It indeed behooves the Church’s episcopal body to take a closer look at the 2013 papal election, since we may very well be witnessing the fulfillment of the prophecy of St. Francis of Assisi concerning a false shepherd
By David Martin
With theologians and bishops aghast over what some are calling ‘the most terrible schism the world has ever seen,’ it behooves the Catholic hierarchy to take a closer look at the 2013 papal election since it appears to have raised to the Chair of Peter “a man, not canonically elected.”
To recap, on the eve of the 2013 conclave, Cardinal Óscar Rodríguez Maradiaga who was one of the key kingmakers for the papal election was busily on the phone with cardinal electors from the Honduran embassy in Rome. His frenzied phone effort was the tail end of an intense lobbying campaign to secure votes for the election of Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio as pope.
That same day, Maradiaga attended a private meeting of Bergoglio supporters, which included key players in the “St. Gallen Mafia,” and together they garnered pledges for up to twenty-five votes for Bergoglio. Not surprisingly, Bergoglio opened with twenty-six votes on the first day of the conclave, though that number would rise to 77 on the second day indicating that this campaign effort was gaining ground. Three days later the newly elected Pope Francis asked Maradiaga to head his powerful new Council of Cardinals, known as the “Council of Nine.”
Six years later, the pope and his “vice pope” are accused of perpetuating “one of the worst crises in the history of the Catholic Church.” A recent open letter addressed to the bishops of the Church accuses Pope Francis of being “guilty of the crime of heresy” and alleges that “Pope Francis has protected and promoted homosexually active clerics and clerical apologists for homosexual activity” indicating “he believes that homosexual activity is not gravely sinful.”
The letter cites the papal favor enjoyed by Maradiaga, a revolutionary accused of covering up for homosexual bishop Juan José Pineda Fasquelle. Pineda was forced to resign amidst allegations that he sexually abused seminarians and embezzled over $1.3 million to “pay for sexual favors” and “maintain a network” of gay-lovers. Reports have it that Maradiaga has brutally ruined the careers of at least six priests who spoke out against Pineda.
Fruits of Vote Canvassing
Hence Francis—who has abetted anti-life forces, betrayed the underground Church in China, sacked loyal priests, empowered homosexuals, rewarded abortionists, praised Luther, blessed adultery, denied the miracle of the loaves, and professed manifold heresy—occupies the Papal Chair today because of this LGBT canvassing campaign that made the difference in determining the outcome of the 2013 papal election. On August 27, 2018, Vatican correspondent Edward Pentin tweeted concerning this political campaign.
“Cdls Danneels & Ex-Cdl McCarrick campaigned for Bergoglio to be Pope, as did ++Maradiaga on eve of Conclave, phoning up various cardinals from the Honduran embassy in Rome. Despite their pasts, all 3 prelates have since been special advisors of Francis or rehabilitated by him.”
As we know, the late Cardinal Danneels was a public advocate of “gay marriage” and McCarrick was defrocked of his bishopric last February after being indicted for homosexual predation of seminarians and for covering up the sexual-abuse of numerous seminarians perpetrated by some 300 priests under his jurisdiction.
San Gallen’s Mafia
Danneels confessed on video in September 2015 that he and several cardinals were part of the notorious St. Gallen’s Mafia that had conspired for the ouster of Benedict XVI and the election of Cardinal Bergoglio, and it was this very group that culminated its campaign effort just before the 2013 conclave, showing clearly that conspiracy played a key role in the outcome of the election. Danneel’s confession alone stands as irrefutable evidence.
Austen Ivereigh’s book, The Great Reformer, brings to light how Cardinal Murphy O’Connor (a homosexual) along with several key cardinals had spearheaded this intense lobbying campaign, through which they secured pledges from nearly 30 cardinals to get Cardinal Bergoglio elected as pope.
According to Ivereigh, “they first secured Bergoglio’s assent” and then “they got to work, touring the cardinals’ dinners to promote their man.” This was confirmed, in the case of Cardinals Murphy-O’Connor and Cardinal O’Malley, in the Wall Street Journal report from August 6, 2013. As the conclave neared, they held a series of closed meetings, known as congregations, one of which featured Cardinal Bergoglio as the keynote speaker, thereby proving that Bergoglio was colluding in this plan.
Ecclesiastical Law Violated
The foregoing warrants episcopal inquisition into Pope Francis’ election since it contained multi-violations against Pope John Paul II’s Apostolic Constitution Unversi Dominici Gregis, which governs papal elections. The Constitution makes it clear that political vote canvassing on the part of cardinal electors is forbidden and incurs automatic excommunication upon those involved. Consider the following:
“The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition.” (81)
While the pope here speaks of the election itself, we should not rule out that this prohibition also applies to that time before the election when preparations are underway, since it is during this time that illicit political activity would exert its greatest influence on the vote. “Any form of pact” obliging electors “to give or deny their vote to a person” would be secured before the election.
We should also consider that violations not mentioned in the Constitution could also criminalize the election. Crimes like extortion or LGBT bribery committed before the election would certainly render the election illicit if their influence carried into the election.
The pope also says in his Constitution:
“Confirming the prescriptions of my Predecessors, I likewise forbid anyone, even if he is a Cardinal, during the Pope’s lifetime and without having consulted him, to make plans concerning the election of his successor, or to promise votes, or to make decisions in this regard in private gatherings.” (79)
A clique of cardinals did “make plans” to force Benedict XVI’s resignation and to campaign for “the election of his successor,” with up to 25 cardinals “promising votes” the day before the election, this having come about through “private gatherings,” thus revealing the illicit conduct of those cardinal electors to be.
Under the pain of excommunication latae sententiae, the pope forbids “each and every Cardinal elector, present and future, as also the Secretary of the College of Cardinals and all other persons taking part in the preparation and carrying out of everything necessary for the election” to allow “all possible forms of interference, opposition and suggestion whereby secular authorities of whatever order and degree, or any individual or group, might attempt to exercise influence on the election of the Pope.” (80)
It was through Judas cardinals that are allied with the infamous LGBT network and who were “taking part in the preparation” of the election that the secular powers were enabled to “exercise influence on the election of the pope.”
Section 76 of John Paul II’s the Constitution states:
“Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected.” (76)
There is much being said at this time concerning Francis’ errors and heterodoxy but little is said concerning the election that launched his revolution. Has it not occurred to Catholics that his election could have been null?
It indeed behooves the Church’s episcopal body to take a closer look at the 2013 papal election, since we may very well be witnessing the fulfillment of the prophecy of St. Francis of Assisi concerning a false shepherd.
“At the time of this tribulation, a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavor to draw many into error…Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true pastor, but a destroyer.” (1226)
—(Taken from Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis of Assisi, R. Washbourne Publishing House, 1882, pp. 248-250, with imprimatur by His Excellency William Bernard, Bishop of Birmingham)