Category Archives: Church History

The St. Gallen connection to those snarky Vatican ATMs

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

One of the intriguing historical events associated with the events of Pope Benedict XVI’s apparent renunciation, was the decision by Deutch Bank to shut down the ATMs of Vatican City prior to Pope Benedict’s removal from power. The New York Times reported on this on January 4, 2013. It is an incontrovertible historical event.

But, this one event has been the source of a lot of speculation about possible force or coercion placed on the Holy Father to renounce. And the reason for the importance of this, is that Canon 188 declares all resignations of office, invalid, when obtained through coercion.

An Old Story gets some powerful help

I have recently come upon important information which leads me to say, that this theory has some very strong circumstantial basis, and one which leads directly back to the St. Gallen Mafia, who even during the very ceremony in which Benedict XVI bade farewell to the Cardinals,  on Feb. 27, 2013, seemed to be already in control of the Vatican administration (cf. during the ceremony the camera pans to Bergoglio & Tagle).

Here is the evidence which supports that line of investigation.

The Raiffeisen Banks

In 1899, Father Johann Traber, a Catholic priest in Bichelsee, Switzerland, founds the first Raiffeisen Bank in Switzerland. This bank was inspired by the teachings of Hermann Schulze-Delitzsch and Friedrich Wilhelm Raiffeisen, who argued that financial institutions should serve the people. A Raiffeisen Bank is a rural credit union. They are found not only in Switzerland, but in Austria, Romania, Luxembourg and Germany.

In 1902, the 10 banks of this kind, in Switzerland, founded the Swiss Raiffeisen union.

In 1912, the unofficial headquarters of this Union is established in St. Gallen, Switzerland, 41 KM to the east of Bichelsee. This would make St. Gallen a center of banking, and an important one during the Second World War, because rural credit unions generally have poor security and are easily used for money laundering. In Fact, in 2019, a Raiffeisen Bank in Austria was implicated in a Russian money laundering scheme.

St. Gallen: A Rampolla Powerbase

But St. Gallen, Switzlerland, was also Diocese controlled for nearly 70 years by Rampolla allies and members. Here is that history

On September 26, 1938, Father Joseph Miele becomes the new Bishop St. Gallen. He is co-consecrated by Bishop Laurenz Matthias Vincenz, the Bishop of Chur, Switzerland, who according to his episcopal lineage, is a direct descendant of Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro, from whom the lineage of the St. Gallen Mafia members also descends.  Father Miele was consecrated principally by Eugenio Maria Giovanni Cardinal Pacelli, who would shortly become Pope Pius XII and sign the Concordat with Nazi Germany, which guaranteed the liberty of the Catholic Church in return for the submission and dissolution of the Catholic Centre Party into the National Socialist Party of Germany. This union with the Nazi party gave Hitler the votes to be declared Dictator for Life by the enabling act.

In 1957, Bishop Miele is succeeded by Msgr. Joseph Hasler, who was principally consecrated by a disciple of Bl. Alfredo Ildefonso Cardinal Schuster, who himself was co-consecrated by a Rampolla Bishop and who was notable in arranging the escape of Nazi war criminals from allied territories at the end of World War II, as the Dossier on Father Albert Hartl, records.

In 1976, on March 25, Bishop Miele is succeeded by Otmar Mäder, who like his three predecessors is a priest of St. Gallen, Switzerland, and who is consecrated by Bishop Miele. This tradition continued on March 29, 1995, with the consecration of Ivo Fürer, former secretary of the European Bishop’s Conference and intimate promoter and member of the St. Gallen Mafia, as FromRome.Info has reported previously.

Home of the St. Gallen Mafia

We know from that report on Bishop Fürer, that Cardinal Kasper and others formed the St. Gallen Group as early as 1991, and from the Biography of Cardinal Daneels, that this group met at St. Gallen up until 2006, and called themselves, The St. Gallen Mafia.

But why St. Gallen, Switzerland?

St. Gallen was a notorious hotbed of Nazi sympathizers. It is sufficient to cite the case of  their chief of police, Paul Grueninger, who for the “crime” of assisting hundreds of Jews escape from Nazi Germany, was demoted and fired from his position. He received an apology posthumously a stunning 55 years later! (source: here)

But St. Gallen is also a center of Corporate networking on account of the 18,000 alumni of a very influential Business school, located there.

St_Gallen_University
St. Gallen University Campus (bottom), is a short walk from St. Gallen Monastery (Church above), where the Mafia met.

In fact, St. Gallen Switzerland is the home not only of the Raiffesen Bank HQ, but of a Business School of international profile: the University of St. Gallen, which not only has ties to the Raiffesent Banks, trough the CEO since 2015 of the Reifesen Banks, Patrik Gisel, graduated from the St. Gallen University in 1993, but more significantly, through the Chairman of the Board of DeutchBank since May 31, 2012, Paul Achleitner and its CEO from 2002-2012, Josef Ackermann, are graduates, and 1977 respectively of the University of St. Gallen.

And this is where it gets interesting. Because the ATM machines which were shut down in January 2013 at the Vatican, were operated by DeutchBank.

Perhaps it is just a coincidence that the two most senior and powerful officers of DeutchBank who undoubtedly were the ones who made the decision to shut down the ATMs at the Vatican, were graduates of a University in the same town where the St. Gallen Mafia met for nearly 15 years?

Oh, and on Feb. 12, 2013, DeutchBank lifed its block on the Vatican ATMs. The very day after Benedict XVI appeared to have abdicated. How nice of them!

That is the evidence. I leave it to you to draw the conclusions.

+ + +

If you would like to support FromRome.Info, click the banner below.

cropped-from-rome-header-032520

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.

$10.00

 

The unexpected profundity of the First Fatima Prayer

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

If you know anything about the approved apparitions of Our Lady and Saint Michael the Archangel at Fatima, Portugal, in the years 1916-1917, then you probably have heard of this prayer, which Saint Michael — the Angel of Peace — taught the three children, on his first Mission to meet them.

O My God, I believe in Thee, I adore Thee, I hope in Thee and I love Thee!  And I ask pardon for those who do not believe in Thee, adore Thee, hope in Thee and love Thee!

However, that is NOT, what the Angel of Peace said. The original Portuguese, in fact, reads thus:

Meu Deus! Eu creio, adoro, espero e amo-Vos. Peço-Vos perdão para os que não crêem, não adoram, não esperam e Vos não amam.

Which in English is this:

My God! I believe, adore, await and love Thee. I ask Thee pardon for those who do not believe, do not adore, do not await and do not love Thee.

LET US DISCUSS THE DIFFERENCES

Like many Catholics, I have always thought the Angel of Peace was instructing in the 3 theological virtues, Faith, Hope, and Charity, along with the virtue of religion. Under that assumption, the English translation which is commonly used has been published and propagated. Thus, there are the acts of believing, hoping, loving and adoring.

But what the Angel of Peace says differs on 2 points.

First, he does not say I believe in You, but rather I believe You.  The difference here regards the sense of the verb, to believe, in both Portuguese and English.  To say I believe in You is an act of faith, which regards dogma or the acceptance of the existence and trust one has in a person.  But to say, I believe you, is the simple act of putting complete trust in the other.  The first is the kind of faith we have on Earth, where we cannot see God face to face.  The second is the kind of trust all in Heaven have in God, Whom they do see face to face and fully.

The first act is remote, and intellectual. It regards the supernatural virtue of faith. The second act is immediate and volitional, that is, regards the will and the supernatural virtue of hope.

Second, he does not say, I hope in You, but rather, I await you.

At first this is a bit difficult for us English speakers to understand, since it is an archaic concept.  When a person awaits another, he is waiting for the arrival or visit of the other.

But what does this mean in regard to God?

This has 3 senses.  First, that we are waiting for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, at the end of Time, when He shall come to judge all and everyone.

Second, this regards how we must prepare ourselves for a holy death, and to meet Jesus Christ, Who in the moment after death will judge us personally and for all our deeds.

Third, this regards how we should wait for God’s visitations in prayer, by praying more to receive and listen to God, than rambling on speaking to him about what we want.

As regards Angels, it is quite clear that the second sense does not apply to them, but that the first and last are the essence of their expectation of God’s Justice and desire to serve.

IN CONCLUSION

This first prayer taught at Fatima by the Angel of Peace teaches us profound truths about how our Catholic Faith must be real, living, and engage us totally in a relationship which is directed directly at God, the Most Holy Trinity. As His faithful servants and adorers, we should fill our life with love and trust in Him.  Faith is presupposed, but our life of Faith goes way  beyond believing only in doctrines and dogmas. It requires that we make these the foundation of our whole relationship with God.

Let us pray this prayer frequently during the day, and learn from it to make our way back to God and to God. Let us sanctify ourselves in the true adoration of God Who has done everything for us, and who is, as the Angel of Peace declared, “attentive to our prayers and supplications.”

+ + +

If you would like to support FromRome.Info, click the banner below.

cropped-from-rome-header-032520

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.

$10.00

 

A List of Catholic Clergy working as Nazi Spies, 1932-1945

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Here is a history which you were never taught about in Catholic Schools of any kind. The extensive collaboration of Catholic Clergy with the Nazi regime and the Waffen SS before and during World War II. And not only in Germany, throughout Europe, and in the Vatican!

The information came to light when the U.S. Army captured Albert Hartl, a former Catholic priest from Bavaria, who became a close collaborator with Himmler after leaving the Catholic priesthood and joining the Gestapo and working closely with the SS in Russia!

You can see his photo above, taken at Nuremburg. Here is the Wikipedia caption on that photo:

Albert Hartl (1904-1982) at the Nuremberg Trials. Hartl was RSHA-Fuhrer and SS-Member. This photograph of Hartl (probably as a witness) was taken by US Army photographers on behalf of the Office of the U.S. Chief of Counsel for the Prosecution of Axis Criminality (OUSCCPAC, May 1945 – Oct. 1946) or its successor organization, the Office of Chief of Counsel for War Crimes (OCCWC, Oct. 1946 – June 1949).

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the life of Hartl (note SD = Gestapo):

Hartl studied for the priesthood from 1916 to 1929 at a seminary in Freising and the University of Munich. He was ordained in 1929 by the Archbishop of Munich Cardinal Michael von Faulhaber and began teaching, including at the Freising seminary.[2]

Career with SD

While teaching at Friesing, Hartl became involved with a group of priests who had joined the Nazi Party, and in 1933 he signed up as a paid SD informant. He reported Father Josef Rossberger, apparently his best friend, for anti-Nazi activity, which led to a trial, Rossberger’s imprisonment, and Hartl being taken into protective custody by Richard Heydrich, head of the SD. Following this, Hartl left the priesthood and joined the SD himself.[2] In 1935, according to Gitta Sereny, he became the SD’s Chief of Church Information.[3] In March 1941, when the Reich Security Head Office was reorganized, he was placed in charge of a Gestapo office known as IV B (“Sects”). Department IV B4, led by Adolf Eichmann, was the office responsible for the deportation of Jews outside Poland.[4]

I reprint here pages from a OSS interrogation report on Albert Hartl, an ex-Catholic priest who joined the Waffen SS and received information from a network of spies throughout Europe during the Nazi era. The OSS was the Military Intelligence Service of the U.S. Military, which was charged in rounding up Nazi Spies, and potential war criminals during and after World War II.  Albert Hartl, at the end of the war, fled to Yugoslavia, but was arrested on a trip back to Austria. The information he gave up was crucial to mapping out the Nazi spy network within the Catholic Church from 1932-1945.

The report was declassified as per the Nazi War Crimes Act of 2007, and released by the CIA. You can download the entire report, which is 65 pages long, in PDF format here:

OSS – SSU – CIG EARLY CIA DOCUMENTS VOL. 5_0007 Full Document

St. Gallen Mafia connection

I publish this as an Appendix to my reports on the affiliations of Catholic Clergy with the Nazi Party and movement, which I covered in the following articles, previously published here at FromRome.Info:

  1. The Nazi Forefathers of the St. Gallen Mafia
  2. The Nazi Refugees and the origins of the St. Gallen Mafia

I do so, because Albert Hartl, was ordained a priest by Cardinal Michael von Faulhaber, Archbishop of Munich from 1917 to 1952, was a member of the House of Rampolla di Tindaro, to which the St. Gallen Mafia belongs according to its episcopal lineage.

I think this OSS document detailing the activities of Albert Hartl make it quite clear that Catholics cannot ignore the question of the interference of intelligence agencies and foreign spies at the Vatican, nor exclude the possibility that a political party among the clergy might control the Church so as to serve the most vile and godless interests.

What all need to really pay attention to, is how this Nazi agent, a Rampolla circle member, PROPOSED TO THE OSS — the future CIA — how to infiltrate the Catholic Church using controlled well-known personalities in Catholic education and media (p. 26, below).

Now for the pages which concern us. I reprint them as they are contained in the report from pages, 16-26, with a few exceptions.

+ + +

Page123

page124page18

page19

Thepage20

THEN AFTER THE REPORT ON PROTESTANT CLERGY AND RENEGADE CATHOLIC CLERGY, the report on Nazi informants at Rome:

page23

page24

AND FINALLY THE EVALUATION OF THE QUALITY OF INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY ALBERT HARTL to the US. OSS:

page25

AND FINALLY, HARTL’S PROPOSAL FOR INFILTRATING CATHOLIC CHURCH BY THE CIA AND HOW TO GO ABOUT IT, through controlled Personalities…. !

page26

La Traduzione Autentica della Declaratio di Papa Benedetto XVI

di Frà Alexis Bugnolo e Emiliano Palopoli

Questa traduzione italiana è stata fata per manifestare il senso autentico della Dichiarazione secondo le regole di Latino e non secondo la narrativa sostenuta dal Vaticano per giustificare il Conclave del 2013. Si notano tante anomalie che mostrano chiaramente l’invalidità del atto e danno segni che la Rinuncia è stata forzata da Cardinali già in scisma con Papa Benedetto XVI.

Non soltanto vi ho convocato a questo Concistoro per le tre canonizzazioni, ma anche per comunicare per conto della vita della Chiesa, la vostra decisione di grande importanza. Avendo esplorato la mia coscienza più volte al cospetto di Dio, sono arrivato a una cognizione certa che le mie forze deterioratesi per l’età non sono più atte ad amministrare il Munus Petrino in modo equo.

Sono bene conscio che questo Munus secondo la sua essenza spirituale, dovrebbe essere esercitato non solo agendo e scrivendo, ma non meno soffrendo e pregando. Ma tuttavia, nel mondo della nostra stagione, soggetto a rapidi mutamenti, e perturbato da questioni di grande peso per conto della vita di Fede, pure un certo vigore del corpo e dell’anima è necessario per governare la Barca di S. Pietro e per annunciare il Vangelo, il quale vigore in me in questi mesi finali diminuisce in modo tale, che per bene amministrare il Ministero affidatomi devo riconoscere la mia incapacità. A ragione di ciò, ben conscio del peso di questo atto in piena libertà dichiaro che rinuncio al Ministero del vescovo di Roma, Successore di San Pietro, affidatomi mediante le mani dei Cardinali il 19 Aprile 2005, affinché sia vacante la Sede di San Pietro a partire dal 28 Febbraio alle ore 20,00 ora locale, e che sarà convocato un Conclave, da parte di coloro che sono competenti, per eleggere un nuovo Sommo Pontefice.

Carissimi Fratelli, con tutto il mio cuore, vi ringrazio per il vostro amore e lavoro con cui avete portato con me il peso del mio Ministero e vi chiedo perdono per tutti le mie mancanze. Affidiamo completamente la S. Chiesa di Dio alla cura del Sommo Pastore, Nostro Signore Gesù Cristo e imploriamo la sua Madre, Maria, che assista con la sua materna bontà, i Padri Cardinali nell’elezione di un nuovo Sommo Pontefice.

Per quanto mi attiene, vorrei servire con tutto il mio cuore in futuro per una vita dedicata all’orazione per la Santa Madre Chiesa.

© 2020

 

 

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.

$10.00

28 Febbraio 2013: Congedo dai Cardinali, Bergoglio sta per ridere alle 2:37?

Il Commentario di Frà Bugnolo sul video

Alle 2:37 si vede il Cardinale Jorge Mario Bergoglio accanto il Cardinale Zen. Zen sembra indignato come fosse stava guardano un teatro dell’assurdità. Bergoglio sembra da ridere alle parole di Sodano, che dice che i Cardinale sempre hanno voluto di accompagnare il Santo Padre nel suo cammino!

E Papa Benedetto? Sembra essere drogato, con la più brutta faccia mai ha avuto durante il suo Pontificato.

Ma alle 8:40 Bergoglio da il segno di mano massonico.

La Televisione Vaticana durante il servizio fa forze di mostrare Cardinale Bergoglio, Bertone e Tagle. Coincidenze?

Decide tu!

ENGLISH

This video shows the last address of Pope Benedict XVI to the College of Cardinals, which took place on Feb. 28, 2013, in the Sala Clementina, at the Vatican. The Sala Clementina is at the center of the City State and is adjacent to the Monastery of Mater Ecclesiae, where Pope Benedict XVI now resides.

At 2:37 one can see Cardona Bergoglio next to Cardinal Zen. Zen seems indignant as if watching a theatre of the absurd. Bergoglio seem as if he is going to laugh, at the words of Cardinal Sodano, that the Cardinals have always wanted to accompany the Holy Father in his path!

And Pope Benedict XVI? He seems drugged, and has one of his most ugly visages during his pontificate.

But at 8:40 in this video, Bergoglio gives the masonic hand sign.

TV Vatican has notably made efforts during this transmission to show you Cardinals Bergoglio, Bertone and Tagle.  A coincidence?

I will let you decide!

The Death of Pope John Paul I

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Remember, that Pope John Paul I had been the Patriarch of Venice, and he was elected primarly because the Church Bank which served the priests and religious of his region of Italy had been brought to bankrupcy by the Vatican Bank. He promised as Pope to clean up the Vatican Bank, and if he went ahead he would have surely discovered who had accounts in that bank. If those accounts belonged to the CIA or its operations, his elimination would become a political necessity. So let us examine what happened to Pope John Paul I, widely seen as the liberal successor to Paul VI.

First let us review the official Vatican line of what happened and why. Please listen to the entire Rome Reports, which can always be counted on to give you the approved narrative on any topic.

Who is John Magee mentioned in this short video? the papal a secretary who met with Pope John Paul I when, it is said, he felt a strong chest pain? His biography sheds some light on this. He was befriended by Pope Paul VI, who leading Italian historians say was a flagarant sodomite. And once a bishop, Magee was accused of not taking proper legal action to about priests in his diocese who raped boys. Magee also seems to have been close to the IRA, in the person of Bobby Sands.

Why may this been important? Because the IRA seems to have been one of the stay-behind organizations run and supported by the CIA, which in popular literature is called operation Gladio, though that was the code name only for the operations in Italy.

Thus, there is strong motive to believe that John Magee was a CIA operative. And if so, the heart-attack of Pope John Paul I may have not been an accident. Indeed, as Corbett reports, the death of John Paul I was orchestrated by a CIA asset, at the direction of Dulles’ deep state intelligence network. Dulles’ nephew was made a Cardinal by Pope John Paul II, whose election was made possible by the death of John Paul I, and who himself went one to collaborate with the CIA to wash funds to the Solidarity movement in Poland, to bring down the communist government.

As far as we are concerned about current events in the Vatican, involving the St. Gallen Mafia, I have previously observed that John Paul II promoted all the key members of that group to the dignity of the Cardinalate, from the leader Cardinal Daneels to Cardinal Bergoglio. This may explain why Bergoglio was so willing to canonize John Paul II, and may also explain why the entire political establishment of the West and Trad inc. continues to refuse any investigation into how Bergoglio came to power.

Please note, that I am not saying that the CIA has been controlling the Vatican for decades, but I think the question needs to be kept on the table.

+ + +

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.

$10.00

The Dictatus of Pope St. Gregory VII

 

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

In the present hour of darkness and confusion, it behooves all to turn their gaze back to the sound and eternal judgement of the saintly popes of old, of which one of the greatest was Pope Saint Gregory VIII, in life called Hildebrand, who single-handedly saved the Catholic Church from the filthy and avaricious hands of godless men who usurped the right to name Bishops, Abbots and distribute the benefices of the Church to their friends and political allies.

During his papacy, there was entered into the official register of papal laws, the Dictatus papae, a collection of solemn truths which regard the Catholic Faith on the Papal Primacy and the Roman Church. See here for the Latin text and a copy of one of the most ancient manuscripts containing it.

Due to the relative obscurity of this magisterial text, I share with you now the text in both Latin and my English translation. (The Video above includes the Latin text) I pray that it might be for your enlightenment and for the confirmation of your faith in these troubled times, when true doctrine is being so obscured.

Dictatus Papae

Number Latin English translation
I Quod Romana ecclesia a solo Domino sit fundata. That the Roman Church has been founded by the Lord alone.
II Quod solus Romanus pontifex iure dicatur universalis. That the Roman Pontiff alone is called “universal” by right.
III Quod ille solus possit deponere episcopos vel reconciliare. That He alone can depose and/or reconcile Bishops.
IV Quod legatus eius omnibus episcopis presit in concilio etiam inferioris gradus et adversus eos sententiam depositionis possit dare. That His legate takes precedence in council to all bishops even when he is of inferior grade and can give a sentence of deposition against them.
V Quod absentes papa possit deponere. That the Pope can depose those absent.
VI Quod cum excommunicatis ab illo inter cetera nec in eadem domo debemus manere. That among other things we neither ought to remain in the same house of the one excommunicated by him.
VII Quod illi soli licet pro temporis necessitate novas leges condere, novas plebes congregare, de canonica abatiam facere et e contra, divitem episcopatum dividere et inopes unire. That for him alone is it licit, according to the necessity of time to establish new laws, to welcome new peoples, to make new abbacies of canonical right and, contrariwise, to divide rich bishoprics and unite needy ones.
VIII Quod solus possit uti imperialibus insigniis. That he alone can use the imperial insignia.
IX Quod solius pape pedes omnes principes deosculentur. That all princes are to kiss the feet of the pope alone.
X Quod illius solius nomen in ecclesiis recitetur. That the name of him alone is to be recited in the churches (in the Canon of the Mass).
XI Quod hoc unicum est nomen in mundo. That this (his name as Pope) is the only one in the world.
XII Quod illi liceat imperatores deponere. That for him it is licit to depose emperors.
XIII Quod illi liceat de sede ad sedem necessitate cogente episcopos transmutare. That for him it is licit when driven by necessity to transfer bishops from see to see.
XIV Quod de omni ecclesia quocunque voluerit clericum valeat ordinare. That he validly ordains any cleric from every church wheresoever.
XV Quod ab illo ordinatus alii eclesie preesse potest, sed non militare; et quod ab aliquo episcopo non debet superiorem gradum accipere. That the one ordained by him can take charge of any church, but not serve as a soldier; and that he ought not accept a superior grade from any bishop.
XVI Quod nulla synodus absque precepto eius debet generalis vocari. That no synod without his precept ought to be called “general”.
XVII Quod nullum capitulum nullusque liber canonicus habeatur absque illius auctoritate. That no chapter be held and no canonical book be recognized without his authority.
XVIII Quod sententia illius a nullo debeat retractari et ipse omnium solus retractare possit. That his sentence ought to be retracted by no one and that he alone can retract that of all.
XIX Quod a nemine ipse iudicare debeat. That he himself be judged by no one.
XX Quo nullus audeat condemnare apostolicam sedem apellantem. That no one dare condemn the one appealing to the Apostolic See.
XXI Quod maiores cause cuiscunque ecclesie ad eam referri debeant. That the greater cases of every church whatsoever ought to be referred to Her.
XXII Quod Romana ecclesia nunquam erravit nec imperpetuum scriptura testante errabit. That the Roman Church has never erred nor shall ever err in perpetuity, as Scripture testifies.
XXIII Quod Romanus pontifex, si canonice fuerit ordinatus, meritis beati Petri indubitanter efficitur sanctus testante sancto Ennodio Papiensi episcopo ei multis sanctis patribus faventibus, sicut in decretis beati Symachi pape continetur. That the Roman Pontiff, if he has been canonically ordained, is undoubtedly made holy by the merits of Blessed Peter, according to the testimony of Saint Ennodius, Bishop of Pavia, with many holy Fathers favoring him, just as is contained in the decrees of Blessed Pope Symachus.
XXIV Quod illius precepto et licentia subiectis liceat accusare. That by his precept and license it is licit for his subjects to bring accusations.
XXV Quod absque synodali conventu possit episcopus deponere et reconciliare. That he can depose and reconcile bishops without the convening of a synod.
XXVI Quod catholicus non habeatur, qui non concordat Romane ecclesie. That one is not to be held to be Catholic, who is not in agreement with the Roman Church.
XXVII Quod a fidelitate iniquorum subiectos potest absolvere. That he can absolve the subjects of the iniquitous from fealty.

Ratzinger vs. The Benedict Bot: A case in point: The 3rd Secret of Fatima

 

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

After my revelations that I had been threatened over the phone by Archbishop Ganswein, the revelations which burst out from Archbishop Viganò and others in January about the duplicity of the private secretary of Pope Benedict XVI, shed real light on the need to review all the statements alleged to be from Pope Benedict XVI after February 2013, as to their authenticity. (See links in this paragraph for pertinent articles about this).

Editor’s Note: The phrase, “The Benedict Bot”, as used above in the title of the present article, is a term coined by Frank Walker, editor of Canon212.com, and used to characterized the apparently manufactured and artificial statements by others in the Vatican, which are attributed by the Vatican Press Office to the Roman Pontiff, in such wise as to raise grave concerns whether they are in any way an authentic expression of his mind. Thus the Benedict Bot is the persona created by the Vatican. This term obviously refers to a theory of interpretation, because without video confirmation that Pope Benedict XVI has said something, the matter is always capable of doubt, especially after the Vatican has been caught twice falsifying the letter and statements of Pope Benedict, as FromRome.Info has reported previously, not to mention every translation of his Declaration of Feb. 11, 2013.

Now, on the fourth anniversary of the controversy over the Third Secret of Fatima which exploded in Catholic Media in May of 2016, I think that time has come to compare the real Ratzinger with the Benedict Bot. So lets examine what Cardinal Ratzinger is alleged by a close friend on 3 occasions to have said, BEFORE February 2013, and what he is alleged to have said by the Vatican Press Office in 2016.

Cardinal Ratzinger on the Third Secret

Here is the testimony of Father Paul Kramer, in his interview in the Fatima Crusader edition of 2009, where he reports the testimony of Father Ingo Dollinger, regarding the Third Secret of Fatima, and his conversations with Cardinal Ratzinger.

Then on June 26, 2000, Cardinal Ratzinger published for the world the document [on the Third Secret] contain-ing the vision of a “bishop in white”, claiming that the en-tire Secret is set forth in this document. Yet it can only be understood that way if we say that he is using a mental res-ervation; that what is set forth by Our Lady in Her words is already implicitly contained symbolically in the vision. The elderly German priest, Ratzinger’s long-time person-al friend, took note of the fact that when this vision of the Third Secret was published it

The Fatima Crusader 10 May 2009May 200911 The Fatima Crusader did not contain those things, those elements of the Third Secret that Cardinal Ratzinger had revealed to him nearly ten years earlier. The German priest — Father Döllinger — told me that his question was burning in his mind on the day he concelebrated with Cardinal Ratzinger. Father Döllinger said to me, “I con-fronted Cardinal Ratzinger to his face.” And of course he asked Cardinal Ratzinger, “how can this be the entire Third Secret? Remember what you told me before?” Cardinal Ratzinger was cornered. He didn’t know what to say and so he blurted out to his friend in German, “Wirklich gebt das der etwas” which means “really there is something more there,” meaning there is something more in the Third Secret. The Cardinal stated this quite plainly.

I have tracked down the original article, here. Christopher A. Ferrara refers to this interview in his commentary on the events of 2016, here.

The Fatima Crusader, on its FaceBook page, in on May 17, 2016, reported Father Kramer’s more detailed testimony thus:

STATEMENT FROM FATHER PAUL KRAMER
Regarding the Recent Confirmation by Fr. Ingo Döllinger

<< Third Secret of Fatima Still Mainly Concealed; Warns Against an Evil Council and Changes in the Liturgy >>

“Fr. Ingo Döllinger is a several decades long close personal friend of Pope Benedict XVI. Cardinal Ratzinger told Dr. Döllinger around 1991 that the 3rd Secret speaks of an ‘evil council,’ and warned against changing and adulterating the liturgy of the Mass — literally against adding extraneous elements into the liturgy (which is exactly what Bugnini & Co. did by adding Protestant elements into the liturgy).

“The Secret, according to Döllinger, also speaks negatively about the Conciliar popes, according to what Ratzinger told Döllinger — comparing one pope to a chameleon, another to a serpent, etc.

“Dr. Döllinger spoke not only to me and Joseph Cain on what Ratzinger had told him, but he related even more details to the young clerics in the seminary of Anapolis (Brazil), where he had been rector. I myself and Joseph have spoken not only with Döllinger, but also with the priests and deacons in Brazil who had heard Dr. Döllinger relate to them the details of the Secret that had been told to him personally by Cardinal Ratzinger around 1991.

“After the publication of the ‘bishop in white’ vision of the 3rd Secret, Döllinger noticed that the details of the Secret that Ratzinger had revealed to him nearly a decade earlier were not in the ‘bishop in white’ version of the secret. When Döllinger had his next opportunity to meet with Cardinal Ratzinger (after a concelebrated Mass), Döllinger asked Ratzinger how it can be said that the whole Secret has been published, since the details of the Secret earlier mentioned to him by Ratzinger were conspicuously absent from the version of the Secret published by Ratzinger on 26 June 2000. Ratzinger was cornered, and therefore blurted out, ‘Wirklich giebt es da noch etwas.’ (‘Really there is more there.’) Dr. Döllinger also told Joseph and me that he had personally known (St.) Pio of Pietrelcina, and that he had made his confession to Padre Pio fifty-eight times.”

Andin 2016, Maike Hickson revived the story and started a firestorm by doing so, by quoting Father Dollinger thus, in her article at One Peter Five, published on May, 15, just two days earlier:

Not long after the June 2000 publication of the Third Secret of Fatima by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger told Fr. Dollinger during an in-person conversation that there is still a part of the Third Secret that they have not published! “There is more than what we published,” Ratzinger said. He also told Dollinger that the published part of the Secret is authentic and that the unpublished part of the Secret speaks about “a bad council and a bad Mass” that was to come in the near future.

Thus, Cardinal Ratzinger before becoming pope.

The Benedict Bot Responds

Now for the Vatican Press office response of May 21, 2016:

Several articles have appeared recently, including declarations attributed to Professor Ingo Dollinger according to which Cardinal Ratzinger, after the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima (which took place in June 2000), had confided to him that the publication was not complete.

In this regard, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI declares “never to have spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima”, clearly affirming that the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter “are pure inventions, absolutely untrue”, and he confirms decisively that “the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete”.

The first thing to notice is that the Benedict Bot is calling a life long friend and confidant, of impeccable public reputation, a bold face liar.  I do not know of any case in the entire personal history of Pope Benedict XVI that he calls anyone a liar, let alone a close friend. That is entirely out of character for Benedict. But not for Bergoglio and many who now rule the Vatican.

Second, the Vatican Press Office does not quote the sources of the reports they are attempted to rebut. Are they afraid that others might start analyzing the evidence?

Third, the Vatican Press Office does not say to whom Pope Benedict XVI made these recent statements, who was present, who witnesses them, nor reports their entire context, or even if they refer to his conversations with Father Dollinger, because if you notice how the quotations are spliced, important context has been left out to verify such a relation between them — even if they are authentic quotes — to Father Dollinger’s reported statements on the Third Secret.

For these three reasons, one can doubt that the statement from the Vatican Press Office is an authentic representation of anything Pope Benedict XVI said in 2016, if he said anything at all.

Finally, seeing how Archbishop Gänswein was caught in bold face lies when he denied that Pope Benedict XVI had collaborated in certain matters regarding the Book on Celibacy by Cardinal Sarah, I think we might be able to guess where the source of the Benedict Bot statements of 2016 may have come from.

+ + +

 

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.

$10.00

Michel Piccoli, dead at 94: Acted out Benedict’s Renunciation 2 years beforehand

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Il Reformista reports that on May 18, 2020, there passed away Michel Piccoli, one of the most famous French actors of his generation, who appeared in more than 170 films.

In 2011, he played the part of what could arguably be identified as Pope Benedict XVI in the Movie, “Habemus papam” by Nanni Moretti, which “prophetically” showed the Pope renounce using an invalid formula. See the video above, for the key scene in the film.

Even in February of 2013, this film was spoken of in relation to the events of that month.

The cause of Michel Piccoli’s death was listed as a stroke. He was 94 years old. Wikipedia, however, omits any reference to his historic role as the Pope, in the Film, Habemus Papam. And, I think that is significant, because I know that Wikipedia only hides information for ideological reasons.

Michel Piccoli’s death comes within days of the tremendous revelations of Pope Benedict XVI in the new biography by Peter Seewald, Ein Leben, in which there is attributed to the Pope words which express that he never intended to validly resign, that he intended rather to retain the spiritual mandate (Verantvortung, Munus).

The producer of the film, in which Piccoli played the role of Pope Benedict XVI, Nanni Moretti, is a self-declared atheist and Marxists. Several of his films have won awards at important film festivals, an honor only given to those who push the narrative of the global elites. He lives at Rome, and thus is certainly known to the Scalfari, the founder of the Repubblica newspaper, who is a close friend of Jorge Bergoglio, them man whom, historically speaking, is the pope elected in Moretti’s film. In fact, Google.com shows that there more than 10 articles at La Repubblica about Moretti. That is a lot of free publicity for a fellow atheist and Marxist, a lot of friendship.

Scalfari is widely suspected to be the “important and influential person” at Rome, identified by Cardinal McCarrick as the one who lobbied for Bergoglio’s election. The pieces seem all to fit together nicely, don’t they?

Nanni Moretti’s article at Wikipedia also hides the fact that he produced this same film on Pope Benedict’s XVI renunciation 2 years before Benedict XVI “resigned”, by concealing the name of the film under its English title.

Michel Piccoli, when asked about the events of Feb. 11, 2013, at that time, reacted somewhat violently to reporters questions. He definitively refused to discuss his role in the film by Moretti, for some reason.

Well, with his unforeseen death — which is perhaps timely for those in the Vatican — that reason goes to the grave with him.

The use of films to psychologically condition minds in the future to predetermined events, has long been a tactic of the CIA, as I have reported previously. This film, Habemus Papam, must then been seen as part of the calculated and planned coercion put on Pope Benedict XVI from 2011 wards to leave the scene (see here).

+ + +

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.

$10.00

 

 

 

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

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

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.

The Prophetic Vision of Bl. Emmerich of May 13, 1820

By Alexis Bugnolo

Tomorrow is the 200th anniversary of one of the most historically and mystically significant prophetic visions any Saint has had in the history of the Church. Not only on account of its accuracy but on account of the fact that it speaks of our own time of chaos in Church and State. A time in which there are 2 popes at the same time, a thing unheard of in the Catholic Church at any time in 2000 years, not to speak of the last 570 years, without any anti-popes: the last being Felix V (Duke Amadeus VIII of Savory) who falsely the papacy, from Nov. 5, 1439 to April 7, 1449 A. D..

In particular, the fact that Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich had this vision, which regards a wicked pope at Rome establishing worship for all gods in the Church, 200 years to the day that Bergoglio has called upon all religions to pray together, on May 14, 2020 is not coincidental, unless of course it was willed by Bergoglio precisely to indicate that he recognizes himself as the Anti-Christ in this vision.

For this reason, I will republish it here, from the English translation taken from The Life and Writings of Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich. And lest anyone doubt the transcription, I will instead include here the images from the pages of the book at Google Books. I shall intersperse the pages with comments of my own.

Screenshot_2020-05-11 The Life and Revelations of Anne Catherine Emmerich(7)

May 13, 1820 would not be a day which anyone in 1820 could consider significant. But the meaning of this day was made important because 97 years later Our Lady appeared on this same day at Fatima, Portugal, to ask the consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart and portend dire and disastrous events in the world and in the Church if the Holy Father did not hearken to Her request, a request God Almighty would confirm with the greatest public miracle since the parting of the Red Sea by Moses: the Miracle of the Sun, of Oct. 13, 1917.

So the very date of the vision beckons us to pay attention. Our Lady appearing at Fatima on that same day is a sign that She is telling us that this vision is not about the past, but about the future, and that to interpret it as regarding ancient times is simply wrongheaded.

Second, the mention that she had a vision of two popes verifies this interpretation. Because, as I said, there has not be the conflict of a Pope and Antipope since 1445. But, it must be noted, this expression, “two popes” is even more noteworthy, because no Catholic would ever speak of 2 popes. They would say, I see a vision of a pope and of an anti-pope.  To say 2 popes is to signify a situation which is entirely unique in the Church and regards a crisis of discernment which will shake all Christendom.

Third, to mention 2 popes in regard to 2 churches is also something which is highly remarkable. Because, to those who would want to simply interpret the vision of Bl. Anne as regarding the conflict of pope and anti-pope, the mention of 2 churches makes that impossible, since every anti-pope claimed to be the pope of the same church as his rival. This is further confirmed by her mention of the city of Rome, to exclude any possible idea that she was speaking of the Coptic Pope of Alexandria or of any other see in conflict with Rome.

From these first observations, we can exclude that this mystical vision has anything whatsoever to do with the past, and is truly prophetic of the future.

2015-fashionable-personal-transport-two-wheel-scooter-self-balancing-unicycleBut Bl. Emmerich’s vision of a vehicle which is flat and has wheels but is pulled by no horses confirms that she is speaking of our own days, and in vision has seen a technology of our own days, which only recently has become popular.

Thus, as those who insist Bergoglio is the pope have attempted, at sites such as One Peter Five, any interpretation which insists that Bl. Emmerich’s mystical vision refers to ancient times, when such technology was never even imagined to be able to exist, is simply willful blindness grasping for straw.

 

Screenshot_2020-05-11 The Life and Revelations of Anne Catherine Emmerich(6)

That this vision refers to a time future to that of 1820 and to our own time is further clarified because the Blessed openly distinguishes the time of the two popes to the wonderful vision, “Rome suddenly appeared as in the early ages ….”.

The fact that within her first vision, she is given another, is significant. For just as in any literary work references are made to the past to draw comparisons to present situations, it is clear that the Holy Spirit, Who is the author of all true mystical communications, through angelic ministrations, is calling us all to read carefully what the Blessed is about to say and compare it to the past. Here is what she says:

Screenshot_2020-05-11 The Life and Revelations of Anne Catherine Emmerich(5)

And she continues:

Screenshot_2020-05-11 The Life and Revelations of Anne Catherine Emmerich(4)

As we can see from the above, this reading is also confirmed by the fact that though Pope Boniface IV and the Greek usurper Emperor Phocas did live contemporaneously, Phocas was a Catholic and had nothing to do with the idolatry which was practiced at the Pantheon, a Roman Temple dedicated to all the pagan gods, which was converted to the Christian Church of Santa Maria Rotonda in 609 A.D., at the request of the former and with the permission of the later. To insist that Phocas wanted the Cross set up in a temple of demons is not only anachronistic but an absurdity of the highest order.

I hold rather, that this insertion of the historical account was willed by the Holy Spirit, because He knew well, that if He openly revealed to the Blessed Emmerich the things of the future, she would never have been beatified and her writings would have been destroyed or condemned by false shepherds. Seeing their wickedness from eternity, He spoke to her in a way the faithful who still had eyes to see, could see, and so that the blind, refusing to see, would not see it.

That this vignette regarding Pope Boniface IV and the Emperor Phocas is not about the vision of the two popes, Bl. Emmerich also makes clear when above, she says, “When I had witnessed this vision even in the smallest details, I saw again the present Pope.” This put out of any question that the vignette continues in what follows.

She then speaks of the Dark Church or Church of Darkness, as the German original has — I am told. This is significant, because since she has just spoke of the Church of Santa Maria Rotonda, which is very luminous, having a round opening in the ceiling which lets in the light of heaven day and night. This Church of Darkness then has a roof which blocks out the light of heaven, and that is a sign that it is illuminated from below and is not the Church of Christ but that of the Anti-Christ and Satan.

Screenshot_2020-05-11 The Life and Revelations of Anne Catherine Emmerich(3)

Bl. Emmerich describes this church of darkness, above, as one without the Sacraments, without an altar, and not even a proper pulpit. She is obviously describing then a place of worship which is not Catholic.

And with her mention of idols, drawn from the breast of each, it becomes clear why she first had the vision of Pope Boniface IV, namely, that the true Catholic Faith removes idols, and the false Church of Darkness restores them. References to Bergoglio’s introduction of Pachamama idolatry in the Church, which came to the fore in October, 2019, but which has been practiced by the St. Gallen Mafia and its allies for some time, could not be more obvious. She descries the Indian demon Kiva (many arms), Pachamama (miserable shrunken limbs).

Screenshot_2020-05-11 The Life and Revelations of Anne Catherine Emmerich(2)

The whole church was draped in black. You cannot describe more prophetically the Good Friday service of Bergoglio at the Vatican.

The Blessed also now describes the nature of the crisis: The Church of Darkness has few worshipers but great zeal to promote idolatry. The Church of Christ has many worshipers but no zeal to defend the Faith. This is exactly what we see today.

Screenshot_2020-05-11 The Life and Revelations of Anne Catherine Emmerich(1)

She then accurately declares that while idolatry of ignorant pagans was common, many did not do it out of a malign will, but those who abandon the True God for idols are very wicked and have  bad will. This rebukes so many who are silent about the idolatry of Bergoglio and his coterie.

The Blessed then describes exactly what has happened in the last 7 years, the growing tepidity of the clergy who, because they are deceived into thinking Bergoglio is the pope, lose the grace of God day by day for their sins of doing nothing and going along.

Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich then speaks of the COVID-19 lock-downs, which have closes the Churches all over the world: “I saw in all places Catholics oppressed, annoyed, restricted, and deprived of liberty, churches were closed, and great misery prevailed everywhere …”. And since mystical visions speak of things spiritual, it is not contradictory that she adds “with war and bloodshed”, because the closing of the Churches is killing souls and destroying their spiritual life.

Finally, she mentions the common laypeople of simple faith who resist the lock-downs, speaking of them in the terms which describe such people in their own day.

Screenshot_2020-05-11 The Life and Revelations of Anne Catherine Emmerich

Finally, Bl. Emmerich clarifies for us the cause of the crisis: the Masonic Sect, speaking of it in terms which every Catholic in 1820 would recognize. She foretells Our Lady’s intervention and the return of a strong Pope, to succeed the weak pope. Her other visions explain that this intervention will be obtained by Our Lady when She sees enough of the faithful asking for it, at Santa Maria Maggiore, at Midnight. Prayers, that are presently being offered every night.

Thus ends the vision of May 13, 1820.

+ + +

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.

$10.00

Pope Benedict XVI knew what he was doing, and knows he remains the Vicar of Jesus Christ

This is a reblog of the article which is originally entitled, An answer to why Benedict resigned the ministerium not the munus

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The question has been raised for more than 7 years and numerous scholars have studied it and attempted to answer. The first was Father Stefano Violi, a canonist at the faculty of Lugano. Then, there was Antonio Socci who wrote numerous books on the matter. Then there was Ann Barnhardt who after her famous declaration of June 2016, that Pope Benedict XVI had made a substantial error, in the summer of 2019 published extensive documentation showing Joseph Ratzinger’s participation in discussions about splitting the Petrine Munus from the Petrine Ministerium in a shared papacy.

But the definitive answer on the question why he renounced the ministerium only and not the munus, I think was just given by Dr. Edmund Mazza in his Essay, cited by Edward Pentin yesterday, and republished in full at the suggestion of Dr. Mazza, here at FromRome.Info today and at the Most Rev. Rene Henry Gracida’s blog, Abyssum.org, where Bishop Gracida calls it a “brilliant” exposition.

It is brilliant because its is based only on Pope Benedict’s own words and the norms of Canon law. I will explain why, here, and use the same method.

Dr. Edmund Mazza holds a Ph.D. in Medieval History and was transitory collaborator with me at The Scholasticum, an Italian Non profit for the revival of the study and use of Scholastic method.

The Mind of Pope Benedict

Here I quote the key passage from Dr. Mazza, explaining why ministerium and not munus:

Seewald then observes: “One objection is that the papacy has been secularized by the resignation; that it is no longer a unique office but an office like any other.” Benedict replies:

I had to…consider whether or not functionalism would completely encroach on the papacy … Earlier, bishops were not allowed to resign…a number of bishops…said ‘I am a father and that I’ll stay’, because you can’t simply stop being a father; stopping is a functionalization and secularization, something from the sort of concept of public office that shouldn’t apply to a bishop. To that I must reply: even a father’s role stops. Of course a father does not stop being a father, but he is relieved of concrete responsibility. He remains a father in a deep, inward sense, in a particular relationship which has responsibility, but not with day-to-day tasks as such…If he steps down, he remains in an inner sense within the responsibility he took on, but not in the function…one comes to understand that the office [munus] of the Pope has lost none of its greatness…

Benedict again goes to great lengths to contrast the difference between I. “the office of the Pope” and II. the ministry or “function” associated with it. How to “decode” Benedict? By examining the words he has chosen and the ways he has deployed them before. 

(Blue coloring added for emphasis)

And Dr. Mazza continues, further below, after citing a key passage from a 1978 discourse by Ratzinger on personal responsibility and the Papacy,

This 1977 speech is, in fact, the key to deciphering, not only Benedict’s 2017 interview, but his 2013 resignation speech.

In 2017 Benedict says: “If he [the pope] steps down, he remains in an inner sense within the responsibility” he took on, but not in the “function,” or “day-to-day” tasks.  In 1977 Ratzinger says: “this institution [the papacy] can exist only as a person and in particular and personal responsibility…”  He adds: “He abides in obedience and thus in personal responsibility for Christ; professing the Lord’s death and Resurrection is his whole commission and personal responsibility.” 

For Benedict, “personal responsibility” is the essence of what it means to be pope. To be responsible not as a public official filled with day to day tasks, but metaphysical responsibility for the flock of Christ. In his interview, Benedict says that although he “stepped down,” “HE REMAINS…WITHIN THE RESPONSIBILITY.” Translation: “He remains Pope!”

(Blue coloring added for emphasis)

Far Reaching Implications

Dr. Mazza has ably demonstrated that for Benedict the munus means the personal responsibility which can never be rejected, and the ministerium is the day to take fulfillment of the tasks in  public way.

But he has also demonstrated that for Benedict, the Office of the Papacy is the personal responsibility of a single person. This is clearly seen in a brief quote from the 1977 talk, cited at length by Dr. Mazza in his essay:

The ‘‘we’’ unity of Christians, which God instituted in Christ through the Holy Spirit under the name of Jesus Christ and as a result of his witness, certified by his death and Resurrection, is in turn maintained by personal bearers of responsibility for this unity, and it is once again personified in Peter—in Peter, who receives a new name and is thus lifted up out of what is merely his own, yet precisely in a name, through which demands are made of him as a person with personal responsibility. In his new name, which transcends the historical individual, Peter becomes the institution that goes through history (for the ability to continue and continuance are included in this new appellation), yet in such a way that this institution can exist only as a person and in particular and personal responsibility…

(Blue coloring added for emphasis)

Conclusions of Fact and Interpretation

From this we are forced to conclude, the following:

  1. Pope Benedict XVI knew what he was doing.
  2. Pope Benedict XVI never intended to lay down the personal responsibility or munus
  3. Pope Benedict XVI only intended to leave aside the day to day work of the ministerium.
  4. Pope Benedict XVI therefore is still the pope and he thinks he is the pope.
  5. Pope Benedict XVI considers his act of renouncing the ministerium just as valid as his retention of the munus.
  6. Pope Benedict’s concept of Pope Emeritus signifies, thus, the retention of the munus and dignity in the full sense and of the office in a partial sense.

Conclusions of Law and Right

And from this we can conclude the following according to the norm of law:

Canon 188 – A renunciation made through grave fear, unjustly inflicted, deceit or substantial error, or even with simony, is irritus by the law itself.

Irritus, is a canonical term which means not done in such a way as to fulfill the norm of law. According to Wim Decock, Theologians and Contract Law: the Moral transformation of the Ius commune (1500-1650), p. 216, irritus means “automatically void” (Source)

We can see this from the Code of Canon Law itself, in canon 126:

Canon 126 – Actus positus ex ignorantia aut ex errore, qui versetur circa id quod eius substantiam constituit, aut qui recidit in condicionem sine qua non, irritus est; secus valet, nisi aliud iure caveatur, sed actus ex ignorantia aut ex errore initus locum dare potest actioni rescissoriae ad normam iuris.

Which in English is:

Canon 126 – An act posited out of ignorance or out of an error, which revolves around that which constitutes its substance, or which withdraws from a sine qua non condition, is irritus; otherwise it is valid, unless something else be provided for by law, but an act entered into out of ignorance or out of error, can give place to a rescissory action according to the norm of law.

Rescissory means revoking or rescinding. The final clause here means an act done erroneously can be repaired if the law allows for it by a subsequent act. There is no such provision in law for papal renunciations, they have to be clear in themselves or they have to be redone (source). The sine non qua condition here is found in canon 332 §2:

If it happen that the Roman Pontiff renounce his munus, …..

This is the sine non qua condition. It is a condition because it begins with If, it is sine non qua, because it specifies the form and matter of the juridical act as a renunciation (form) of munus (matter). The form and matter together make the essence of a thing. That essence of a juridical act when posited cause the substance of the thing. Essence is the sine qua non of each thing, because without it a thing is not what it is. An error therefore about the matter to be renounced is thus a substantial error in the resulting act.

And hence, the kind of renunciation posited by Pope Benedict is automatically void, null and of no effect, because it violates the Divine Constitution of the Church, which requires that one and only one person hold both the papal dignity, office and munus. There can be no sharing of the office while there is a retention of the munus and dignity.

This argument is based solely on the words of Pope Benedict XVI and the words of canon law. It has, therefore, the highest authority and probability.

I challenge any Cardinal to refute this argument! — And if they cannot, then if they do not return in allegiance to Pope Benedict XVI, they are ipso facto excommunicated by canon 1364 for the delict of schism from the Roman Pontiff. All of them, each of them. And thus have no right to elect his successor.

I put you all on notice!

+ + +

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.

$10.00

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.

$10.00