Skip to main content

Benedict’s biographer slams ‘authoritarian’ Pope Francis for undermining Catholic Tradition

Benedict’s biographer slams ‘authoritarian’ Pope Francis for undermining Catholic Tradition

Comments

Anonymous said…
It is necessary to accept the premise of the world that offers us as true, but we must analyze with a necessary questioning. Because something tyrannical forces us to accept that the truth is the lie. For the facts themselves demonstrate that it happened to Benedict XVI in 2013.

In fact, St. Augustine says that where there are facts there are no arguments. However, it is necessary to emphasize even more that the deep elite clearly wants to tyrannize us and has removed a true pontiff for a false pontiff. When we forcibly remove someone, then it's clear that he was stopping them. But the elite changed the game and impeded him. If something is impeded, then it cannot be in practice what it was before. Although he wore a white cassock and blesses with apostolic blessing, his ministry turned into a non-ministry.

The appearance of freedom of a "Pope Emeritus" who even walked in the Vatican gardens freely praying his rosary was not really a freedom. Because also if someone is offside, then he was controlled. If he was controlled, then he could not express himself freely. Hence we see then the Mater Ecclesia more consistent with all that was a cloister or simply a prison without walls for controlledl.

And in this same vein we see the Vatican also under control of this elite. And that's to this day.

So it's no wonder if Bergoglio rules with an iron fist; the tyrannical elite has its tyrant in the Vatican who is consistent with its tyrannical interests.

Renato
1:03 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...
6 comments
Read more

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...
Post a Comment
Read more

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...
3 comments
Read more