Skip to main content

Rorate Caeli: Socci: The Backstory: here is what went on behind the scenes. The rage of the despot against the Catholic Pope

+
JMJ

I sometimes wonder if Pope Francis is going to have a stroke one of these times when his little plans are thwarted  - even a tiny bit.

P^3

Source: Rorate-Caeli

Reliable sources inside the Vatican have pieced together what happened. The book “From the Depths of Our Hearts” is clearly by Benedict XVI and Cardinal Sarah (as is indeed the letters between the two of them -  made public by Cardinal Sarah -  demonstrate unequivocally). Everything had been decided and agreed upon from the very start. The other day – when the part defending celibacy was published -  pandemonium broke out in the Vatican because Bergoglio was fuming with rage. In fact, that authoritative  pronouncement by Benedict, stops him from tearing apart ecclesiastic celibacy, as he had intended to do in the upcoming Post-Synod Exhortation. So, he personally summoned Monsignor Gaenswein, Benedict’s secretary, but also Prefect of Bergoglio’s Papal Household and, furious, ordered him to have Benedict XVI’s name removed from the cover of the book (being unable to demand the changing of the texts therein).
 
Bergoglio demanded a full and total disclaimer. For this reason the first filtered report spoke of sources “close to Benedict XVI” who said Benedict had not written the book with Cardinal Sarah, nor had he approved the cover (that is, his signature on the volume).
This however, was not true and Benedict XVI was unable to accept speaking falsely by implicitly accusing Cardinal Sarah of having involved him without his consent. Neither did Pope Benedict have any intention of taking back what he had written in defense of celibacy in the book. In fact Cardinal Sarah immediately made the letters exchanged between them public, which showed the book had been decided upon by both of them, and without doubt he made them public with Benedict’s permission. To re-establish the truth.   
 
On the other hand, Benedict also found himself needing to protect his secretary from the South American’s “vengeance”, seeing as he had received a peremptory order from Bergoglio. So this solution of compromise was adopted: in  successive book editions the author will be Cardinal Sarah “with the contribution of Benedict XVI”.  The text of the book, nevertheless, remains the same. 
 
With this messy compromise, the Bergoglian court can say to the mass-media that “Benedict XVI removed his signature from the book” (even if it’s not true) but in actual fact the book remains just as it is, with Sarah’s signature and Benedict’s name as author of the parts agreed upon. 
 
A very ugly story of clerical bullying, which, in the end aims at muzzling Benedict XVI.  
The fundamental question remains however: If Bergoglio – in his Exhortation -  hits out at celibacy (with the ordination of “viri probati”), he places himself de facto in direct contrast with the  doctrine of the Church, reaffirmed in recent days by Pope Benedict XVI. Thus, he becomes  responsible for a very grave rift, fraught with consequences.
Translation: Contributor Francesca Romana
Source: Antonio Socci’s Facebook

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

Spiritual Journey Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - Extracts

+ JMJ I have posted these two chapters to provide context for the quote of: It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith. P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.ca Chapter II The Perfections of God We ought to remember during this entire contemplation of God that we must apply all that is said of God to Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is God. We cannot separate Jesus Christ from God. We cannot separate the Christian religion from Jesus Christ, Who is God, and we must affirm and believe that only the Catholic religion is the Christian religion. These affirmations have, as a result, inescapable conclusions that no ecclesiastic authority can contest: outside of Jesus Christ and the Catholic religion, that is, outsi...

Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (de fide) - Expanded Listing: Answer for Reader

 + JMJ  A reader asked the following question in the 2015 version of the article on the Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (link) : 117: "In the state of fallen nature it is morally impossible for man without Supernatural Revelation, to know easily, with absolute certainty and without admixture of error, all religious and moral truths of the natural order." Where can you find this in the documents of the Church? ( Link to comment )  Here's the reference from Ott: The citation that Ott provided was Denzinger 1786 and the source document is Dogmatic Consitution Concerning the Faith from the First Vatican Council (Papal Encyclicals - link) : Chapter 2 On Revelation, Article 3: It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation , that those matters concerning God, which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone, without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error. Here's ...