Skip to main content

Cdl. Burke: The "Grounds... for... [In]validity of the [Francis] Election would be... Campaign Organized Beforehand which is Strictly Forbidden"

Patrick Coffin on his YouTube show asked Cardinal Raymond Burke:

"I was wondering rather if those rules [of the 2013 conclave that elected Francis] were violated and rather or not the whole election of Francis may be invalid. Is there any foundation for that speculation?"

Cardinal Burke answered:

"The only grounds that could be used for calling into question the validity of the election would be were the election organized by a campaign beforehand which is strictly forbidden and that would be difficult to demonstrate..."

"... If these persons [the St. Gallen Mafia of liberal cardinals] engaged in a active campaign first to undermined Pope Benedict XVI and at the same time to engineer the election of someone [Francis] then that could be a argument. I don't think I have the facts, and there have to be facts, to prove that. That's all I have to say about that."
(Patrick Coffin show, "141: Dubia Cardinal Goes on the Record - Raymond Cardinal Burke (Free Version)," Premiered 13 hours ago, 19:55 to 21:46)

Coffin about a minute later said "Bishop Henry Rene Gracida... has written a Open Letter to the cardinals saying only a imperfect synod could be called and resolve this."

My question to Cardinal Burke is:

Why would proving that the St. Gallen Mafia "undermined Pope Benedict XVI and at the same time engineer[ed] the election of someone [Francis]" be "very difficult to demonstrate"?

Finally, One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec and his collaborator Dr. Taylor Marshall must be shaking in their boots for their credibility because they have been claiming that it was virtually impossible under any GROUNDS for the Francis conclave to be invalid.

Skojec said Coffin by merely mentioning Bishop Gracida's Open Letter and the possibility of a invalid Francis conclave believed a "outlandish conspiracy theory."
(Twitter, December 8, 2018, 9:43AM)

Does Skojec claim that Cardinal Burke believes in a "outlandish conspiracy theory"?

Marshall, it appears, has been saying that anyone who dares claim that there is evidence about the invalidity of the Francis papacy is promoting "Sedevacantism" and Taylor seems to promote the offense against God that people who doubt the validity of the Francis papacy should not attend Mass where Francis is commemorated.
(Taylor Marshall's "Good Luck" Tweet)

In a previous post, I suggested that if this is the case then Marshall may need to go to confession for apparently promoting the mortal sin of not attending Sunday Mass since even excommunicants are obligated to attend Mass under the penalty of mortal sin.

Does Marshall claim that Cardinal Burke is promoting "Sedevacantism"?

Pray an Our Father now for Bishop Gracida's call for a imperfect synod to be called to investigate the validity of the 2013 conclave.

Comments

Aqua said…
“Very difficult to prove”.

They literally put it in a book, with a helpful bow and ribbon.

Upon understanding the depth, depravity and deception of “deep state’ interests I am no longer surprised by statements like this. It is simple to prove if there is a will for it. There is no will for it. Deeply disappointed in Cdl Burke.
BrotherBeowulf said…
Agreed the false conclave was rotten from the gitgo. The conspiracy is blatant and obvious and admitted by McCarrick in his Seton Hall speech of October 2013.

Is it not the case however that as Benedict never relinquished the papacy complete and entire, the conclave that never was . . . well, that dawg won’t hunt.
Aqua said…
To acknowledge the Conclave “irregularities” (invalidities) while asserting they cannot be proven is to strengthen the position that: whatever precedent events happened that produced this antipope and his antipope magisterium must be accepted. There is nothing that prevents nefarious illegalities because ... nothing can be proven. The more nefarious the precedent act, the more certain that act is, because it is less likely to be proven by weak men tasked with guarding the way.

Miracles? The power and omnipotence of God? Courage, strength, honor? A topic for study and exposition, fine; surely not relevant here. Can’t know. Impossible to prove. Do whatever they say.

It fits with the Dubia disaster. Five essential, fundamental questions of the Christian Faith. To Pope Francis they demand in the Holy Name Of God: What.Say.You!?

Oh, nothing?

Ok. That’s fine too.

Which sends the deadly message to the Faithful and the watching world: these five questions - were essential; were fundamental; not any more; who cares.

If you wish to present the Dubia, defend the Dubia. They either matter - or not. Their authors have proven, by inaction, that they don’t matter at all to the Church as it now exists. The antipope has spoken: Dogma not relevant in our day. The Cardinal authors agree. The watching Faithful must now judge whether they matter or not.

1: Divorced and re-married admitted to Holy Communion? Yes.
2: Absolute moral norms that prevent intrinsically evil acts always, everywhere? No.
3: Is there such a thing as intrinsically evil acts; grave sin, such as adultery? No.
4: Can circumstance or intent transform evil into good? Yes
5: Can personal conscience prevail over Magisterial Church teaching authority? Yes

Asked. Answered. Submit.

It is *worse* than had the questions never been asked.

Similarly, Cdl Burke is making the strong case now for the antipope: whatever election related irregularities and illegalities may have occurred before are not relevant now. Can’t know. Won’t know. Don’t want to know. Rules are not relevant to Cardinals because we can never know. Shut up and submit. Heresy? Can’t know. Won’t know. Don’t want to know. Shut up and submit.

I saw this on a small scale when I entered the Church in a heretical RCIA class that demanded we accept abortion and incorporate Wicca into our faith (true story), and almost walked away then. I see it now expressed on a grand scale promoted (or worse) *accepted* by seemingly orthodox Cardinals and Priests. Not me. No way. My Dubia answers differ from this antipope. Unlike Cdl Burke I demand a correction and do not accept the illegalities.
Therese said…
"I saw this on a small scale when I entered the Church in a heretical RCIA class that demanded we accept abortion and incorporate Wicca into our faith (true story), and almost walked away then."

Now that's what I call a miracle. ;-)

It's a blessing to have you with us.
MaryP said…
What about the av equipment and ekectroniccommunications? What about the breaking of the ballot rules? Both are automatically invalidating according to UDG
Aqua said…
Therese, I was convinced that Catholics had something more that could correct deviations like that at the individual and Parish level. I had no idea what was coming. Goodness, it never stops.

My discouragement is from the lack of defense at any level, from anywhere. But, as in those early days, I reference Sacred Tradition. No one can take that away.

Paolo84 said…
Agreed 100% God forgive me I no longer attend Mass in communion with Bergoglio and even when the latter is not mentioned but priest and bishop are part of Bergoglio's new church. Unfortunately I'm far away from a priest who's out of Bergoglio church. We are few but remember "a small remnant"...
Paolo84 said…
I read comments like this and I begin to think that the "small remnant" is not that small after all. Thank you Aqua!
BrotherBeowulf said…
Villanova. October 2013. (Not Seton Hall.)
BrotherBeowulf said…
And the remnant includes our Lady, Queen of Revelation whose Immaculate Heart shall indeed triumph. Regardless of faithless popes (John 23rd who disobeyed Her direct command re the Third Secret) and antipopes (‘Francis’).

Therese said…
No, no one can take Sacred Tradition away. Neither can anyone take away Our Lord's commands or His promises to those who will love Him. In times of bloody persecution saints are made fairly rapidly, but for us it is the slow, grinding down of our resolve. Love resides in the will, and also persistence in the face of evil. Stay very close to God.

Popular posts from this blog

"Exorcist Fr. Ripperger is asking everyone to say this Prayer until the Election is Resolved"

A good friend of the Catholic Monitor got this from a group message. She said "exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger is asking everyone to say this prayer until the election is resolved": Prayer of Command In His Name and by the power of His Cross and Blood, I ask Jesus to bind any evil spirits, forces and powers of the earth, air, fire, or water, of the netherworld and the satanic forces of nature.  By the power of the Holy Spirit and by His authority, I ask Jesus Christ to break any curses, hexes, or spells and send them back to where they came from, if it be His Holy Will.  I beseech Thee Lord Jesus to protect us by pouring Thy Precious Blood on us (my family, etc.), which Thou hast shed for us and I ask Thee to command that any departing spirits leave quietly, without disturbance, and go straight to Thy Cross to dispose of as Thou sees fit.  I ask Thee to bind any demonic interaction, interplay, or communications.  I place N. (Person, place or thing) under the protectio

High-profile Lawyer Barnes: Amy Coney Barrett would be a Disaster

High-profile trial lawyer Robert Barnes who deals in civil, criminal and constitutional law reported on Twitter that Amy Coney Barrett would be a disaster. The Barnes Twitter report shows that Coney Barrett has " sid[ed] with the government on the lockdowns, on uncompensated takings, on excusing First Amendment infringements & Fourth Amendment violations... [and] exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps... [and] hid behind precedent... to prohibit pro-life activists from exercising their free speech ." The Avvo.com lawyer directory reports that attorney "Robert Barnes embraces the challenge to defend the little guy and stand up for what is right. This is why he left the prestigious Yale Law School, whom publicly stated their unwill

If Kamala Harris' Father is part White & part Jamaican African and her Mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black?

  Is Joe Biden's running mate really Black? If Kamala Harris' father is part white and part Jamaican African and her mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black? Reason.com tries to figure it out: Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's pick to be the Democratic Party's vice-presidential nominee, is the daughter of an Indian immigrant mother and a Jamaican immigrant father. Her father, as I understand it, has ancestors of both European and African origin. [Welcome new Volokh readers. FYI, I've been working on a book on the American Law of Race, with this forthcoming article the first relevant output. My own opinion is that Ms. Harris should be deemed American, period, but there is no such box on government forms, and if you decline to state your race, someone will decide for you… First things first. There is no multiracial or mixed-race category in American law in any jurisdiction. Nor is there an Indian category. So Harris cannot be legally Indian, nor can she b