Maurizio Blondet: “Bergoglio demonstrates in the end, … that he is not the Pope”

Editor’s Note: With his final comment on this essay, Maurizio Blondet one of the most influential traditionalist-conservative commentators and journalists in Catholic Italy has openly declared that Bergoglio is not the pope, and has seemingly moved into the camp of “Benedict is the Pope”. This declaration, which represents an earthquake in the lay world of the Church in Italy is surely to be quoted over and over:

MB – col fatto che ha decretato una così radicale sovversione della natura stessa della Chiesa, Bergoglio in fondo dimostra la verità che Andrea Cionci ha esposto nel suo libro Il Codice Ratzinger: che non è il vero Papa. Nessun legittimo successore di Pietro avrebbe trasformato al Roccia in una duna, né trasformato la Chiesa in un parlamento.)

My translation:

M.B. – with the fact that he has decreed such a radical subversion of the very nature of the Church, Bergoglio demonstrates in the end the truth which Andrea Cionci has expounded in his book, The Ratzinger Code: that he is not the Pope.  No legitimate successor of Peter would have transformed the Rock into a sand-dune, or the Church into a parliament.)

M. B. stands for, “Maurizio Blondet”, and this comment is made as an Editor’s Note, at the end of the article, “Sinodo sulla Sinodalità di Bergoglio: la tragica Sovversione terminale anticristica” (Bergoglio’s Synod on Synodality: the tragic final Anti-Christic subversion.

Bergoglio says blood-thirsty Pro-Abort adds “a little more humanity” to Pontifical Council

 Editor’s Note: Don’t ignore how psychopaths use language before, during, or after they participate in mass murder or genocide.

VATICAN reinstates convicted Wife-Beater, as Bergoglio calls for women’s rights

Summary and Commentary by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

In the ongoing epic saga of hypocrisy, which is the Vatican under Jorge Mario Bergoglio, there is reported this week, that the Vatican has reinstated one of its police officers, who was found guilty in Italy for beating his wife, and who has just completed his term of incarceration in Italy.  News of his reinstatement to a desk job, comes just as Bergoglio returns from the Mideast, with the quirky remark that “Woman should not be treated as second class citizens.” — Yes, the wife, in this case, probably is not a citizen of the Vatican City State, and so, yes, I guess that means she can be abused with impunity in Italian territory, with no consequences for her husband (who began this shortly after their marriage) in Vatican territory.

The Vatican City State has garnered, rightfully, the reputation of being a having for international criminals, sexual abusers, predators, and mafia. This shame has been brought upon the Church by two centuries of Diocesan Clergy raised to the dignity of the Apostolic Throne. — Oh Lord, how long!

Here is the kind of Priest that the Bergoglian Church does NOT expel

 

Dr. Taylor Marshall comments on this Satanic Sacrilege of the Mass:

Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider speak out in defense of the Ancient Roman Rite

Editor’s Note: It is sad to see two such high clerics attempt to justify opposition to the papal power they have freely chosen to follow instead of Pope Benedict XVI: Burke appears to have abandoned the concept of papal supremacy, and Schneider seems to have abandoned the notion that the pope is protected from harming the Church in his universal laws. — As I have often repeated in the last 30 years, the Catholic Religion is like a fabric under high tension, if you cut any fiber it begins to unravel all over.

In this case, you cannot pick and chose your pope. As I have explained here. Alas, the grace of an episcopal consecration by itself does not guarantee that one sees this. Even a Saint who raised dozens from the dead, healed hundreds, converted thousands and led an entire generation back to Christ, failed to understand this until late in life. — Let us pray for these two men, who have boarded a sinking ship.

UK: He would be happy if 53 Million people dropped dead before 2025

Noteworthy above all is his admission that he has been advocating this since 1972 in the Conservative Party. And it appears they have had no problem with that. No surprise then that they appointed a Rothschild Social Credit Brahman as their PM last week.

He is an altar-boy in comparison with this guy, however:

The Big Squeeze as the road to Agenda 2030

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

There is extensive discussion among opposition news sources and in open forums about Agenda 2030 and how great is the threat of the Great Reset. And how they are going about to lead us into that perpetual slavery is a topic of great interest.

I have seen microchipping, digitalization, transhumanism, social credit system discussed.

But one thing I have not seen discussed is what I call the Big Squeeze: that is the progressive removal or outlawing of all other forms of social organization or activity.

The Scamdemic was really the test run to see how well “prepared” and “conditioned” the masses were. And they are frightfully so.

And this is such a scary realization, that I know many Catholics who have quit their professions and fled the cities because they no longer even want to rub shoulders with these mindless sheep who will accept and participate in the most Orwellian of dictatorships as if it were as normal as another season of the year.

But the Big Squeeze is something we cannot avoid, and I have been noticing some of the tricks.

Here in Italy, where one used to be able to purchase SIM cards for cellphones with cash and transcription of basic information, the next generation registration is moving to full digitalization of fingerprints and faces as a requirement to get a SIM Card.

Next, the ATM machines are being replaced with new versions which can scan faces and finger prints.

But what is more ominous, ATM machines have begun to refuse cash withdraws or even reduce the maximum withdraw, while maintaining the same fees.

Banks in the USA are limiting how many times you can visit the teller in any given bank!

Gasoline rationing seems to be on the horizon, even though now they are only testing it, as they have done this year in France and Ukraine.

I call this the Big Squeeze. Progressively reducing the amount you can purchase even while prices rise or fall.  Because, contrary to expectations, it is not the price you pay per item or per quantity, what really matters is how much time you have to spend to obtain a specific quantity. Once they reduce that to a certain limit, you are not only chained to constantly going to get your small ration, but you can no longer even organize an escape from the system.

Along the way toward the progressive elimination of anything which is not controlled, they will offer little increases of quantity to those who accept one kind of digitalization or transhumanism of this kind or another. And progressively, you either will be entirely transformed into a robot, in the name of having liberty and priviege, or you will be reduced to a cruel slavery where you are in danger of death from dehydration, starvation, extremes of weather or lack of work, simply because you refused to comply and remained human.

And that is Agenda 2030. You will own nothing and be happy, because you will have to spend so much time getting anything that you will spend all your times in line having fun waiting to get it!

The only solution to that is either revolution, or founding completely self-sufficient large scale communities, at the size of entire towns. So far, even the 10% who have woken up to what is going on, are not yet ready to do that.

UPDATE: the BigSqueeze also regards treating truth tellers as terrorists….

https://twitter.com/samanthamarika1/status/1588961614702993408

Censorship is now worse at Twitter under Elon Musk

https://twitter.com/MariaArrache/status/1587980832878350336

And this was predicted, by just reckoning whom Musk put on his new censorship board, all lefties:

https://twitter.com/toad_wooden/status/1587846790954491904

The problem is widespread, even on Instagram:

Padre Ricardo Gomez Giraldo’s declamation in apologia for Don Minutella (Spanish)

Commentary by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

FRENCH TRANSLATION

The above video is a response to the video below, in which Auturo Periodista on YouTube denounced as false the assertion that those who attend mass where Bergoglio is named in the Canon as the Pope, sin mortally, in which, evidently, he cites Don Alessandro Minutella on this topic, who holds that position.

Being a student and disciple of St. Alphonsus dei Liguori, I distinguish between formal and material sin, that is, when one knowingly does that which he knows to be a mortal sin and when one does that which is a mortal sin without knowing it is such.

And so, yes, if you know Benedict XVI is the pope, to attend a mass where Bergoglio is named as the Pope — where your attendance is not merely as a visitor, such as at a funeral or a tourist in the Church who does not receive communion nor prays the prayers of the mass — then you sin mortally, because to participate in an act of worship of God which is founded upon the affirmation of a horribly offensive lie (that Bergoglio is God’s Vicar on Earth) is

  1. a mortal sin of schism (because you stand among those who are separated from the true Pope),
  2. and a mortal sin of sacrilege (because you rob Benedict XVI of the honor and due this during Mass),
  3. and a mortal sin of contumely, because by doing so you insult to the Divine Majesty in His Presence (because you affirm that Bergoglio is His Vicar, though he be a heretic and thus you call Christ a liar, for having said, “I have prayed for you Simon, that your faith not fail”).

But in other conditions, you do not sin mortally, and perhaps do not sin at all, except out of a consequence of your ignoring the controversy about who is the pope, which however, after 9 years, cannot be without grave fault, since we are gravely obliged to submit to the true Pope, not merely exhorted to follow any pope we like or find upon hearsay.

But since so many Catholics, of good will, do not understand this obligation, it can be that some attend such masses without mortal sin. Though many Catholics who are lax are already in mortal sin since they do not live according to the moral law, do not remain faithful to the teachings of Christ, or violate the laws of the Church on marriage.

But NOT to sin mortally, you would truly have to be ignorant of the canonical truth that Bergoglio is not the pope, and also ignorant of the theological truth that Bergoglio teaches heresy, and factually ignorant that Bergoglio has not committed schism by handing the Church in China over to Her persecutors, since it is contrary to right morals to claim to be in communion with either an antipope, heretic or schismatic.

As I have repeatedly explained, this does not have to do with whether the Mass is licit or not, or whether the Sacrament has been validly confected or not. This controversy is reasonably sustained ONLY in regard to who is named in the Canon of the Mass as the pope, which should be the expression of with whom the priest celebrating is in communion, and thus, whether he belongs to the Church of Christ, guided on earth by Benedict XVI, or the antiChurch of the Globalists, led by Bergoglio (aka Pope Francis).

Auturo shows by his discourse that he has never studied theology, or if he has, that he does not understand it. Since attendance at Mass is not necessary for salvation nor for remaining in the state of grace. It is an obligation of divine worship ONLY when there is a mass in communion with the true Pope. Many Catholics confuse and misunderstand this, because they have never opened up a book of moral theology and because they do not understand the obligation of going to mass on Sunday in the manner the Church teaches and proposes it.

He also confuses the moral order with the canonical order. Sins exist whether there is a law or not against them. So a priest can denounce an immoral behavior before the Church canonically issues some judgement. As regards a papal schism, a priest in communion with the true pope, has the divine authority and duty to warn the faithful against being in communion with a false pope. And in doing this he does nor err or sin, if he use sound arguments. Auturo’s claim that we have to wait for judgement from the Church about who is the pope is faulty, because, rather, we have to wait for the Pope to validly resign, before we even consider as valid the election of another. We do not have to produce a document or wait for a further judgement that the “successor” is valid or not. Those who claim he is valid have to produce one. And in this case they cannot.

The present crisis in the Church requires that we act now in a way highly unlike we have acted before, according to appearances, because it is now that true Catholics in most parts of the world, without priests in communion with Pope Benedict XVI, are seen to be such by NOT going to Mass ever in communion with Bergoglio, not receiving the Sacraments from priests who name them (only in case of mortal sin, can one confess to a schismatic non heretical priest), and not visiting their churches, universities, or receiving any sacrament from them, including Ordination or Consecration, nor joining religious communities in communion with the anti-Pope.

This manner of acting is spiritual and Catholic, and thus requires a witness to integrity of life very rare today.

Pope Benedict XVI’s teaching on munus and ministerium

The gratuitous assertion that Pope Benedict XVI intended to renounce the papacy, by means of renouncing the Petrine ministerium, is absurd on the face of it, as is demonstrated from his Homily on May 7, 2005, when he began his pontificate

FRENCH TRANSLATION HERE

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The principal gratuitous assertion of those who hold that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is Pope Francis, is that in renouncing the petrine ministerium, Pope Benedict XVI renounced the petrine munus, and thus opened the way for the canonically valid election of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, as the vicar of Christ.

This argument is gratuitous because, so far, no one has attempted to prove it.

But there are ample counter proofs, which have been drawn into light by the investigations of Andrea Cionci, Attorney Acosta, Father Kramer and myself, that Pope Benedict XVI considers himself still the holder of the Papal Authority, even if one were to ignore what his own eyes see, that the Pope dresses as the pope now for 9 years running.

Here we must remember, that the Catholic world is victim of a psyop.  A psyop is the term in military warfare for a deception to make your enemies not see what they see.  And that is what was pulled off on Feb. 11, 2013, as I explained in the documentary, A Message in a Bottle. For the whole world says Benedict XVI abdicated, though Benedict XVI never did anything of the kind.

For Pope Benedict XVI on that day, said, “I declare that I renounce the ministry [ministerio] which was committed to me by the Cardinals on the day I was elected…” (source and translations here)

But Canon 332, section 2, requires that a pope renounce his munus, to abdicate validly.

Si contingat ut Romanus Pontifex muneri suo renuntiet … (source here)

And that Pope Benedict XVI does not consider the munus of the office of the Pope (petrine munus) to be simply identical with the ministry of the Pope (petrine ministerium) can be seen from his Homily on May 7, 2005 A. D., for the Celebration of his taking possession of the Lateran Basilica, as the Bishop of Rome, a most solemn moment, at the start of his papacy.

For in that homily he spoke these words in Italian (Vatican.va):

Questa potestà di insegnamento spaventa tanti uomini dentro e fuori della Chiesa. Si chiedono se essa non minacci la libertà di coscienza, se non sia una presunzione contrapposta alla libertà di pensiero. Non è così. Il potere conferito da Cristo a Pietro e ai suoi successori è, in senso assoluto, un mandato per servire. La potestà di insegnare, nella Chiesa, comporta un impegno a servizio dell’obbedienza alla fede. Il Papa non è un sovrano assoluto, il cui pensare e volere sono legge. Al contrario: il ministero del Papa è garanzia dell’obbedienza verso Cristo e verso la Sua Parola. Egli non deve proclamare le proprie idee, bensì vincolare costantemente se stesso e la Chiesa all’obbedienza verso la Parola di Dio, di fronte a tutti i tentativi di adattamento e di annacquamento, come di fronte ad ogni opportunismo. Lo fece Papa Giovanni Paolo II, quando, davanti a tutti i tentativi, apparentemente benevoli verso l’uomo, di fronte alle errate interpretazioni della libertà, sottolineò in modo inequivocabile l’inviolabilità dell’essere umano, l’inviolabilità della vita umana dal concepimento fino alla morte naturale. La libertà di uccidere non è una vera libertà, ma è una tirannia che riduce l’essere umano in schiavitù. Il Papa è consapevole di essere, nelle sue grandi decisioni, legato alla grande comunità della fede di tutti i tempi, alle interpretazioni vincolanti cresciute lungo il cammino pellegrinante della Chiesa. Così, il suo potere non sta al di sopra, ma è al servizio della Parola di Dio, e su di lui incombe la responsabilità di far sì che questa Parola continui a rimanere presente nella sua grandezza e a risuonare nella sua purezza, così che non venga fatta a pezzi dai continui cambiamenti delle mode.

Which words regard the power of the Papal Office, and which I translate into English, thus:

This power of teaching frightens so many men, inside and outside of the Church. They ask themselves whether this is not a threat to freedom of conscience, whether it be a pretense [presunzione] set against the liberty of thought. It’s not like that.  The power conferred by Christ upon Peter and upon his successors is, in an absolute sense, a mandate to serve [mandato per servire]. The power to teach, in the Church, conveys a commitment to service [impegno a servizio]. The Pope is not an absolute sovereign, whose act of thinking and willing [pensare e volere] are law.  On the contrary: the ministry [ministero] of the Pope is a guarantee [garanzia] of obedience to Christ and to His Word [Sua Parola].  He ought not proclaim his own ideas, but rather bind himself and the Church constantly to obedience to the Word of God [Parola di Dio], in the face of every temptation to adapt and water it down, in the face of every opportunism.  This did Pope John Paul II do, when, facing every temptation, apparently good-willed toward man, in the face of the erroneous interpretations of freedom, he underlines in an unequivocal manner the inviolability of the human being, the inviolability of human life from conception until natural death.  The freedom to kill is not a true freedom, but is a tyranny which reduces the human being to slavery.  The Pope is conscious of being, in his great decisions, bound to the great community of the Faith of all times, to the binding interpretations grown up along the pilgrim path of the Church.  In this manner, his power is not above, but is at the service of this Word of God, and upon him there is incumbent the responsibility to make sure that this Word continues to remain present in its greatness and to resound in its purity, such that it is not broken into pieces by continual changes according to fads.

Commentary

To unpack the teaching of the Holy Father on munus and ministerium, one needs to look carefully at the above text, and see how the Holy Father uses different phrases to express himself in Italian.  Here I list them:

The power conferred by Christ upon Peter and upon his successors is, in an absolute sense, a mandate to serve [mandato per servire].

The power to teach, in the Church, conveys a commitment to service [impegno a servizio].

On the contrary: the ministry [ministero] of the Pope is a guarantee [garanzia] of obedience to Christ and to His Word [Sua Parola].

In this manner, his power is not above, but is at the service of this Word of God, and upon him there is incumbent the responsibility [responsibilità] to make sure that this Word continues to remain present in its greatness and to resound in its purity…

Here I remind those who do not know Latin well, that there are 3 Latin terms used in Canon Law for governance: mandatum, munus and ministerium.  In regard to the Papal Office, the mandatum is given by Christ.  This mandatum regards the twofold command that Christ gives to Peter: feed My sheep and lambs (John 21:15) and confirm your brethren (Luke 22:32 – Cited by the Holy Father in the previous paragraph of his Homily). The munus is that which Peter receives by Christ in these commands. It is the charge of authority, to exercise the power, and the responsibility to execute the commands. The ministerium is that which Peter does when executing the commands.

But, in the Holy Father’s native language, German, the words: munus and responsibility are the same word, Verantwortung.  Canon 145 reckons every office [officium, ufficio, Amt] to be a charge [munus, incarico, Verantwortung].  But canon 332 §2 requires that a Pope renounce his munus.

Now, Italian has a word, impegno, which has no exact equivalent in English. Above I translated it as commitment, but it could be translated charge, obligation, or duty. Indeed, in German it is often translated by Verpflichtung which is a synonym for Verantwortung! So I think it is safe to say that by “commitment to service” the Holy Father is signifying or at least referring to the munus ad ministrandum in the Latin.  And garanzia in Italian [Garantie in German] means the assurance of the fulfillment of an impegno! — Thus in Italian, it is indisputable that the Holy Father sees the ministerium to be distinct from munus, just as it is in German.

From all this it is clear that in the mind of Pope Benedict XVI, from the very first days of His Pontificate, he understands the distinction between munus and ministerium and does not consider them identical concepts or words which mean the same thing. Because every human being using different words to signify different things, recognizes that the difference of the things signified is the cause of the difference of the words.

And thus, since Benedict XVI knows that by renouncing the papal ministerium, he is NOT renouncing the papal munus, he knows that on Feb. 11, 2013, he did NOT renounce the papacy.

————–

CREDITS: The recent image of the Holy Father, standing in front of the new painting was published from here.

News and Commentary on the Catholic Church