The resignation of Benedict XVI was invalid. The schism of the Church approaches

[Kaesekopf]

The resignation of Benedict XVI was invalid. The schism of the Church approaches. [original en español]
3 Sep 2013 | J. Alberto Villasana / English trans.  links anon.
— https://twitter.com/AlbertVillasana/
— http://www.ultimostiempos.org/

Pope Benedict XVI announced his resignation to the Church on Monday February 11, 2013. That day he read a Declaratio which became effective, at his wish, on February 28 at 8:00 pm. However, he made the decision to resign a month and a half in advance. Before Christmas of 2012, due to the dossier that was delivered to him on Dec. 17, he concluded that it was better to step aside for the good of the Church. His brother, Father George Ratzinger, and other prelates close to the Pope were witnesses to that decision, as stated by Lluis Cardinal Martinez Sistach of Barcelona.

The dossier that led him to resign was prepared by the commission of three cardinals he appointed to investigate the source of the leak of confidential documents known as "Vatileaks".

But it is logical that the documents published in the book «Sua Santità» written by Gianluigi Nuzzi did not worry the Pope as much as a specific one filtered directly to the newspaper «Il Fatto Quotidiano», and that is the one Dario Cardinal Castrillon personally gave him, translated into German, which refers to knowledge that the cardinal of Palermo, Paolo Romeo, had of a plot to assassinate the Pope. [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2099276/The-Pope-victim-assassination-plot-year-claims-senior-Vatican-cardinal.html]

The dossier that the cardinals Herranz, Tomko and De Giorgi handed to Benedict XVI [http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/02/for-record-la-repubblicas-summary-of.html], with the investigation into the plot to assassinate him, led the Pope to imagine the earthquake that his death would have caused the Church, unleashing a hellish struggle for influence and shady maneuvers ahead of the succession resulting from internal antagonisms of the curia. Not for fear of death, but for possible harm to the Church, did the Pope decide that it was best to resign to remove threats and advance a peaceful succession.

In a report which the Jesuit priest Arnaldo Zenteno produced, published on April 9, 2013 [http://grupobasesfys.blogspot.mx/2013/04/el-presbitero-arnaldo-zenteno-nos.html], it states the following in section 3): "In the lunch meeting with Benedict XVI in Castel Gandolfo, it was entrusted to Pope Francis that one of the causes that influenced his resignation were the threats he received and for fear of being poisoned, as the decision to kill him was already made, so that Benedict XVI, in a move to neutralize the attempt on his life, made public his resignation with which disarmed the attempt to kill him."

In this sense, while it is true that the Pope "freely" declared to resign, the fact is that to a greater or lesser extent he was forced by the pressure of an attack, so his freedom, according to the canonical doctrine, was conditioned in radice.

While the Pope made the decision to resign in accordance with the powers given to him under the Code of Canon Law, he made it under the duress of moral violence, which, according to No. 125 of the same Code, invalidates the final decision at the root and renders the act invalid [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__PE.HTM]. It is like one who freely chooses to marry, but if there is hidden stress, fear or deception, the marriage is void for fault, although a clearly "free" commitment has been expressed publicly.

It must be recognized that while the Church has always considered a sacred law that the election of the Pope is ad vitam, it is good that canon law considers the possibility of resignation for extremely serious cases, such as exile, persecution or other grave cause. In this sense, the waiver provided for in Canon 332 of the CDC [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P16.HTM] is like an emergency exit, and it is convenient to have, so much so that it helped Benedict XVI to flee from the threat hanging over his person and the Church, even though he was aware—especially with the heroic example of his predecessor—that the papal election is ad vitam and is not negotiable, nor may its terms be negotiable.

There is a further element to the pressure to claim that Benedict XVI's resignation was invalid, and it is evidence that in the decree read by Pope there was not any legitimate resignation due to an error in the Latin.

In the Declaratio of the "resignation" of Pope Benedict XVI, as it was officially released by the Vatican and published in L'Osservatore Romano, there is a very obvious solecism, i.e., a syntactic error, which consists in putting the elements of a sentence in the wrong way.

At the core of the resignation it reads: "Declaro me ministerio Episcopi Romae Successoris Sancti Petri, mihi per manus Cardinalium die 19 aprilis MMV commissum renuntiare" ("I declare to renounce the ministry of the Bishop of Rome, successor of St. Peter, which has been entrusted to me by the hands of the cardinals on April 19, 2005.") This sentence is totally unintelligible, containing a grammatical error, as commissum, which depends on ministerio, is the object of the verb renuntiare, so it should be in dative, according to him, that is, it should say commisso [while the copy on the website of the Holy See uses commisso; the copy on news.va retains the error; furthermore, in this video recording Benedict clearly pronounces the erroneous Latin.]

Now, in canon law, all legal writing containing a fault of Latin is null. Already Pope St. Gregory VII (cf. Registrum 1.33) declared null a privilege accorded to a monastery by his predecessor Alexander II, "due to corruption in the Latin".


Another example: in the decretal epistle Ad audientiam of Pope Lucius III, found in the body of canon law (cf. Decretal Epistles of Gregory IX, In Rescriptis, c. XI) it states that "false Latinity annuls a papal rescript." In this decree, the Pope prohibited giving credit to any papal document "if it contains a clear fault of construction." The gloss (in the official text published by order of Pope Gregory XIII in 1582) explains why a papal decree "must not contain any fault", and why any Latin error constitutes such a presumption of invalidity "that no evidence to the contrary can be admitted". While some modern canonists believe that the 1917 and 1983 codes automatically repealed all previous rules, the care that the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Pontifical Texts continues to place on the matter casts doubt on this view.

Claiming that a decree is null does not necessarily mean it is a false document. But an error, if one discloses it, can be overt or surreptitious, i.e., Pope Benedict XVI could have written carelessly, or hiding a real hidden message (the resignation having been made under pressure). The first is rather unlikely, as presumably such an important text was revised by the Pope not once but several times.

In conclusion, it does not seem that the Latin error committed by Benedict XVI has been one of laziness, but rather an intentional purpose, in which he would be speaking to us not only of the absolute nullity of the pontifical decree, which is a fact, but also of the pressure by which it was motivated, as well as the back door that Pope Benedict would leave open.

The truth is that, as of March 13, 2013, the prophecies that speak of "Two Popes in Rome" began to be fulfilled, one existing officially emeritus and one acting. Never in the history of the Church has there been this situation, predicted by saints and mystics, and it is very difficult for it to happen again.

The trouble is that, according to the prophecies and private revelations, when there are two popes in Rome (they can be the present ones or two others in the future) there will be a schism in the Church, a division caused by an illegitimate pope's heresy and the reaction of the true Vicar of Christ, who will raise his voice to denounce the apostasy. At that time, there will be a sudden invasion of Russia into Europe, coinciding with the War of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 38), which consists of the attack of Russia and Arab countries against Israel. Then, the legitimate pope will be persecuted and will have to flee Rome for refuge, while the antipope will rule the Church supporting the false peace, the sacrilegious unification of religions. That false peace will be the religious support of the world government of the antichrist. The antipope will betray the faith by accepting the coalition of all creeds and renouncing the Catholic identity.

St. Francis of Assisi says: "There will be an uncanonically elected pope who will cause great schism". And Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich, Augustinian religious, states: "I saw a strong opposition between the two popes, and I saw how dire will be the consequences of the false church (...) This will cause the greatest schism ever seen in the world". [http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/10/explosive-revelation-benedict-xvi.html — a foretaste, perhaps?]

The Blessed Virgin said explicitly at La Salette: "Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist". [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_La_Salette]

And there are many other private revelations and announcements of Church hierarchs:

Says Fr. Paul Kramer, "The antipope and his apostate collaborators will be, as Sister Lucia said, supporters of the devil, those who work for evil without being afraid of anything."

Pope St. Pius X announced: "I had a terrible vision: I do not know if it will be me or one of my successors, but I saw a Pope from Rome fleeing amongst the corpses of his brothers. He will take refuge in disguise somewhere and after a short time he will die a cruel death."

Juan de Rocapartida: "Approaching the End Times, the Pope and his cardinals will have to flee from Rome in tragic consequences to a place where they will not be recognized, and the Pope will suffer a cruel death in exile."

Nicholas of Flüe: "The Pope with his cardinals will have to flee from Rome in a calamitous situation to a place where they will be unknown. The Pope will die in an atrocious manner during his exile. The sufferings of the Church will be greater than any previous moment in history."

Ven. Bartholomew Holzhauser, founder of the secular clergy societies in the eighteenth century: "God will permit a great evil against His Church: they will come bursting in suddenly and unexpectedly while bishops and priests are asleep. They shall enter into Italy and devastate Rome, burn churches and destroy everything."

The revelation received by Mother Elena Aiello, famed stigmatic who was often consulted by Pope Pius XII: "Italy will be shaken by a great revolution (...) Russia will prevail over the nations, and especially over Italy, and will raise the red flag over the dome of St. Peter."

The words of John of Vitiguero: "When the world is disturbed, the Pope will change residence."

Elena Leonardi, spiritually guided by Padre Pio: "The Vatican will be invaded by communist revolutionaries. They will betray the Pope. Italy will suffer a major revolt and will be cleansed by a great revolution. Russia will march on Rome and the Pope will be severely endangered".

Enzo Alocci: "The Pope will disappear temporarily and this will occur when there is a revolution in Italy."

Blessed Anna Maria Taigi: "Religion will be persecuted and priests massacred. The Holy Father will be forced to leave Rome."

The mystic Maria Steiner: "The holy Church will be persecuted, Rome will be without a shepherd."

The revelations of Garabandal: "The Pope will not be able to be in Rome, he will be persecuted and will have to hide."

To Fr. Stefano Gobbi, mystic and founder of the Marian Movement of Priests, Our Lady confided: "The Masonic forces have entered the Church in a disguised and hidden form, and they have established their headquarters in the same place where the Vicar of my Son Jesus lives and works. It is being done as is contained in the third part of my message, which has not yet been revealed, but it has already become clear by the same events that you are living."

Pope Paul VI: "The smoke of Satan has entered through the cracks of the Church" (Homily of June 29, 1972).

According to St. Paul, the antichrist will manifest himself just after the Pope to be cast aside, "But the one who restrains is to do so only for the present, until he is removed from the scene. And then the lawless one will be revealed." (2 Thessalonians 2: 6-8).

Canon Roca, the excommunicated Illuminist who collaborated on the infiltration against the Church, wrote: "In its present form the papacy will disappear, the new social order will be implemented from Rome but independently from Rome, without Rome, in spite of Rome, against Rome. And this new church, which might not be able to retain anything of Scholastic doctrine and the original form of the former Church, will nevertheless receive consecration and canonical jurisdiction from Rome."
The new church will support the unification of religions and the false peace, fulfilling what was said by Jesus Christ in the sense that even the elect could be deceived.

Karol Cardinal Wojtyla was very clear when he declared, before the Eucharistic Congress in Pennsylvania, in 1977: "We are facing the greatest historical confrontation humanity has ever had. We are in the final contest between the Church and the anti-Church, the Gospel and the anti-Gospel. This confrontation lies within the plans of Divine Providence and is a challenge that the whole Church has to accept."

If Benedict XVI's resignation was null by fault, the Conclave was invalid because there never was a sede vacante. That fact poses a pressing question: will not Benedict XVI remain the Vicar of Christ in the eyes of God? Will it not be Benedict XVI who has to flee from Rome in the midst of persecution? These are questions that will be resolved over time.

In 1917 it was revealed to three shepherd children in Fatima, Portugal, the revelation that had Pope St. Pius X a few years before, only in an even more precise form: "We saw a bishop dressed in white, we had a feeling it was the Holy Father, flee a city in ruins trembling with halting step." [http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000626_message-fatima_en.html]

The version of Fatima even further points that it could be of the Pope who resigned, Benedict XVI, and would explain the phrase "We saw a bishop dressed in white, we had a feeling it was the Holy Father." If it had been evident that it was the reigning pope, they would have said so in an undeniable way. Instead, they saw a "bishop dressed in white". They never could have imagined the theme of "resignation", so only had "a feeling".

The second element is even more precise and revealing: they saw him fleeing "trembling with halting step," which may be due to his advanced age.

And a third element is also revealing: of the same bishop in white that earlier they see fleeing Rome, they affirm later, at the time he is killed on a hill, that this was the "Holy Father".

Following the flight of the legitimate pope, the antipope will remain in Rome leading the "new church", supporting the apostate union of religions. This is the "abomination of desolation", foretold since ancient times by the prophet Daniel, established in the holy place.

In the words of Cardinal Luigi Ciappi, personal theologian to Pope John Paul II: "The Third Secret refers to the loss of faith in the Church, i.e., the apostasy which will emerge from the top of the Church."

Only two things are certain at this point: for the first time in history there are two Popes in Rome, and Benedict XVI is more present than ever. Suffice it to recall some of his last words while still in the Seat of Peter: "You will be close to me, even if I am hidden from the world." — Benedict XVI, Address to the Roman clergy, February 14, 2013

More secondhand info, which, if true, advances the Canon 125 thesis:

http://themoynihanletters.com/from-the-desk-of/letter-42-alpha-and-omega

"Regarding the decision to step down, I have the feeling," she continued, "that Benedict finally realized that, in the Curia there were simply too many who needed to be changed. The secret report of the three cardinals revealed a series of things that did not work. The report recognized that there are many in the Curia who are very good, but also a good-sized group with... various problems.

"The Pope found himself in a dramatic situation when he found that they had put someone in his own house who stole his documents. This was disconcerting. Some Germans went to visit him, and the Pope said to them, 'Think about it, he was giving me my medicine, too.'

"In other words, he felt there might even have been a threat to his own life...

"Then, on a number of occasions, he was asked to approve appointments and transfers which he was not certain about. This troubled him deeply. "Then, he meditated, and prayed. And he made his plan. And what did he do? In a single blow, they are all gone, the heads of every office in the entire Curia. Now a younger man will be able to come in and, over the coming years, completely reform the Roman Curia. He couldn't have been more brilliant."

If Villasana's analysis is correct, many of Ratzinger/Benedict's words and actions take on extra significance. Here are three:

• His silent prayer to God during the conclave: "Please don't do this to me." Taking the Third Secret of Fatima into account—the text of which he read in its entirety—perhaps he himself considered the possibility that the pope to follow JPII would be the pope of the third secret, and not JPII?
• From the above link: "In his interview with Peter Seewald, when Seewald asked him whether he was at the end or the beginning of his pontificate, he replied 'Both.'" Could he himself know?
• His reference to the ascent to Mount Tabor and the Transfiguration in many of his final public statements; what came after the Transfiguration? The Resurrection...by way of the Passion, of course.

Found this on a blog I like, it was then removed a few days later.  Saved in my RSS feed.  Thought I'd post it here.

[Guapo]

Popcorn!  I predict this thread will be at least 3 pages. 

(Yous rabble rouser K nuttin like stirring up a hornets nest)

Was he forced to resign?  Probably, but we can't prove a thing.  So Canon Law takes a back seat.   Now about that Conclave...mmm..

[Kaesekopf]

Discussion forums for the win! 

[Irishcyclist]

Dan Brown novel?

[JuniorCouncilor]

The Latin as they report it does appear to be erroneous, though I don't know if it would universally have been considered so in the Middle Ages.

[Elizabeth]

Found this on a blog I like, it was then removed a few days later.  Saved in my RSS feed.  Thought I'd post it here.

THANK YOU

Do we know anything of Senior Villasana?

[Der Kaiser]

Assumeing it was valid. I wonder if Fr. Ratzinger(there is no such thing as "Pope emeritus) is happy with himself for throwing this joke on the Church that call himself Francis? He can not have imagined his successor would be a complete apostate.

[Greg]

Dan Brown novel?

Brown Fan novel.

[Guapo]

Assumeing it was valid. I wonder if Fr. Ratzinger(there is no such thing as "Pope emeritus) is happy with himself for throwing this joke on the Church that call himself Francis? He can not have imagined his successor would be a complete apostate.

Sigh (grumble towards K)...My friend he was forced down. The Cardinals abandoned him in the hour of need.  He had no choice.  If you think Francis is bad, wait till you see whose next.

[Greg]

Assumeing it was valid. I wonder if Fr. Ratzinger(there is no such thing as "Pope emeritus) is happy with himself for throwing this joke on the Church that call himself Francis? He can not have imagined his successor would be a complete apostate.

Why not? He was pretty darned close to being an apostate himself.

[Bonaventure]

This forced abdication theory is, quite frankly, one of the most pathetic things I've heard of. It's worse than the Paul VI prisoner in the Vatican theory, and worse than the Siri thesis.

In any case, here's what Archbishop Lefebvre said about these theories in his time. The words are still relevant:

They ask me, what do you think of the Pope? Not much, it's a mystery, an improbable mystery. It's a great tragedy for the Church, because ultimately, who's with the Pope is with the Church, is with the unity of the Church... But there is also a question mark. When we say "How is it possible that the Pope, if he's truly Pope, successor of St. Peter, he must in consequence have the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, he must be protected by the Holy Spirit in what he does, because he's the Pope we have the promise of our Lord that he will be protected in upholding the faith... Therefore someone who does these kinds of things is not Pope...This Pope is doing things that are so contrary to the faith, against the Church, so destructive to the faith of the Church, and the Church itself... But it's not the Pope, it's his entourage... Well, here's one solution. The Pope is a prisoner, the Pope is a martyr, the Pope is locked in, the Pope isn't free to do what he wants, the Pope is drugged, the Pope is half-crazy, the Pope is I don't know what, he's a human wreck who is led around and manipulated...That's one solution. It's a solution that I'd say is astonishingly supported by many visionaries, people who think they have visions, I'd say they are diabolical in origin, these visions.

These visions of those who say that the Holy Father is a prisoner, that the Holy Father is somehow incapable, that he's drugged, for the thirteen years that he's been there he has no responsibility for anything. They've locked this man up and then eventually we get to the point where there's another Pope who is imprisoned under the Vatican, then they've given him a double and other things like this that are just crazy [ aberrantes ], crazy, crazy, no? Idiotic, completely idiotic, aren't they, and all of this is very smart on the part of the devil because this sways a certain amount of people, right, who are always saying: The Pope! The Pope! The Pope! No, no, no, don't speak to me about the Pope! Be obedient! Be obedient! I beg you, I beg you, it's his entourage, it's not him.

But I will say you can also look at the problem from another angle and say: good, ultimately I agree with you, it's not possible that the Pope who is protected by the Holy Ghost, by the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ, could do things like this. There we agree, it's not possible, it doesn't fit, this destruction of the Church, this destruction of the Social Reign of Christ the King, this destruction of the Catholic faith in every aspect, every catechism, every university, every religious order, the seminaries, everywhere you look it is the systematic destruction of the Church, which was aimed at by all of these reforms that the Vatican implemented, because Vatican II wasn't, I'd say, what allowed these reforms to be put into effect, what had to be done was to implement the reforms of Vatican II in an equivocal way, this allowed them to start putting the reforms into practice and this was the goal, it [ Vatican II I believe ] was the springboard that permitted all this, so it can be said that the Holy Father, in effect, that it's not possible that a Pope could do all this, therefore he's not Pope.

This reasoning is worth, this reasoning, I don't know, I don't say that's what's going on and there are several scenarios, maybe this one has some merit, we'll know the truth later maybe, I don't know, I don't know. The way I see it, it's not clear yet, you understand, but one day if it came to light that it was true, and this is something that is far from impossible, here also, there are apparitions that say the same thing and these apparitions have been recognized by the See of Peter, Fatima, La Salette, that say that the devil will climb to the highest places in the Church, I don't know if by the "highest place in the Church" that means Secretary of State, and then stops there, or if it goes even farther, if it goes all the way to the Pope. I don't know maybe even to someone who says he's the Pope, I don't know, but you know this is something that isn't impossible and theologians have studied this problem, the theologians have studied this problem to see if it's something that can happen, if a Pope can perhaps be a heretic and as a result excommunicated from the Church and therefore all his acts become illegitimate and invalid. And if, just as a hypothesis, once again I just don't know, don't put words in my mouth, I don't know, but if at last it comes out that quietly that there are certain connections to Masonry, imagine that the Pope was registered in a Masonic lodge before his election, he would be excommunicated. Excommunicated... His election is invalid, he can't be Pope and we would have had for all this time... A Pope who wasn't Pope. This is possible. Once again I don't say this is what is really happening but what do you want in a situation like this, we're looking for a solution. We find ourselves with a problem that has almost no theological solution, theologically, I say theologically almost impossible to solve, so we search for a solution, fine! A solution that he is a prisoner, drugged, this is possible. I admit that when you see him move around and talk, personally I haven't seen him for two years, I haven't seen him in the flesh, I mean privately but with a public audience, I saw him put aside his paper and his script, speaking with a skill, a fluidity, getting to the point, with intelligence but in full possession of his faculties, in full possession of his faculties, not a man who had been drugged, or who has been given a shot or who... Not at all! The farthest thing from it!

Well then, when he blessed the Pentecostals, was there a revolver pointed at his head? When he kissed the feet of the Orthodox [ priest? I don't remember this occasion ]... No, this is absurd, it's not possible. Besides Mgr. Benelli said to me three weeks ago, when I saw him, Mgr. Benelli said to me: 'It's the Pope who wrote you those letters, you don't want to believe it but it's the Pope who wrote them to you, he is fully up to date, he is up to date about everything, he knows very well what he's doing and he's the one who wants all this happen and he makes the decisions and when I leave, when this conversation we're having is over and I leave, I am going to see the Pope every day, and I am immediately going to tell him what was said in this conversation.

All emphases mine.

[Greg]

If you think Francis is bad, wait till you see whose next.

Unless it is George Michael, I can't see the next geezer being much worse.

In some sense "the worse the better".  It polarises people and forces a decision from them.  Even JayneK would have to stop making crazy excuses if he was extreme enough.

[Guapo]

Polarization is on the menu.  Hegelian dialect is there main course.  Synthesis, Anti-synthesis, Thesis

[james03]

"Then, on a number of occasions, he was asked to approve appointments and transfers which he was not certain about. This troubled him deeply. "Then, he meditated, and prayed. And he made his plan. And what did he do? In a single blow, they are all gone, the heads of every office in the entire Curia. Now a younger man will be able to come in and, over the coming years, completely reform the Roman Curia. He couldn't have been more brilliant."

I've been saying something like this for some time.  But my version has that he was being blackmailed.  I speculate this because of the strange Cardinal Schoenborn meeting that resulted in the deal with +Fellay being changed while he was on his way to Rome, and the later sacking of Levada and his being replaced by the arch-heretic (yes, someone who denies the bodily Resurrection is a raving heretic) Mueller.  One month later Benedict was gone.  If that is true, then the resignation is valid.  He thought the next Pope would be clean and could handle it.  Edit:  Pope Benedict also told +Fellay:

My authority ends at this door.

The article is also misleading.  Here is the google translation of the key piece of "proof":

Rebounds circulating between the intelligence community in Rome, Italy, indicate that radical conservative sectors of the Roman Catholic Church have launched harsh criticism and vicious attacks against the Pope Francisco, through media, websites and social networks for their attitude reformer.
Among the arguments that, as an example, the Catholic conservatives wield radicals are:......
3.  At lunch meeting with Bededicto XVI in Castel Gandolfo, the Pope Francisco confided that one of the reasons for his resignation were infouyeron threats he received and for fear of being poisoned, they had already decided to kill him, by what Benedict XVI in a play to neutralize the attempt on his life, made ??public his resignation with which disarmed the attempt to kill him

So Fr. Zeteno is castigating "radical conservatives" of spreading this rumor.  He is not revealing it.

So there is nothing confirming it.  There was a report that the Pope was threatened in The Telegraph.  And it was probably true.  But I imagine the Pope gets death threats all the time.  I doubt this had anything to do with his resignation.

Now IF the Pope resigned because of a threat, then he is still the Pope.  Which also means that the Canonization of St. John Paul II, Martyr, The Great will be invalid.  We can only hope.  But as is, this article has zero proof.

[Elizabeth]

  Now about that Conclave...mmm..

What about the Conclave, Guapo?