Tag Archives: pedophilia

Vatican II opened the doors to an orgy of pedophilia

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Bergoglio is the flowering of Vatican II in its authentic spirit, because as a pedophile protector, inasmuch as he concealed the names of the perps in Buenas Aires, and inasmuch as he has surrounded himself at the Vatican and in his personal residence at Santa Marta with Cardinals and Bishops who were known pedophile protectors if not public advocates of the worse moral and sexual perversions, he reflects the same spirit which Vatican II opened to the doors to.

The Los Angeles Times, in thei reprint of an unsigned AP report, entitled, Clergy sex-abuse claims triple, U.S. Catholic Bishops report, they recount how the 2018-2019 survey by the U.S. Bishops Conference show a surge of new claims, 4434 more in all, “triple the number seen the previous year”. And lest anyone attempt to claim that this has nothing to do with Vatican II, the Los Angeles Times points out that the majority of victims are from the age of the Aggiornamento, not that of Pius XII.

The total world wide victims of pedophilia are uncountable. This recent report by the USCCB increases the total number of victims in the U.S.A. alone by 25% (which I calculate from this source which says until 2018, nearly 20 thousand victims were identified). The Catholic clergy in the USA are no more than 10% of the total in the world, so one can extrapolate the magnitude of the problem, if one wants.

This is the deep reason why both Bergoglio and Vatican II must be rejected as fake. This is the reason reason they wanted Pope Benedict XVI out. He wanted to bring back the pre-Vatican II religion and clean the clergy of pedophiles. And the revolutionaries of Vatican II who made their career on pushing the Council do not want that, at any cost.

I ask pardon for the title of this article, which might seem graphic, but I chose it to emphasize how important it is that we admit the true moral and spiritual realities behind recent Church history. For unless we name the demon, we cannot exorcise it.

+ + +

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

 

Why does Burke insist that Bergoglio is the pope?

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Cardinal Burke has for years enjoyed great fame and prestige among Catholics who love the Traditional Latin Mass and want the faith defended. But there has been growing concerns that Cardinal Burke, besides lamenting the problems, won’t actually do anything to defend the Church. He recently outraged hundreds of thousands of Catholics last fall by calling all those Catholics who doubt that Bergoglio is the pope “extremists”.

So, I think Catholics need to ask themselves, why does Burke insist so much that Bergoglio is the pope. Perhaps we will never know, but here are some facts which might help you discern why.

Cardinal Burke’s pastoral record includes not a few things which many of the Catholics who admire him would also consider extreme and not-Catholic.  Since a number of Catholic organizations have entered into an alliance to never tell the faithful about such things, FromRome.Info considers itself obliged to set the record straight. This is especially necessary since there are so many voices which have called for Burke to be the next pope.

“Sister Julie” Green

I will simply quote from published articles. Here is one by Malcom Gay of the Riverfront Times, writing on August 25, 2004, in an article entitled, Bishop takes Queen:

At times his theological allegiance with these orders placed Bishop Burke in some compromising positions. Most striking, perhaps, was the case of Sister Julie Green, a member of the Franciscan Servants of Jesus:

“Julie Green is living a lie!” writes Mary Therese Helmueller in an October 25, 2002, letter to Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo, Papal Nuncio to the United States. “[She] is a transsexual, a biological male. He is really Joel Green, who had a sex operation to make him physically appear as a woman…. I fear that The Church in America will suffer another ‘sex scandal’ if Julie Green continues to be recognized as a Catholic Religious Sister, and if Bishop Raymond L. Burke receives his final vows, as a religious sister, on November 23rd, 2002.”

Montalvo forwarded the letter to Burke, who on November 20, 2002, replied to Helmueller. “With regard to Sister Julie Green, F.S.J., the recognition of the association of the faithful which she and Sister Anne LeBlanc founded was granted only after consultation with the Holy See,” he writes. “These are matters which are confidential and do not admit of any further comment…. I can assure you that Sister Julie Green in no way espouses a sex change operation as right or good. In fact, she holds it to be seriously disordered. Therefore, I caution you very much about the rash judgments which you made in your letter to the Apostolic Nuncio.”

Adds Burke: “I express my surprise that, when you had questions about Sister Julie Green, you did not, in accord with the teaching of our Lord, address the matter to me directly.”

Notice how Burke, not only calls a man, a “Sister”, but gives him permission to live with a woman in a community of woman’s religious, which ostensibly takes the vow of chastity. He even scolds the laywoman who denounced the scandal to the Apostolic Nuncio! I will not even mention the grave offense to the Divine Majesty to allow such a man to take vows as a woman religious, vows which by the very fact that he is a man will be asking God to stand as a witness to a lie.

Saint Stanislaus Parish, St. Louis, MO, USA

Four years later, Tim O’Neil, writing for the St. Louis Dispatch, in an article entitled, St. Stan Pastor Refuses to Meet with Burke, says:

The public dispute with St. Stanislaus began in 2004, when Burke instructed the parish to rearrange its assets and the powers of its lay board to conform with the systems used by all other Catholic parishes within the archdiocese. St. Stanislaus had maintained internal controls that dated to its founding by Polish immigrants in the 19th century.

St. Stanislaus’ lay leaders refused. After Burke removed priests from St. Stanislaus, Bozek came to the parish from his assignment in Springfield, Mo. Burke quickly declared him excommunicated. Soon afterward, he declared the parish board members excommunicated and stripped the parish of its standing as a Roman Catholic Church.

In other words, an entire parish of Polish ethnicity, who had built and managed at their own expense, their Parish, for more than a century, were excommunicated by Burke for refusing to give him control of the assets of the private institution!

That is the thanks you get for being faithful and paying your own way! — And as a matter of fact, 10s of thousands of Churches throughout Europe were built and maintained in the same way. This is part of Catholic tradition. It is also a solemn right of the faithful.

And the diocesan priest who was so disgusted at Burke’s attempted thievery and braved the dispute by serving the faithful of the parish, was also excommunicated!

The issue here is of the Seventh Commandment: Thou shalt not steal. If the Cardinal excommunicated them solely for their failure to uphold the Catholic Faith, why did he not and does he not now excommunicate prelates for their failure? When there is a question of money, Burke acts. There is no other way to look at this. The Catholic Bishops Conference has funded the same kind of organizations for 60 years as this parish is reported to have done, but Burke never separated himself from the Conference or used his episcopal authority to condemn them. I agree that heretics should be penalized, and I agree that private chapels should be Catholic if they want to be places of worship approved by the Church. But there is absolutely no right in civil or ecclesiastical law whereby the Cardinal can tell a private chapel what to do with its funds and assets.

So many Bishops have priests who support, promote and fund non-Catholic agendas, but because they keep the money flowing to the Chancery, they are never condemned. Touch the purse however and boom!

What the parish became after their excommunication has nothing to do with the matter, other than raising questions if Burke’s excommunication helped their souls or harmed them by the scandal it gave to them and the wider community.  Also, what about the faithful Catholics who did attend the parish and whose ancestors built it? Now they have neither the Sacraments nor their parish. And I would guess there are a lot more of them than the members of the board of directors of the parish.

This was a pastoral tragedy, and the responsibility for that is always with the shepherd.

And as a Franciscan, I would remind everyone, that Christian Faith is about saving souls, not saving money.

Burke’s Record on Pedophilia

I quote from Malcom Gay, the Riverfront Times, August 24, 2004:

Burke, it seemed, had tended his garden nicely in La Crosse and was well poised to minister to the fallout of the scandal in the Archdiocese of St. Louis. Whereas his predecessor, Justin Rigali, had drawn fire for ignoring victims of abuse, the incoming archbishop was tidily insulated from the problem. So much so, in fact, that when St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Ron Harris asked him to name the most pressing issue facing the Catholic Church here, Burke replied, “How to organize our parishes and our Catholic schools.”

But some members of Raymond Burke’s former flock paint a far different portrait of the erstwhile bishop of La Crosse. If cases of clergy sex abuse were few and far between, they say, it was because Burke was a master at keeping a lid on them. Several victims who claim they were abused by priests in La Crosse tell Riverfront Times they were stonewalled by Burke, who declined to report their allegations to local authorities. And while some of his fellow church officials nationwide were reaching hefty settlements with victims, Raymond Burke was unyielding in his refusal to negotiate with victims’ rights groups. He declined to make public the names of priests who were known to have been abusive, and he denied requests to set up a victims’ fund. Most strikingly, Riverfront Times has learned, while bishop in La Crosse Burke allowed at least three priests to remain clerics in good standing long after allegations of their sexual misconduct had been proven — to the church, to the courts and, finally, to Burke himself.

His critics say Burke’s ability to conceal the diocese’s dirty laundry was abetted by Wisconsin’s unique civil code, which makes it virtually impossible for someone to sue the church for the actions of an individual priest.

“He stands with his fellow bishops in Wisconsin as having had the ability to just rebuke and ignore our victims,” says Jeff Anderson, an attorney in St. Paul, Minnesota, who specializes in clergy abuse cases. “He has a long history of making pastoral statements that they care, that they want to heal, that they want to help. They are very long on words, but very short on actions.”

“We don’t exist, for him,” seconds Peter Isely, a Wisconsin leader of the national Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP). “Loyalty to the church is of the highest order for him, and his response to victims’ claims has been lethargic and slow and reluctant and bureaucratic and impersonal.”

Then again, if success is measured in money saved and avoidance of scandal, Raymond Burke possesses a sterling record. At a time when dioceses are reaching million-dollar settlements with individual victims and filing for bankruptcy, Burke reported in January 2004 that between 1950 and 2002 the Diocese of La Crosse paid out a grand total of $15,807.38 to victims seeking counseling for clergy sexual abuse.

It was in May of 1971 that B.V. first met the man she says sexually abused her. She was nine years old, and her family had traveled 45 minutes to the small town of Hewitt, Wisconsin, to attend a relative’s wedding. While at the wedding, her parents befriended Father Raymond Bornbach, pastor of St. Michael’s Parish. (At their request, victims in this article are not identified by name.) “After that wedding he called my mom and asked to spend some special time with my sister and I,” B.V. writes in a handwritten statement delivered to diocesan officials on September 22, 2003.

Her mother agreed, and soon Bornbach was traveling far outside his parish to pick up the girls and take them for drives along central Wisconsin’s rural two-lane roads.

B.V. alleges that during the drives Bornbach would pull over at outdoor rest stops and ask her eight-year-old sister to get out of the car. “She would sit nearby on a rock, while in the car he would have me sit next to him[;] he would rub his hands up and down my thighs,” B.V. writes. “He would always kiss me on the lips and he smelled of cigar breath. He would stick his tongue in my mouth.”

According to the statement, a copy of which B.V. supplied to Riverfront Times, the abuse continued for more than a year, becoming progressively more intense. Eventually, B.V. alleges, Bornbach brought her to his house, took her upstairs to his bedroom and offered her a rosary before molesting her. “[He] asked to see the scar on my left arm and side where I had been burned as a child,” she writes. “He removed my dress and rub [sic] my chest and laid me on the bed, he then laid on top of me and started to hump up and down and rub his body on mine.”

Bornbach didn’t go any further, B.V. states. He was interrupted by his housekeeper. When the bedroom door opened, she writes, “he jumped up and told her we would be right down.”

Afterward, B.V. recalls in her statement, Bornbach took her to a local hardware store and bought her a bike. “[It was] my 1st ever bike,” she writes. “It was purple.”

The statement was penned nine months after B.V. came forward with her allegations in a January 6, 2003, letter to then-Bishop Burke. “They told Bornbach to get an attorney and not to talk to anyone,” B.V. says during an interview in her central Wisconsin home. “So when I called, I asked if I was supposed to get an attorney, too. They proceeded to tell me that if I got an attorney, all communication with them would cease.”

It was the beginning of what became for her a painful eighteen-month saga. “I was really naive in thinking that once they received this letter they would right away do something with this guy,” B.V. says today. “Bishop Burke protects his own.”

And,

Initially B.V. wanted four things from the diocese: She wanted Bornbach stripped of his collar. She wanted his name released to the public. She wanted to meet her alleged abuser face to face and she wanted to meet with Raymond Burke.

“From day one I asked to speak with the bishop. Almost every time I talked to these people I asked how come I wasn’t talking to the bishop,” B.V. says. “How come something wasn’t being done?” Instead of meeting with B.V., the bishop appointed a liaison to meet with the alleged victim. When B.V. asked if her therapist could attend the liaison’s initial fact-finding interview, Burke agreed, though it went against a policy on child sexual abuse he’d set out in 2002. He stipulated two conditions, however, in a letter dated May 6, 2003. “The interview will be confidential. Therefore, no recordings or notes may be made or taken,” he writes. The second stipulation: “You agree that the interview is part of an internal Church process which may not be disclosed, compelled to be disclosed, or used as evidence in or as a basis for any non-Church action.”

B.V. balked. She wasn’t ready to tell her story to a stranger, and she canceled the meeting. “You have to be ready,” she says. “Some days you don’t want to talk about it, other days you do.”

But the diocese wasn’t waiting around. Unbeknownst to B.V., Burke had passed the matter off to the Diocese of La Crosse Child Sexual Abuse Review Board, a six-member group of church and lay officials — including the diocesan attorney — whose duty it is to review allegations of clergy sexual abuse. So B.V. was surprised to receive a letter from the board on August 28, 2003, warning, “If we do not hear from you by Monday, September 15, 2003, we will assume you do not wish pursue to [sic] the matter and the case will be closed.”

“I called them immediately,” she says. “[I] told them, ‘You can close the case, but it will never be closed for me.'” At age 89, Father Raymond Bornbach now lives in a humble single-story home in Marshfield, Wisconsin. Diabetes and a recent operation to replace his aortic valve have restricted his movements. Nonetheless, he continues to put on his Roman collar and visit patients at nearby St. Joseph’s Hospital. During a recent interview, he confirmed that he still draws a pension from the church. He also is still listed in the Official Catholic Directory as a retired priest in good standing. He denies ever engaging in any sexual misconduct and describes his relationship with B.V. as “best friends.”

(When asked by the sexual review board about the abortive assault at the priest’s home, Bornbach’s housekeeper, with whom he still lives, also denied the incident occurred.) It took years of therapy before B.V. finally mustered the strength to bring her allegations to the bishop of La Crosse. What she did not know, however, was that she was not the first to contact Burke regarding Raymond Bornbach.

In a letter dated March 26, 2001, another alleged victim of clergy abuse contacted by Riverfront Times wrote to Burke, stating: “I know I have talked to you about Fr. Raymond Bornbach before, and I thought when you retired him it would take care of the problem of his dirty little hands and his filthy mouth… But it has not since he still goes to the St. Joseph [sic] Hospital in Marshfield, and visits sick people,” the letter reads. “He still goes on the psych unit and tells women there that ‘Jesus loves them and he does too.’ When he was visiting [illegible] there he not only told her that but he was also touching her breasts and putting his tongue in her mouth… I know what he did to her because she told me right after it happened.”

(The letter writer, who supplied Riverfront Times with a copy of the correspondence, blacked out the name of the alleged victim at St. Joseph’s.) The letter writer goes on to detail other instances of alleged abuse by Bornbach, before concluding: “Bornbach even wearing the collar is such a disgrace to all good priests. I’m surprised the other priests don’t strip Bornbach of his collar.”

As with all allegations of clergy abuse, Burke declines to discuss specifics. “Whenever an accusation is brought, no matter what the status of the priest was, it was thoroughly investigated,” he says. “The priest was confronted, and it was thoroughly investigated: That’s my policy.”

The diocese may well have investigated Bornbach, but any such records are strictly shielded from public view. Nonetheless, at least one other alleged victim cited in the letter says she was never contacted by investigators in relation to Raymond Bornbach.

As the months dragged on, B.V. became increasingly frustrated with Burke’s inaction. “It was pointless to talk to the diocese,” she says. “I called one of [the members of the Child Sexual Abuse Review Board] and said: ‘I want a meeting.'” It was not until B.V. contacted the review board that she was finally afforded an interview with Bishop Burke, on January 10 — a full year after she’d stepped forward. Her husband went with her.

B.V. says that during the meeting Burke promised he’d make a decision about the Bornbach matter by the time he left for St. Louis. “We said, ‘You leave on January 24th, that’s all over the newspapers. We know when you leave. Are you going to be able to make a decision in four days?’ He said, ‘Yes, I will definitely call you and let you know what we’ve decided,'” B.V. recalls. “Of course, January 24th came and went with no word from Burke.”

Last week B.V. received a letter from the diocese informing her that the Child Sexual Abuse Review Board had substantiated her claim and that appropriate action would be taken.

“We recommended that action be taken against Father Bornbach,” says one board member, who spoke on condition that his name not appear in print. “[Although] at his age we were told laicization would probably not take place, but it would be recommended that he no longer act or appear with a Roman collar as a Roman Catholic priest.”

B.V. credits the board for investigating her claim and believes that had she not contacted its members, nothing would have happened. “This man is a rock,” she says of Burke. “He is not moving. He knows his laws, and he knows he’s protected. The law protects the church. They don’t have to do anything about these people. Nothing. And this bishop knows that.”

Perhaps you can understand now, why Cardinal Burke thinks that Catholics who doubt Bergoglio, the undisputed Grand Don of the Lavender Maria, is the pope, even after the ritual of satanic worship in the Vatican Gardens, are extremists.

And perhaps you are now better informed about whom you should hope and hope not to be the next pope.

POSTSCRIPT of April 12

Following the publication of the article above, its author was vilified and calumniated by those who claim to be the friends of the Cardinal. But none of them, as of Easter Sunday, has attempted in the least a refutation of the reports cited.

The crimes and sins of child rape, transgenderism, mutilation, sacrilege and theft are inexcusable. If your “devotion” to Cardinal Burke tempts you to excuse such things, I think you need to read the entry in the dictionary called, “idolatry”. A lot of idolaters hate me for what I write, and I thank God for it. But here I simply reported the news and commented on it. I did not perpetrate anything in those reports. Those perps are the real ones that should be vilified. If you cannot see that, I think you need to re-read the Gospels. If your first reaction is to attack the reporters and not commiserate with the victims, then I think you are very sick spiritually and are unwittingly aiding and abetting a culture of the worst kind of clericalism in the Church.

The mature and objective way to respond to the above article is to do your research. The blogger who objects to the article above came commenting in the comboxes with insults not proofs of anything, even though he claims to be an expert on ONE of the charges mentioned above. That simply does not make sense. He has to realize that he is by those actions implicitly condoning the other TWO accusations. I think he should be transparent about any conflicts of interest he may have with any of the actors cited above. And I think he needs to publicly affirm whether he thinks child rape, transgenderism, sacrilege of putting a man in a woman’s habit and letting him take vows as a female religious, etc. etc. are sins. Indeed, the supporters of Burke, like him, repeatedly make some very bizarre comments about this man who mutilated himself and donned a woman’s habit, claiming that the Cardinal was trying to help him with his same sex attractions! But they never deny he was born a man nor that he mutilated himself, nor that Burke publicly accepted his vows aas a female religious or calls him a woman! So the onus is on him now. His manner of reacting to this article is very telling. And still he has refuted nothing in it.

The article above was published 3 days ago. I would think that after 15 years, there would be at least 1 article refuting each false charge, if any were false. Do a google search if you like, and if you find any such articles by reporters, cite their links below in a comment. I have more than graciously allowed a link to the blogger who objects to the above, though its sole purpose was to insult me and attack my public credibility and reputation. An insult and attack which was not preceded by any attempt to communicate with me, publicly or privately.

Finally, the claim by this blogger that these charges have “long ago been refuted” is simply not credible. I am not the first to recite these reports. See here about the Male nun:

From January 2003:

https://akacatholic.com/the-correction-may-never-come-but-judgment-will/  See the comment section.

From 2004:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1200411/posts

From 2005:

http://carrietomko.blogspot.com/2005/02/e-mail-from-lee-penn-bishop-burke-few.html

From 2013

https://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/129565-trandgender-navy-seal/page/3/?tab=comments#comment-2592879

From 2015

http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2015/10/good-news-bruce-jenner-cardinal-burke.html

From 2017

https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B988_Nun.html

Long ago refuted? Hmm.

+ + +

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

Devils, Murders & Lavender Mafia

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Our Lord has been Crucified. He was nailed to the Cross at the Noon hour. This is our meditation for today. His murder was truly a satanic act, conducted by the wicked high priests of His day. But He triumphed over all of them, because you cannot kill God, for the weakness of God in submitting to Crucifixion is stronger than all the wickedness of men.

Satan, being defeated upon Calvary, however, goes about the world trying to replicate that crime. He does this most particularly by inciting men to the worst vices and inspiring them to become priests and inflict horrible crimes upon the innocent.

One such crime is the rape of boys by priests. Worse, still, is when murder follows.

Such individuals are psychopathic. And in my opinion they should receive capital punishment for all three crimes: murder, rape and sacrilege of their sacred office as priests.

These boys suffer in a sense the full hatred of Satan upon Christ Jesus at Calvary. But, alas, the consequences of their murders are not salvific. The corrupt network of clergy who protect, promote, ordain and consecrate such perps is called the Lavender Mafia. And FromRome.Info is committed to exposing their work in the Church, for the sake of protecting all the Faithful, boys included.

Opus Angelorum

One particularly ugly case is that of the Canons Regular of Santa Cruz and the Opus Angelorum the movement which founded them.

This Ordo began in Austria just after the war. It was based on the private revelations which a laywoman, Gabriele Bitterlich, claimed to receive, and which explained never before known doctrines about Angels and Demons and their spiritual warfare.

One of these doctrines is that you can cure sodomy by a special sort of incantation to particular Demons. But one of the great difficulties that perverts have is admitting their own fault and responsibility. So, I think you can see, then, how such a occult practice might be very attractive to those who want to be cured but not really be cured.

After 1982, the Congregation of the Holy Office, now led by Cardinal Ratzinger, forbade the use of these exorcisms, as Wikipedia relates in its article on the Opus Angelorum:

The exorcism using Mrs Bitterlich’s demon names in violation of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s 1982 prohibition of use of “the ‘names’ derived from the alleged private revelation attributed to Mrs Gabriele Bitterlich” may have been one of the reasons for enacting the Congregation’s more detailed 1992 rules against the use in the movement’s “ministry and apostolate” of “the theories originating from the alleged revelations of Mrs Gabriele Bitterlich concerning the world of the angels and their personal names, groupings and functions”, and its ruling, “Exorcisms may be carried out only in line with the Church’s norms and discipline on the matter, and with the use of formulas approved by the Church.

In fact, Austria, where the Opus Angelorum began is notorious for the Lavender Mafia among the clergy.

Canons Regular of the Holy Cross

This new movement, Opus Angelorum, succeeded quickly in gaining the highest approbation of the Church. They were allowed to revive a defunct order in Portugal and re-establish it. It is called the Canons Regular of the Holy Cross, or of Santa Cruz.

The Bishop who assisted the new and improved Sr. Lucia of Fatima, make her moves on the stage of world opinion, after 1960, was a member.

So is Bishop Athanasius Schneider.

However, the Order has two very black spots. One regards Father Franciscan Cunha. Here I quote from Wikipedia in Portuguese, using a Google translation. Everything which follows is Wikipedia, until I say otherwise:

+ + +

Frederico Cunha, from his full name Frederico Marques Cunha (born April 12, 1950 in Natal, Brazil), habitually referred to in the media as “Padre Frederico” is a Catholic priest convicted in Portugal for the murder and sexual abuse of children and adolescents. He escaped justice in 1998. [ 1 ]

Arrival in Madeira

Manuel Catarino says that Frederico Cunha, before arriving in Madeira in 1983, lived in Italy, inserted in the religious order of the Canons Regular of Santa Cruz (the Crosiers), the order that directs the movement of the Work of the Angels, called in Latin Opus Angelorum, “an ultraconservative congregation, of esoteric practices not always applauded by the Curia of Rome”. [ 2 ] (The Holy See declares that “the Work of the Holy Angels, which, as it stands today, is a public association of the Church in accordance with traditional doctrine and the directives of the Supreme Authority; it spreads devotion among the faithful to the Holy Angels, urges prayer for priests, promotes love for Jesus Christ in His passion and union with it “.) [ 3 ] Also the Austrian protest newspaper [ 4 ] Kirche In states that he was then a member of the Work of Angels. [ 5 ] According to statements by the priest himself and the diocese of Funchal, he is a priest of that diocese, not of a religious order. [ 6 ]

Ponta de São Lourenço, Madeira

D. Teodoro de Faria , the bishop of Funchal, from Madeira, who had met Frederico Cunha in Rome, made him his private secretary. Catarino says that Father Frederico’s bizarre behavior attracted attention. He had a special taste for skulls, which he wore on his coat or hanging from his belt. From a certain point, D. Teodoro de Faria waived the services of the secretary. Father Frederico started to move from parish to parish. The island’s faithful complained. And the bishop changed his parish. Where he spent the longest time, as a shepherd, was in São Jorge, in the north of the island, from 1987 Here he was as a shepherd from 1987 to 1990. He then met Miguel Noite, the son of a poor family, who became his lover. [ 2 ]

Other sources, when speaking of more recent similar events in Madeira, describe Frederico Cunha with less dismal details. [ 7 ] [ 8 ]

Crime, imprisonment and prosecution

According to the prosecution of the Public Prosecutor, Frederico Cunha, on May 1, 1992, met Luís Miguel, a 15-year-old boy, on foot on the Caniçal road and offered him a ride in his black Volkswagen. His corpse was found at the bottom of the Caniçal cliff, at Ponta de São Lourenço, on the eastern end of Madeira, with signs of aggression. The crime, according to the prosecution, took place at the viewpoint, without witnesses. The priest never denied his presence at Caniçal: he was there, but in the company of Miguel Noite – who claimed to have been there with his lover. Six witnesses said they saw the priest with a blond boy in the car. [ 2 ]

The victim’s corpse, Luís Miguel Escórcio Correia, was found on the morning of May 2, 1992, on the beach below the Caniçal cliffs, where Opus Angelorum maintained its subsidiary Casa do Caniçal. The police initially thought it was an accident. But when the body was autopsied, coroner Emanuel Pita discovered that several injuries, including a fatal head injury, could not have resulted from his falling off the cliff. Based on the results of the autopsy, a criminal investigation was launched. [ 2 ] [ 9 ]

An anonymous witness reported to the police by phone that he had seen Cunha’s car at the scene of the crime. [ 10 ] During a search of Cunha’s home, the police found a series of pornographic photos of children and adolescents taken by the priest to his victims. On May 25, 1992, Frederico Cunha was arrested and placed in preventive detention in the city of Funchal. [ 11 ]

Bishop Teodoro de Faria protested the imprisonment of F.Cunha and described him as “innocent as Jesus Christ” also he was unjustly attacked by the Jews. [ 12 ] Many Catholics were “surprised, shocked and ashamed” by this comparison. [ 11 ] Father Frederico himself, in Jornal da Madeira, compared himself to Jesus Christ, saying that like the son of God, he was “a victim of injustice and absurdity” . Highlighted figures of the Church were affirmative witnesses. The President of the Regional Government of Madeira, Alberto João Jardim , accused “a certain mainland media” of using the case “to denigrate Madeira’s image”. [ 11 ] In 2010, in an interview with the newspaper Público , attorney João Freitas, himself a practicing Catholic, publicly declared that he had been pressured in the context of criminal proceedings, several times, to force the acquittal of the accused. J. Freitas said that the pressure was not exerted solely by the church; it also came from other quarters. [ 13 ] The diocese of Funchal never opened any canonical process to Father F.Cunha, not even after the Court condemned him, that is, he never promoted the necessary procedures for him to be prevented from exercising. [ 14 ]

The trial took place on March 10, 1993, a year after the crime. Frederico Cunha was sentenced to 13 years for the murder of Luís Miguel, with subsequent penalty of expulsion from Portugal. Cunha was also ordered to pay the murder victim’s family members the sum of 1,600,000 escudos as compensation, which was never paid. The godson, Miguel Noite, was jailed for 15 months, with suspended sentence, for cover-up and false declarations. [ 2 ] During the trial, four adult witnesses told the court how they had been sexually abused by the priest. [ 8 ] . Frederico came to serve time in Vale de Judeus, Alcoentre. [ 12 ] [ 2 ] [ 14 ]

He had not yet served half of the sentence, in Vale de Judeus, the priest was authorized by the judge for the execution of sentences, Margarida Vieira de Almeida, to spend eight days with his mother, in Lisbon: both, on April 10, 1998, they fled by car to Madrid, and took the first plane to Copacabana, in Brazil, where they still reside. [ 2 ] [ 1 ] The priest used a duplicate passport, provided by the Brazilian Embassy itself, which prompted a request for explanations from the Portuguese Government. [ 15 ]

Life in Brazil

Currently, Father Frederico lives with his mother in a building between Copacabana and Ipanema, in one of the most luxurious places in the city of Rio de Janeiro. When in 2015 the Portuguese newspaper Sol interviewed him, he said that he continues to celebrate masses, although not in conventional places: “It is in a pastoral that I say mass” . He dedicates himself to abstract photography. He continues to affirm his innocence and considers that his condemnation in Portugal was typical of a Nazi regime. [ 14 ]

The execution of the international arrest warrant and the rest of the sentence expired on April 8, 2018. [ 16 ]

+ + +

Thus Wikipedia in Portuguese.  Bishop Schneider joined the Canons Regular in 1982, was ordained a priest in Brazil in 1990, earned a doctorate in Patristics in 1998 from the Augustinianum, here at Rome, and presumably studied here in person from 1996-1998. But his published biography is a blank from 1990 to 1996.

Bishop Schneider began teaching Patristics in Kazakhstan in 1999 and just 7 years later was named an Auxiliary Bishop and consecrated by Cardinal Sodano. A truly remarkable achievement for a seminary professor. His co-consecrator was a Sodano man, so this is also very remarkable. Sodano is now known to be the protector of pedophiles and sodomites from Argentina to Mexico. Maciel, founder of the Legionaries is the most notorious. Many of the most unsuitable men appointed by John Paul II as Bishops were consecrated by Sodano, whom, rumors hold received financial favors for his support.

Bishop Schneider became an Auxiliary Bishop in the diocese of Archbishop Lenga. The day Lenga was forced out, just 5 years later, Schneider was transferred to the Diocese of Astana.  Lenga’s replacement — also consecrated by Sodano — is no longer a bishop. After a few years he was removed and reduced to the state of a layman for some grave crime. Bishops Schneider had the knowledge and wherewithal to get moved out before the problem arrived, and with Sodano’s blessing.

In the same year Bishop Schneider was ordained a priest in the Opus Angelorum’s Canons Regular, another very disturbing event occurred, as Wikipedia relates in the Opus’s article. “Movement” here refers to the Opus.

In 1990, journalist Heinz Gstrein, who is also an Orthodox theologian,[21] wrote that the superior of a religious community in the Indian state of Kerala, who was sexually abusing members of his community, turned to the movement for advice and aid. They undertook not to make his lose his position or suffer any other loss and performed an exorcism on him to combat “the demons of homosexuality Dragon, Varina und Selithareth” (names in Mrs Bitterlich’s writings about angels and demons).[22] Afterwards he committed a sexual murder. Homosexual acts were illegal in India until 2018 (see Homosexuality in India) and Gstrein points out that concealing a design to commit an offence is punishable under Indian law.[23][24]

What remains most curious, is how the Canons Regular came to have a house in Madeira, on the cliff above where the battered and dead body of Father Francisco Cunha’s victim was found. Father Francisco some how hit it off with the new Bishop of Madeira in 1983, in the first year of the Bishop’s episcopacy, during a brief visit at Rome. This Bishop also had the curious circumstance of being consecrated just 6 days after his nomination, by the Grand Master of the Order of the Holy Sepulcher, who had been Nuncio in Portugal until the Bishop was about 17 years of age.

I do know, from the investigations I conducted for various authorities, here in Italy, that pedophile priests share boys by dropping them off at Sanctuaries and Monasteries as prospective vocations.. They visit for a day or two and are then taken to other monasteries or rectories. In the mean time at these places or nearby them, they are solicited for sex or forcibly raped. The priests and laymen, often judges, lawyers and doctors, who are involved worked together to promote one another, as has been documented elsewhere in such cases.

I mention al these facts, because, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, according to Dr. Henry Sire, in book, The Dictator Pope, is a known black mailer.  Bishop Schneider gave a very noble profession of faith against the errors of Bergoglio, until, after the signing by Bergoglio of the document saying all religions are equally willed by God, Schneider went to meet Bergoglio in person, to reproach him about it, and in the matter of a hour flipped. Ever since then, Schneider insists that Bergoglio is not a heretic and even if he was there is no way to remove him. And that all who would think to do so are “spiritually myopic”!

A myopic defect is a defect of the eyes which causes them only to see things near by and not long afar off. If you are protecting your career, being myopic is a problem.

What does Bishop Schneider know about these demonic incantations to cure sodomy and exculpate pedophiles? Did he personally know Father Francisco? Does he know of other affairs in the Opus Angelorum or Canons Regular of the Holy Cross which Bergoglio could have used to black mail him? Was he ever a visitor at the Canons Regular of the Santa Croce house in Madeira, Portugal, on the cliff above where the murdered boy was found?

I write these things, not to damage the reputation of anyone, but to warn the faithful as to why Bishop Schneider may no longer be a reliable witness to the Gospel.

+ + +

 

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

 

Refusing the Sacraments during an epidemic is nothing compared to…

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Here at FromRome.Info I do not cover the pedophile crisis in particular, because its better covered elsewhere and because I want FromRome.Info to be a place where you do not have to look into sewers. That is not because I do not think it is a major problem, nay, I think pedophile priests should receive capital punishment for their crimes.

But to all this consternation and shock among the Catholic Faithful that Bishop after Bishop, Diocese after Diocese is denying communion on the tongue or shutting Churches and ending public celebrations of the sacraments, I ask you to remember what is going on on the Church.

Refusing the Sacraments during an epidemic is nothing compared to pedophilia. If you want to see how endemic the moral collapse of the entire hierarchy is, just read this article by ProPublica entitled, Dozens of Catholic Priests Credibly Accused of Abuse Found Working Abroad, Some with the Church’s Blessing.

The article has one error, that I can see: its not with the Church’s Blessing, its with the blessing of the Lavender Mafia.

This kind of abyss of conscience is a sign of their apostasy and atheism and pure Modernism. They are fakers, tricksters and swindlers. And that is why they love Bergoglio. And that is why all frauds in media, even Catholic Media, like Trad inc., love Bergoglio. They are tricksters and deeply admire him for what he is able to get away with on a daily basis.

Consider what kind of perverse mentality is involved in allowing these monsters to go overseas and continue to rape children:

  • Denial of the objective immorality of pedophilia
  • Denial of the objective duty of the priesthood to honestly serve God
  • Denial of the objective natural duty to keep promises
  • Denial of the objective natural sense to protect children
  • Denial of the objective natural sense that human sexuality is for procreation
  • Denial of the objective natural sense of pudor or disgust at perversion
  • Denial of the objective coherence of civil law with Divine and Moral Law
  • Denial of the Divine and Moral Law
  • Denial of the Dignity of the Priesthood
  • Denial of the Catholic Faith

No man arrives by chance at such an abyss of conscience. It has to be learned and taught. And if Bishops are practicing it everywhere, then the clergy is endemically corrupt. That is why they do not bat an eyelash at denying the Sacraments or the baths at Lourdes, they do not even believe in such things!

So do not let them make you think that YOU can give them the Corona Virus. Remember it is they who can give you AIDS!

This is why I strongly have advised the faithful for more than 20 years to NOT go to Mass with someone who is obviously a heretic, modernist or a member of the Lavender clique. Its not only a matter of your soul’s salvation, its also a matter of public health safety.

Where did all these monsters and their enablers come from? The answer is easy: any Bishop who would go along with Vatican II has the precise absence of moral conscience which is required to tolerate such men in the priesthood. This is because Vatican II implicitly affirms that the Catholic Faith is a game and that adapting that game to the times is perfectly licit and withing their power.

__________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screen shot of the ProPublica article cited above, and is used here in accord with fair use standards for editorial commentary and as a free advertisement of their article.

PLEASE NOTE: In this article I compare the denial of sacraments to the collaboration in allowing pedophiles to continue to operate near children. These are two different sins and of two different orders of morality. However, as they both partake of the sin of treachery in the execution of the Divine Ministry, the second is worse, because it breaks a promise made after the fact of a crime proven. But the first, obviously, is worse because it is directed to more souls and involved the Most Blessed Sacrament, God Himself. So by this comparison, which I make, I do not intend to ignore this fact, but only speak under a limited respect of treachery as a break of a promise made.

+ + +

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

It’s the Great Apostasy, let’s stop the denial

e2701435aeaef9c741b2750dcf18d00e
A Medieval Illumination, showing the Adoration of the Beast by the false Catholics of the end times.

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The beloved disciple and faithful son of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Apostle Saint John warned us a little less than 2000 years ago: In the end, a Great Apostasy would sweep away many Christians.

Saint John tells of the Great Apostasy in the Twelfth Chapter of his Book of the Apocalypse, also known as the Book of Revelations. I will put in red text the interpretation of this chapter given by Franciscan Saints* and I will use the English text of the Douay Reims Bible for the scriptural citation:

12 And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars: (Heaven here refers to the Catholic Church, which is Heaven on Earth. The appearance of the woman refers to the Dogmatic Declarations of the Magisterium about Our Lady, as Ever Virgin, Immaculate Conception, Assumed into Heaven, Queen of Heaven and Earth. The twelve stars refer to the affirmations by the Church of Our Lady’s 12 privileges)

And being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered. (This refers to the struggles in the Church among theologians and believers against the faithful Catholics who are true children of Mary and know that the most authentic and certain path to God is through Mary to Jesus.)

And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns: and on his head seven diadems: (This refers to the Satanic plot of Freemasonry and other nefarious groups to establish the Mystical Body of the Antichrist in the Church and thus prepare the world for the coming of the AntiChrist)

And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered; that, when she should be delivered, he might devour her son. (This refers to the Great Apostasy which will occur after Our Lady is declared Assumed body and soul into Heaven. It will entail the near total apostasy of all the Clergy, who are as the stars in the Heaven of the Church, and it indicates that they will submit to the Father of Lies and give themselves up to the most horrible vices and errors)

And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne. (This refers to the Rise of the true Church in war against the Anti-Christ. This true Church will be faithful Catholics consecrated to Our Lady and embracing the whole doctrine of God, and who by their fidelity will be raised up to form a renewed Sacred Hierarchy to replace the old which has apostatized)

And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared by God, that there they should feed her a thousand two hundred sixty days. (This refers to the true Catholic Faith which in the end times will have to take refuge in lowly and humble places, because the wealthy and powerful will give up their souls to the rule and domination of demons)

And there was a great battle in heaven, Michael and his angels fought with the dragon, and the dragon fought and his angels: (This refers to the war between the sons of God vs the sons of the Devil, that is, the war between the true Church and the Anti-Church. The Leaders in this war will be led on each side by men inspired and devoted to Saint Michael and Lucifer, respectively)

And they prevailed not, neither was their place found any more in heaven. (This refers to the victory of the true Church over the false AntiChurch).

And that great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, who seduceth the whole world; and he was cast unto the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. (This refers to the definitive excommunication of the AntiChurch and its members from the Catholic Church).

10 And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying: Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: because the accuser of our brethren is cast forth, who accused them before our God day and night. (This refers to the future pope of great virtue who will preside over the renewed Church and condemn the AntiChurch)

11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of the testimony, and they loved not their lives unto death. (This shows that the victory will be obtained by faithful Catholics who risk everything to defend the true Faith, putting their trust in the Blood of Jesus, Who already overcame the world, flesh and the devil).

12 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you that dwell therein. Woe to the earth, and to the sea, because the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, knowing that he hath but a short time. (This refers to the joy Catholics will have in those days seeing the Church delivered from this monstrous cult of satanists, pedophiles and sodomites, but warns the world, since being cast out of the Catholic Church they will seek to rule over and weaponize the world against the Faithful).

13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman, who brought forth the man child: (This refers to the ensuing attacks of the godless against the true Faith until the end of time, for the whole world led by the AntiChurch will attack Our Lady who defeated them)

Obviously, the teachings of the Franciscan Saints about these matters is not binding in faith, but so far their predictions have turned out to be very accurate. The hatred of the Catholic Faith and the plot to destroy the Church, while brewing for ages, broke out in the Church after the Dogmatic Definition of the Assumption of Our Lady, body and soul into heaven. The wicked clergy could not stomach this dogma which countered their lusts, impiety and fake religious pretensions. They engineered a Council which ushered into the Church the “smoke of Satan” (as Pope Paul VI said):

The pope, concerned, writes:

“… We would say that, through some mysterious crack—no, it’s not mysterious; through some crack, the smoke of Satan has entered the Church of God. There is doubt, uncertainty, problems, unrest, dissatisfaction, confrontation.

“The Church is no longer trusted. We trust the first pagan prophet we see who speaks to us in some newspaper, and we run behind him and ask him if he has the formula for true life. I repeat, doubt has entered our conscience. And it entered through the windows that should have been open to the light: science.”

Storm clouds

The post-conciliar wounds make themselves felt:

“… It was thought that, after the Council, sunny days would come for the history of the Church. Nevertheless, what came were days of clouds, of storms, of darkness, of searching, of uncertainty … We tried to dig abysses instead of covering them …”

(Source: “What did Paul VI mean by saying the “Smoke of Satan has entered the Church”?”, citation from Aleteia article from 2018)

This Satanic Smoke has progressively blinded the eyes of the Clergy and Sacred Hierarchy, and even of many of the religious orders, into inclining more and more away from the perennial columns of Faith and Devotion, Hope and true Charity which the Church established from of old in Her Sacred Liturgies, Canons and Disciplines. It was under this Smoke that the good were persecuted and driven out, the wicked and perverse introduced into the high places. This was a necessary preparation for the Great Apostasy, because to achieve their goal the servants of the Father of Lies needed to prepare a whole generation of clergy who either loved falsehood or who had not the manliness to fight it.

This was achieved by introducing the God of the Club, which was initially proposed as merely a form of extreme clericalism but transmogrified to be a true idolatry upon the altar of which 10s of thousands of young people were sacrificed to sexual predators and only those who kept it quiet were promoted to the status of Bishops.

However, without a doubt this “striking out of heaven of a third of the stars” refers to a moment when nearly all the Clergy are separated from the Church (heaven). This, in my opinion, is adequately and perfectly described by the apostasy of the clergy from Christ’s true Vicar by following the lie of the MSM and wicked clergy that Benedict had resigned the office of the papacy, when in truth he never did anything of the kind. By no longer naming Benedict in the Canon of the Mass they show and seal their schism from Christ, from Benedict, and from the Church. They become fallen stars and are swooped up into the work of the great Dragon who is Satan.

Because, in the Greek, the word Apostasy means a falling away. It does not have the technical meaning we attribute to it in Canon Law today as a complete intellectual denial of the Catholic Faith.

As we are now in the full swing of the Dragons tail, we have to stop denying what is going on. All those Bishops who teach heresy and promote sacrilege by giving the Sacraments to public sinners, by condoning wickedness and teaching it, plus all those Bishops who do not oppose this, are all part of the Apostasy. There are even a few very wicked men, who agree with the apostasy but want to raise money by pretending to criticize it even as they insist you remain in communion with the leader of the Apostasy.

In this battle, we cannot afford to pretend any longer, nor to compromise. As Our Lady lamented at Akita, the Church in this battle will be filled with those willing to compromise, especially among clergy and religious.

The Pachamama worship was no accident. The adoration of the Andean Dragon Demon of the underworld is not a coincidence. This was not a political decision, it was an intentional act to involve everyone in the worship of Satan.

We must join the battle (See, Saving souls in the time of Apostasy) and urge the bishops and clergy to condemn the heresies of the Anti-Church and to break off communion with Bergoglio. (See the Article: Every Priest has the Right etc.) So long as the False Prophet and AntiChurch is recognized as having authority they will use it to destroy the entire Church world wide. Those who insist on recognizing their authority therefore must be presumed to be deceived by some sort of devil, because they are giving power to the Beast, who hungers to damn all souls to Hell so he can reign over and torment them for all eternity.

The wicked know what they are doing. They might try to gaslight you into not seeing what they are doing or in not doing anything to oppose them, but they know what they are doing. — I see this on a daily basis at Rome. As soon as you put a value judgement on heresy, apostasy, immorality or show canonically that the Renunciation is invalid, they lose all composure and snap at you like mad devils, a torrent of lies and abuse coming from their mouths. Their faces warp with the most nasty and biting expressions. They cannot endure your presence and run off. — Though this is not new. When I was studying at Rome 7 years ago, I found the same spirit, though confined, to certain faculties of theology in the Pontifical Institutes. But now this spirit reigns, it has captured the Vatican by guile and treachery.

Finally, I want to emphasize that, when Saint John says a third of the stars, I believe he means nearly all of them in that age, because in the night sky you can only see about a third of the visible sky on any one night.

And we have entered the night…. and it is WAR!

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do Thou, o Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the Power of God, thrust down into Hell Satan, and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world, seeking the ruin of souls!

Saint Michael the Archangel, First Defender of the Kingdom of Christ, pray for us!

,________

* I heard this explanation from an old Franciscan priest, when I became a Franciscan. I no longer remember the Saints he cited. And he has now passed from this life.

Pope Benedict’s forced Abdication

HOW IT WENT DOWN

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

As the long time readers of my blog, From Rome, know, I have extensively covered the Renunciation of Pope Benedict in articles analyzing it’s canonical value (here), who perpetrated the seizure of power from him (here), how it lead to his de facto imprisonment (here) and how, nevertheless, He has triumphed over all his enemies by it (here). Moreover, I have covered the signs he has given after the fact that he never resigned validly (here, here and here). And in many other articles.

Now I want to focus on how the Renunciation happened, that is who was behind it and how it went down, to show that in some respects it might have been a forced and in others, a free act, and how and why Benedict may have sound reasons to be continually hesitant to admit what he really did and why.

History is Context

Fred Martinez, of Catholic Monitor Blog, is doing some excellent work at cutting through the propaganda of the controlled Catholic media. In his post of Monday, October 29, 2018, entitled, “Is Francis our first gay Pope?” he laid out in great detail all the evidence that the core agenda of Bergoglio is to achieve the agenda of the LGBTQ movement.

Two days and one year later, Raffaela, who blogs at, Il Blog di Raffaela. Riflessione e Commenti fra gli amici di Benedetto XVI, published a very excellent historical chronical of Pope Benedict’s war against pedophilia in the Church, in a blog post entitled, “Le decisioni e l’esempio del Papa Benedetto XVI nel combattere la piaga della pedofilia nella Chiesa. Cronologia (English translation: The decisions and example of Pope Benedict XVI in fighting against the plague of pedophilia in the Church. A Chronology).

These two excellent contributions to Church history by lay bloggers are the necessary context to understand the forced abdication of Pope Benedict, or rather, to discern what I believe are the general and specific indications that in some way the Renunciation was demanded of Pope Benedict and in some way it was a free act.

Rules of Power

The first forensic criterion to employ is the common principle, often quoted here in Italy, of Cui prodest? This Latin maxim means, literally, Who is profiting from it? And the soundness of this principle in forensic investigations is based on the principle of moral theology, that no one does anything purposeful without a reason, and thus no one commits a crime unless something is to be gained by it.

So, Rafaella shows us that Benedict was a strong opponent of pedophilia in the clergy and was willing to remove Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, priests and even place Commissioners on large and powerful groups, to punish this abominable vice.

But after his abdication (I use this term to refer to a forced renunciation), there comes into power Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the Mafia of St Gallen and the Lavender Mafia, who are pushing the gay agenda, openly and flagrantly.

The common sense inference, then, is that one of these three groups or all of them insisted on the removal of Pope Benedict.

This is less a conjecture than a simple application of the rules of power struggles. The Papacy since the time of the Italian Risorgimento, has lost all real temporal power. It can be invaded at any time, and the powers of the nations can at any time take away its status as an independent diplomatic entity. The result of this loss of temporal power, means in truth, that the Papacy is left with a small enclave which is populated only by the Roman Curia and ruled by the Cardinals.

Now while the Cardinals each do not have as much power as the Pope, all of them together, with all their political and financial connections round the world, do in fact have more power than the pope.  Therefore, it would not be surprising if in the century following the suppression of the Papal States, that the College of Cardinals would come to dominate the power structure of the Vatican and that the Pope might become simply the public pawn of an all male club of ecclesiastics.

Now if these political inferences are correct, it would be expected that if a Pope started to impose discipline upon the subjects of each faction of Cardinals, by booting out of the priesthood or suspending some of their best friends and supporters, who were pedophiles, that eventually a zealous pope might in fact undercut all the power structures which put him in and maintain him in power.

What was happening in the year prior to the Renunciation?

With these speculations as a preface, let’s consider just some of the groups that Benedict XVI penalized in the year prior to Feb. 11, 2013, and watch how the timeline supports the inferences of risk, which I just outlined.

  1. On Feb. 2, 2012, Mons. Scicluna (who now leads Bergoglio’s pro gay clerical investigation team) marks out Pope Benedict as the person responsible for punishing pervert priests.  This may sound like praise, but it also might be painting a bull’s eye upon the target to be removed.
  2. From Feb. 6 to 9, 2012, there is a Conference in Rome for Bishops and heads of religious orders on the need to remove perverts. Members of the Conference again finger Pope Benedict as being the prime mover of it.
  3. Feb. 16, 2012 onwards: The Legionaires of Christ, their Movement and their woman’s branch come under strictures and strong measures against sexual perversion and the evil role of their founder.
  4. Spring, 2013: Church of Ireland rocked by allegations.
  5. May, 2012: Members of the Legionaires of Christ are reduced to lay state, new strictures upon the institute imposed by Papal order. New investigations.
  6. Spring and Summer, 2012: Pope Benedict begins to demand resignations of bishops.
  7. July 2, 2012: Pope Benedict appoints Archbishop Muller to the CDF. Shortly after this, he begins considering a renunciation. Before the end of summer, he mentions it to Cardinal Bertone, the then Secretary of State, who was effectively the real monarch at the Vatican and who was blocking Benedict on many things. (Why mention this to your chief opponent?)
  8. October 2012: Don Oko publishes the book, Pope Benedict against the Homo-Heresy.
  9. October 11, 2012: The investigation into the Legionaries is put on pause, allegedly because the Cardinal assigned needs to rest.
  10. January 30, 2013: the Acts of the Conference from a year ago are published an presented to Pope Benedict.
  11. February 1, 2013: Archbishop Gomez of Los Angeles announces that Cardinal Mahoney is banned from all public activities as a Bishop on account of his gross mishandling of cases of pedophilia in that Archdiocese. At the same time he names 126 priests of the Diocese as involved in such crimes. (Sicluna and Mahoney share the same episcopal lineage)
  12. Feb. 5, 2013: New promoter of Justice at the CDF, Fr. Oliver, mentions Sicluna in a statement wherein he fingers Benedict as the key man in the Vatican for punishing pervert priests.
  13. Feb 7, 2013 — From Rome Blog has it from a source at Rome, that on this day, Mr. Gotti, who had been dismissed from IOR the previous summer, without the knowledge or consent of Pope Benedict, had an hour long meeting at the Vatican with Cardinal Bertone, the then Secretary of State, in which the Cardinal affirmed Benedict’s decision to reinstate him fully and back him in his investigation of the Vatican Bank.
  14. Feb. 11, 2013 — On a single sheet of paper, to the surprise of nearly everyone, who is left speechless, except Cardinal Sodano, Pope Benedict reads out a statement of renunciation.

In short, in one year Pope Benedict had shown himself willing to take down the most powerful priestly institute in the conservative flank of the Church AND to take down one of the most powerful Cardinals in the liberal flank of the Church.

Further information on what was going on in the Vatican Bank is neatly summarized by the Blog, Informatii si mesaje, in their post of Dec. 18, 2018, entitled, “Cardinals’ Mafia — plot against Benedict XVI“, which excerpts reports by Edward Pentin, Marco Tosatti (Rorate Caeli translation), Maike Hickson and Louie Verrechio from 2015.

An Examination and Discussion

The decision to tell Mr. Gotti that he would be reinstated on Feb. 7, and the decision to renounce on Feb. 11 simply do not add up. You cannot have any real hope that you will reinstate someone if you are planning ahead to resign in 4 days. That makes no sense. Also, it makes no sense that Benedict was planning to resign since the summer (as Bertone claims in 2016), and never find the 14 errors in the Latin text you are planning to read out-loud in the Consistory of February.

We do know that the Archdiocese of Los Angeles is ground zero of a  Jewish Gay Mafia with strong ties to the financial industry, and that the Archdiocese has strong ties with this Mafia. We know that on Jan. 5, 2013, the ATMs at the Vatican were shut down by Deutch Bank, a move many have speculated was a signal to Benedict that the financial powers wanted him out.

Conclusions

I believe, therefore, that the demand for the Pope’s resignation was most probably made after February 7, 2013 and before the consistory of Feb. 11, 2013. — If Giuseppe Auricchio, the seer of Avola, Italy, can be believed, he foresaw that Benedict would receive a demand he could not agree to. — If you examine the text of the renunciation, you will find a Latin rife with errors, of the kind which would result if a non expert wrote it and had only 4 days or less to find errors in it. So it is very possible that Benedict was given a text, and that He modified it to make it appear to be a valid resignation, but in fact rather to make it to be an invalid resignation. And that, not knowing who was behind those demanding his resignation, he has never admitted what he really did, so as to protect himself and the Church from this Mafia.

I have not proven a crime, however, I have only outlined a chronology that needs to be further investigated, a chronology which leads me to use as an operative hypothesis, that Benedict DID NOT write the original text of the Renunciation, only changed perhaps the word munus to ministerium.

In my next report, I will discuss the errors in the Latin text and what they show about who may have written it.