Many times the posts in the Catholic Monitor comment section are better than
many of my posts. This time a long time reader, Ana Milan, wrote a excellent comment which needed to be a posted:
There is no reason for Cardinal Burke not to call for an Imperfect
Council in order to clarify once & for all that the Canons governing
papal resignations & PJPII's Rules covering papal election
procedures were transparently kept to, as it doesn't appear to the
general laity that they were. He must realise that the Papacy cannot be
bifurcated & that PBXVI was improperly coerced into abandoning the
Church by foul means, so why must adherents to the OHCA Church of Christ
continue to tolerate a Marxist/Masonic Bishop of Rome who does not want
the title Vicar of Christ?
It was reported that there was an extra vote counted in favour of AF that has never been explained & Cardinals of the St. Gallen Group admitted afterwards that they had made many 'phone calls with the intention of persuading fellow Cardinals to vote for AF who was 'their man'. Such enthusiasm counts as electioneering!
Does Cardinal Burke really believe that a truly elected Pope would hand over 7M Chinese Catholics to the CCP for $2B per annum? How does he stand with the Abu Dhabi Declaration that God desires all religions & the Pachamama disaster within the walls of the Vatican with a follow-up Amazonian Synod later in the year?
Being an American Cardinal he must know that the USCCB is a melting pot of homosexually disordered prelates but never condemns their activities, nor has he pushed for the truth about the McCarrick Investigation to be published - that might just be the end to the American Church! The African Cardinals also are very silent about the slaughter of Christians in their countries, especially Nigeria, which is a public scandal.
It was reported that there was an extra vote counted in favour of AF that has never been explained & Cardinals of the St. Gallen Group admitted afterwards that they had made many 'phone calls with the intention of persuading fellow Cardinals to vote for AF who was 'their man'. Such enthusiasm counts as electioneering!
Does Cardinal Burke really believe that a truly elected Pope would hand over 7M Chinese Catholics to the CCP for $2B per annum? How does he stand with the Abu Dhabi Declaration that God desires all religions & the Pachamama disaster within the walls of the Vatican with a follow-up Amazonian Synod later in the year?
Being an American Cardinal he must know that the USCCB is a melting pot of homosexually disordered prelates but never condemns their activities, nor has he pushed for the truth about the McCarrick Investigation to be published - that might just be the end to the American Church! The African Cardinals also are very silent about the slaughter of Christians in their countries, especially Nigeria, which is a public scandal.
Here is the post:
Dr. Taylor Marshall: "McCarrick... perhaps... [did] something Uncanonical in Regards to the Election of Bergoglio"
Yesterday, Thomist scholar Dr. Taylor Marshall in his popular YouTube podcast said that "McCarrick... perhaps... [did] something uncanonical in regards to the election of Bergoglio":
"We also learned that McCarrick who is a friend of the St. Gallen mafia. In a Villanova video he talked about when Benedict resigned that a certain distinguished Italian gentleman spoke about getting Bergoglio elected. It almost sounds like a campaign. McCarrick actually confessed that this happened before all this came out about McCarrick. So, we realize that McCarrick was perhaps doing something uncanonical in regards to the election of Bergoglio who goes on to be elected as Pope Francis."
(Watch "Trump Should Investigate McCarrick & His Creepy Bishop Network" on YouTube, July 19, 2020, 38:35-39:08: https://youtu.be/8H99rRDjjEc)
Catholic pundit 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."
According to Cardinal Burke proving that the St. Gallen Mafia "undermined Pope Benedict XVI and at the same time engineer[ed] the election of someone [Francis]" would be "very difficult to demonstrate," but possible if a real investigation for evidence took place it could possibly be proven that Francis is a antipope.
Bishop Rene Gracida has convincingly demonstrated that there is valid evidence that Pope John Paul II's conclave constitution "Universi Dominici Gregis" which "prescribe[d].. [the] method for the election of his successor(s)" was violated and must be investigated by Cardinals. If, after the investigation, Francis is found to be a antipope then a new pope would have to be elected after Benedict XVI's resignation is investigated to see if his resignation was valid.
Renowned Catholic historian Warren Carroll explicitly says that what matters in a valid papal election is not how many cardinals claim a person is the pope. What is essential for determining if someone is pope or antipope is the "election procedures... [as] governed by the prescription of the last Pope":
"Papal election procedures are governed by the prescription of the last Pope who provided for them (that is, any Pope can change them, but they remain in effect until they are changed by a duly elected Pope)."
"During the first thousand years of the history of the Papacy the electors were the clergy of Rome (priests and deacons); during the second thousand years we have had the College of Cardinals."
"But each Pope, having unlimited sovereign power as head of the Church, can prescribe any method for the election of his successor(s) that he chooses. These methods must then be followed in the next election after the death of the Pope who prescribed it, and thereafter until they are changed. A Papal claimant not following these methods is also an Antipope."
"Since Antipopes by definition base their claims on defiance of proper Church authority, all have been harmful to the Church, though a few have later reformed after giving up their claims."
[http://www.ewtn.com/library/homelibr/antipope.txt]
Remember what renowned Catholic historian Carroll said:
"A Papal claimant not following these methods [of the Pope John Paul II's conclave constitution] is also an Antipope."
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
"We also learned that McCarrick who is a friend of the St. Gallen mafia. In a Villanova video he talked about when Benedict resigned that a certain distinguished Italian gentleman spoke about getting Bergoglio elected. It almost sounds like a campaign. McCarrick actually confessed that this happened before all this came out about McCarrick. So, we realize that McCarrick was perhaps doing something uncanonical in regards to the election of Bergoglio who goes on to be elected as Pope Francis."
(Watch "Trump Should Investigate McCarrick & His Creepy Bishop Network" on YouTube, July 19, 2020, 38:35-39:08: https://youtu.be/8H99rRDjjEc)
Catholic pundit 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."
According to Cardinal Burke proving that the St. Gallen Mafia "undermined Pope Benedict XVI and at the same time engineer[ed] the election of someone [Francis]" would be "very difficult to demonstrate," but possible if a real investigation for evidence took place it could possibly be proven that Francis is a antipope.
Bishop Rene Gracida has convincingly demonstrated that there is valid evidence that Pope John Paul II's conclave constitution "Universi Dominici Gregis" which "prescribe[d].. [the] method for the election of his successor(s)" was violated and must be investigated by Cardinals. If, after the investigation, Francis is found to be a antipope then a new pope would have to be elected after Benedict XVI's resignation is investigated to see if his resignation was valid.
Renowned Catholic historian Warren Carroll explicitly says that what matters in a valid papal election is not how many cardinals claim a person is the pope. What is essential for determining if someone is pope or antipope is the "election procedures... [as] governed by the prescription of the last Pope":
"Papal election procedures are governed by the prescription of the last Pope who provided for them (that is, any Pope can change them, but they remain in effect until they are changed by a duly elected Pope)."
"During the first thousand years of the history of the Papacy the electors were the clergy of Rome (priests and deacons); during the second thousand years we have had the College of Cardinals."
"But each Pope, having unlimited sovereign power as head of the Church, can prescribe any method for the election of his successor(s) that he chooses. These methods must then be followed in the next election after the death of the Pope who prescribed it, and thereafter until they are changed. A Papal claimant not following these methods is also an Antipope."
"Since Antipopes by definition base their claims on defiance of proper Church authority, all have been harmful to the Church, though a few have later reformed after giving up their claims."
[http://www.ewtn.com/library/homelibr/antipope.txt]
Remember what renowned Catholic historian Carroll said:
"A Papal claimant not following these methods [of the Pope John Paul II's conclave constitution] is also an Antipope."
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
