The Pontifical Reign of Scandal
David Martin | The Daily Knight
Pope Francis congratulates abortion activist Lillian Ploumen after conferring on her the prestigious Order of St. Gregory Award in June 2017. (Photo source, the Netherlands Government)
In the Gospel, Christ speaks of His Second Coming where He says, “The Son of man shall send his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all scandals, and them that work iniquity.” (Matthew 13: 41)
Among other things, Christ is referencing the latter-day scandal of Pope Francis through whom the Church has been made a laughing-stock as in no other period of Church history. For no pope of history (1) has turned the Church against its own religious teachings like Francis has.
Need we cite his bowing to idols, his denial of Christ’s miracles, his denial of eternal hell and damnation, his denial of the Virgin Mary’s role as Co-Redemptrix, his sacking of loyal priests, his suppression of the Traditional Latin Mass, his betrayal of the underground Church in China, his endorsement of homosexuality, his praise of LGBT priest Fr. James Martin, his appointment of LGBT bishops to high positions in the Church, his collusion with homosexual collaborators, his blessing of “transgenders,” his blessing of adultery via Communion to the divorced and civilly remarried, his declaration that the commandments are “not absolutes,” his declaration that “all are redeemed,” his praise of Martin Luther, his support of Black Lives Matter, his praise of Communists, his praise of abortionist Emma Bonino, his rewarding of abortion activist Lillian Ploumen, his collusion with U.N. abortion advocates, his dismantling of John Paul II’s Pontifical Academy for Life, and now his mandating of the COVID vaccine for all Vatican personnel?
His imposition of the jab alone is hair-raising since the COVID vaccine—made with aborted baby tissue—is a key part of the globalist plan to blackmail humanity into compliance with an oppressive New World Order. Herein we see a historic abuse of power in that Francis has provided the moral authority to back the New World Order and has now taken it upon himself to mandate the diabolical COVID vaccine, even slamming those who refuse it.
“A Non-Catholic Pope”
In a statement on July 28th, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano spoke of Pope Francis’ failing pontificate, saying, “We have come to the point that even simple people with little knowledge of doctrinal issues understand that we have a non-Catholic pope, at least in the strict sense of the term.” He said that Francis’ apostasy “poses some problems of a canonical nature.”
Vigano’s statement concerned Francis’ despotic July 16 motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, in which he ruthlessly suppresses the Traditional Latin Mass. Vigano said that "no particular pressure was needed from the historical enemies of the Tridentine Liturgy – beginning with the scholars of Sant' Anselmo – to convince His Holiness to try his hand at what he does best: demolishing."
Francis indeed has shown himself to be a destroyer, for he is pushing a radical globalist agenda that has scandalized even some modernists. Yea, even the terrorist Black Lives Matter group has found some of his policies revolting. More and more we see informed Catholics raising the question as to whether or not Francis’ election was even valid.
Papal Election Steal?
There in fact is evidence supporting allegations that Francis was not legitimately elected. According to the late Cardinal Danneels of Brussels, known for his support of abortion and LGBT rights, he and several cardinals were part of a "mafia" club that was calling for drastic changes in the Church, to make it "much more modern," and that the plan was to oust Benedict and have Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio [Francis] head it. Danneels had voiced these ambitions during a taped interview in September 2015.
This infamous clique comprised key members of the Vatican "gay lobby" that had clamored for Benedict's resignation, the same that had almost prevented his election in 2005. As the 2013 conclave neared, they held a series of closed meetings, known as congregations, one of which featured Cardinal Bergoglio as the keynote speaker.
On the eve of the conclave, Cardinal Óscar Rodríguez Maradiaga was busily on the phone with cardinal electors from the Honduran embassy in Rome. His phone effort was the tail end of this intense lobbying campaign to secure votes for the election of Cardinal 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.”
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.”
Rules and Regulations Violated
Clearly, there was intense politics and vote canvassing at work around the time of the conclave, which directly violated Pope John Paul II's 1996 Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis, governing papal elections. Therein he makes it clear that vote canvassing among cardinal electors is strictly forbidden and incurs automatic excommunication. Consider the following from his Constitution:
“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)
This prohibition applies not only to the election itself but 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.
The pope 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, Pope John Paul 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)
Unfortunately, secular and political interference played the key part in Francis’ election. According to John Paul II, such interference renders the papal election null and void.
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 (2) null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected. (76)