvi-torni-cardinale-questione-talare-bianca.html

  1. The wantonness of the Mafia of St. Gall.

Ratzinger knows well his adversaries, he knows that they have longed for power since the 90’s when they mustered together in secret meetings in the city of St. Gallen, Switzerland.  Not by chance, was it precisely in those years, that Pope Wojtyla published the apostolic constitution, Universi dominici gregis which automatically excommunicates any Cardinal guilty of a pre-Conclave plot to elect a pope.  Ratzinger knows that his enemies’ level of knowledge of Latin and Canon Law is inferior to his own and that, in the face of an apparent surrender, they would not have paid attention to details.  They would, rather, presume the validity of any document which spoke of a resignation.

In fact, after the Declaratio, the Mafia of St. Gallen is dancing with the stars and causes there to be announced from the Vatican Press Office that “the Pope has resigned”.  Their desires appear to them fulfilled quasi “prophetically” by Ratzinger, at the end of his Declaratio where he declares to renounce the ministerium SO THAT (“ut”) “from February 28th, at the hour of Rome, the See of St. Peter will be vacant and that there is to be convoked, by those who are competent, a Conclave to elect a new Supreme Pontiff” (“by those who are competent”, that is, not “you Cardinals”, or at least not all of “you Cardinals”, a reference to those who were unfaithful to him).

_____

CREDITS: Translation and use of image, here at the Featured Image, with permission.

Benedict XVI’s Masterstroke against Globalism & Freemasonry — Part I

FsromRome.Info presents here Br. Bugnolo’s authorized English translation of Andrea Cionci’s Article

La possibile ricostruzione del “piano B” di papa Benedetto XVI

which was published by the Libero, on April 6, 2021, in Italian.

Spanish translation Here

Due to the length of the original, FromRome.Info publishes the translation in 4 parts.

PART IIPART IIIPART IV

A Reconstruction of Ratzinger’s possible Plan B

to cancel the church of Bergoglio with a complete purification of the Church

A Purposefully invalid Resignation? — We investigate the thesis of Attorney Acosta and various theologians

by Andrea Cionci

PART I

The question of the “two Popes” and of the resignation of Benedict XVI is a very broad one, not to be discounted, spreading over 8 years and events difficult to interpret.  In these months, we have analyzed many individual facts and documents without receiving any response to our questions, legitimate though they be.

And yet, the thesis that has been proposed by the attorney Estefania Acosta and by other authoritative journalists, jurists, theologians and ecclesiastics (many of whom have paid a dear price for their positions), is shocking:  Pope Benedict XVI might have WILLINGLY prearranged an entirely invalid resignation to open a new front against his adversaries, causing them to nominate an anti-pope and arranging that in time the truth above the antichrist objectives of the “Deep Church” and the fact that he is still the sole Pope, be discovered.  This would bring about the definitive cancellation of the “false Church”, along with great purification from heresy and corruption, to open up a new epoch of Christian renewal.

Is this plausible? We have already investigated how the hypothesis of a Benedict XVI who is little prepared in Latin and canon law, or even an enthusiastic promoter of the modernist revolution of Francis, are hardly credible, here https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26440869/papa-ratzinger-ipotesi-dimissioni-approssimativo-modernista-reset-cattolico.html

Therefore, there remains that we sift through the hypothesis of the so-called “Catholic Reset”, cited above: this we have attempted to do by putting in order, according to this point of view, the facts, documents, persons.

To allow you to link to all of it, at once, we propose here a summary, a synthesis, from which you can investigate each argument further by clicking the links under the word, “Here”.

Judge for yourself: let alternative explanations be attempted, so long as they are able to place each of the “pieces of the puzzle” in an alternative but coherent framework, HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/22796627/papa-francesco-bergoglio-ratzinger-lenga-gracida-negri-bernasconi-dornelles-eresia-danneels-vescovi-teologi.html

and HERE https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26460977/benedetto-xvi-unico-vero-papa-reset-cattolico-dimissioni-non-valide.html

1, An inconvenient Pope

“Pray for me so that I do not flee before the wolves”: thus did Benedict XVI exhort the Catholic people at the beginning of his difficult pontificate, in 2005.  The world, in fact, immediately turned upon him: 16 years ago, the Catholic Church, with Her two-thousand-year-old Faith, identity and moral laws, constituted the last obstacle in the path of various globalist-progressive objectives sponsored by the international Left and Lodges.

After the hotly opposed discourse at Ratisbon (2006), which had shut the doors to all religious syncretism, after the Motu Proprio, “Summorum Pontificum” (2007), with which Ratzinger “restored” the Mass in Latin, invigorating Tradition with a fresh breath of oxygen, the internal clerical opposition of the Modernists — which had coagulated around the lobby of Cardinals, called “the Mafia of St. Gallen” — there was then en-kindled and decided to foster such opposition to him that he would resign, as has been amply described by Cardinal Danneels (one of the members of the “Mafia”) in his Autobiography of 2015.

  1. The Year of Horrors (Annus orribilis)

In 2012, the situation became unsustainable: at the Vatican large numbers boycotted the Pope by refusing to obey him; the meek Pope-theology could not trust in anyone, so much so that even his private butler robbed documents from his mailboxes, in that famous scandal of Vatileaks which put in clear light the ferocious factional war in the bosom of the Church and gave breath, at last, to a plan to eliminate him physically.  But these revelations played into the hands of Ratzinger, as we will see, by making clear the context in which he would have to opt for his extrema ratio (last reckoning).

The Media, for their part, were all against him: they depicted him as a sullen obscurantist, they massacred him by trotting out true and presumed scandals of pedophilia (which today magically have disappeared) and, toward the end of December there arrived the last thumbscrew: The Obama-Clinton administration blocked the accounts of the Vatican by means of the SWIFT system.  They would only be unblocked in the days immediately following the “resignation” of Ratzinger: HERE https://www.imolaoggi.it/2015/09/29/come-lo-swift-banche-ricatto-benedetto-xvi-per-costringerlo-a-dimettersi/

  1. The Moment arrives for “Plan B”

With a Church completely infected with the metastasizing globalist modernism subject to and placed under international pressure, Benedict decided upon a definitive maneuver, undertaken “to clean out not only the small world of the Curia, but rather the Church in Her totality”, as he will explain to the journalist Peter Seewald in 2016.

A “Plan B” worked out over many years precisely in view of an aggression against the Papacy from within the Church, and announced in many prophecies and in the Third Secret of Fatima, according to which Ratzinger was one of the few to be set apart by God for a special mission.

The Pope assembled in this way what could strategically be defined as a “planned ruse”, with a “false target” and a “feigned retreat” to cause the morale of the authentic Catholic population to be recharged  and to definitively annihilate the antichristic forces in the bosom of the Church. HERE. https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26771800/papa-ratzinger-terzo-segreto-fatima-ipotesi-specchio.html

  1. The “false target”: the ministerium

The plan was founded upon a provision put into act in 1983, when the papal charge was divided into architecture and decoration, munus and ministerium, or rather, the divine office and the practical exercise of its power.

And it is precisely this last which is the true juridical “false target” which he offered to his enemies: to renounce the ministerium, and not the munus, would be to make one think that a noble, a count, had lost his title of  nobility  solely because he had renounced the administration of his possessions.  Nothing of the kind: a count remains always a count even without lands, and contrariwise, an administer cannot become a count solely by administering the holdings.  Munus and ministerium are not equivalents.

In this way, after two weeks of work, in January of 2013, Ratzinger formulated a Declaratio, a declaration in Latin of hardly 1700 key-strokes, where the terms were inverted, according to a “mirror trick”: instead of renouncing the munus, the charge of the Pope because the ministerium (the practical exercise) had already become burdensome, he announces to want to do the opposite: to renounce the ministerium because the exercise of the munus has become burdensome!  A true trick of words, but, which juridically would only have allowed, at the most, the nomination of a bishop-vicar, certainly not the resignation of a pope, the dignity of which is conserved in the foundational munus. (Of this speak at least 5 publications). HERE  https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/26411995/un-testo-giuridico-della-avvocatessa-estefania-acosta-racconta-dimissioni-appositamente-scrite-invalide-da-benedetto-xvi-che.html

_____

CREDITS: Translation and use of image, here at the Featured Image, with permission.