Tag Archives: Cardinal Ratzinger

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

May 27, 2020 Editor 8 Comments

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.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

News

Vatican Intelligence officer: I am a Freemason and so is Bergoglio

February 5, 2020 Editor 22 Comments

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

BREAKING — In an intercepted phone call — one of many which were captured during the corruption investigation in Argentina over foreign influence from Iran, the Head Vatican Intelligence officer in Argentina affirmed that he and his boss, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, were indeed members of the Masonic Lodge.

The explosive revelations where made on Roberto Garcia’s TV program, La Mirada, which aired on November 27, 2017 on Channel 26 in Argentina.

Here is the full video:

The video above, at 27:57, features the guests Edgar Mainhard of Urgente24 and the man who speaks about Bergoglio, Juan Bautista “Tata”” Yofre, who was State Intelligence Secretary in Argentina between 1989-1990 and was the Ambassador of Argentina, concurrently to both Portugal and Panama, during the government of Carlos Menem.

In the interview, Roberto asks Tata to discuss the “unpresentables of Argentina that surround the pope”.

“Tata” recounts a phone call that had been aired during a time of “negotiations with Iran” and that such phone calls had been aired on national television. In one phone call between “Yussuf and Karim” which had come out in the outlet “La Nación”, but later disappeared, Tata says, during the call, Yussuf tells Karim about his encounter with Bergoglio’s Vatican Chief of Intelligence in Argentina. “Tata” made a parenthesis to emphasize that Bergoglio indeed had a Vatican chief of Intelligence there in Argentina and that he knew him personally, but did not mention the name.

Tata continues recounting that on the phone call, “Bergoglio’s Vatican Chief of Intelligence told Yussuf that he [the Chief] was a mason and so was Bergoglio.” Tata says, “This was on ‘La Nación’. You could have listened to it yourselves. I listened to it because I had to give it credit.

Canonical Implications

The penalty for becoming a member of the Masonic Lodge is excommunication. That this was the case, even after Vatican II was made clear in a letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, dated Feb. 17, 1981 and signed by Cardinal Franjo Seper (See text here). Cardinal Seper in that letter declared:

On 19 July 1974 this Congregation wrote to some Episcopal Conferences a private letter concerning the interpretation of can 2335 of the Code of Canon Law which forbids Catholics, under the penalty of excommunication, to enroll in Masonic or other similar associations.

Since the said letter has become public and has given rise to erroneous and tendentious interpretations, this Congregation, without prejudice to the eventual norms of the new Code, issues the following confirmation and clarification:

1) the present canonical discipline remains in full force and has not been modified in any way;

2) consequently, neither the excommunication nor the other penalties envisaged have been abrogated;

Two years later, on Nov. 26, 1983, following the promulgation by Pope John Paul II of the new Code of Canon Law, a public doubt arose regarding whether that penalty had been removed or not in the new Code. Cardinal Ratzinger, now head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith responded with an extraordinary intervention, confirmed in forma specifica by Pope John Paul II. The key passage of which reads:

Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enrol in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.

It is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give a judgment on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a derogation from what has been decided above, and this in line with the Declaration of this Sacred Congregation issued on 17 February 1981 (cf. AAS 73 1981 pp. 240-241; English language edition of L’Osservatore Romano, 9 March 1981).

In other words, the excommunication leveled in Canon 2335 against all Catholics for enrolling in a Masonic Lodge remains in force. This is in accord with the principle of Canon 6 and Canon 20. And thus, the excommunication of Canon 2335 in the old Code is to be understood, in accord with this declaration made by the CDF, to be subsumed into Canon 1364, which punishes by excommunication latae sententiae the crimes of Heresy, Schism and Apostasy, since clearly affiliation with the Masonic Sect is equipollent to all three under the diverse aspects of its creed, its purpose, and its manner of working.

THE CONSEQUENCES ARE SERIOUS: An excommunicated person cannot validly receive any dignity, office or munus in the Church in virtue of Canon 1331 §2 n. 4, of the new Code of Canon Law. That means, that it is canonically impossible that Bergoglio have assumed any ecclesiastical office after his enrollment.

My Comments

Since Cardinal Ratzinger no doubt had knowledge that Bergoglio was a Freemason, as both head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and as Pope, it follows that as pope, if it was demanded of him that he resign the Papacy, so that Bergoglio might succeed him, he would have had the most grave obligation to dissimulate, so that while appearing to renounce, he would deprive Bergoglio of the Petrine Munus, by renouncing something else, as I surmised in my previous article, How Benedict has defeated “Francis”. And especially in my article, Benedict’s End Game is to Save the Church from Freemasonry.

I think, now, you can see why no supporter of Bergoglio cares the lest thing for Canon Law. Cardinals included. How many others in the Vatican are members of the Lodge?

Will Chris Ferrara and Steve Skojec and others, like Cardinal Burke, now stop saying that Bergoglio is definitely the pope? Or are they Freemasons too? — I ask this question because the public has a right to know the answers.

POSTSCRIPT on Evidence and Actionability

There are 3 kinds of evidence, about matters as grave as someone being a Freemason. There is non actionable and actionable. Of the first kind, the non actionable, is information which is hearsay, that is third hand, where there no certainty if the chain of transmission has not invented, corrupted or faithfully related what happened or was said. No legal system in the world accepts such uncertain third party evidence. Of the second kind, actionable, there are two kinds: morally actionable and legally actionable. Morally actionable evidence is the kind upon which you are obliged to act, but cannot bring a legal charge due to lack of records. Legally actionable is of the kind upon which you can bring a legal accusation. This includes third hand testimony given in affidavits or recordings or before credible witnesses. Even in the Church there is law. And, of the kind of evidence Pope Benedict XVI had as of Feb. 2013, I surmise it was only the morally actionable kind, because I have no legally actionable evidence that it was anything else.

However, with this intercepted phone call, the Entire Church has legally actionable evidence, because the phone call was heard by the entire Argentine people on live TV, and we have the testimony of an Argentine Ambassador that that phone call was broadcast. Just find 2 or 3 others persons who heard it, and have they swear an affidavit. Then the Cardinals who are NOT Freemasons, and or any group of Bishops, call a Council and declare the man outside of the Church and deposed from all offices.