PRAYERS TO OUR LADY

What Happened in the Conclave After the "Fourth" Ballot? - Eponymous Flower

What Happened in the Conclave After the "Fourth" Ballot? Does Pope Francis Want a New Cardinal Majority?

John Paul II. Gives Jorge Mario Bergoglio the dignity of Cardinal

(Rome) The Italian journalist and Rector of the School of Journalism of Perugia, Antonio Socci, took the call of Pope Francis, "tear down all the walls" as an excuse, even to demand tearing down the "wall of silence" around the conclave. Socci is known to have doubted the validity of the election of Pope Francis. It's a daring hypothesis that has met with general rejection because of its insufficient foundation. Irrespective of this, however, Socci's questions can not be passed over without further ado.

In his book "Non é Francesco" (He is not Francis) he gave a synopsis of the inconsistencies in the pontificate of the reigning Pope that seems to strike a chord with many insecure Catholics. Two and a half months after its release, Soccis's book has been number one in Italy's Religion / Spirituality area.

In the circle of his colleagues, they feel that since the publication of his book Socci has gone too far in his main thesis. Yet no one denies that he has mastered his craft as a journalist nor neglected a flair for details. It is also not surprising that he sees in Austen Ivereighs book "The Great Reformer" grist for his own mill. The more so, as Ivereigh, unlike Socci, is an avowed admirer of Francis.

Ivereigh, former Press Agent for Cardinal Murphy O'Connor, revealed the existence of a group of cardinals, which he called "Team Bergoglio". This group, which existed in its core of the cardinals Lehmann, Kasper, Danneels and O'Connor should have joined forces to raise a candidate of their choice to the papal throne. The candidate of their choice was the primate of Argentina, Jorge Mario Cardinal Bergoglio. Back in 2005, after the obvious failure of the long-standing "Ante-Pope" Carlo Maria Martini, the voices of the progressive party had focused on another Jesuit, the Argentine Bergoglio, in the College of Cardinals. This conspiracy got cold feet in its duel against Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and retired. For this reason, said Ivereigh, team Bergoglio, having a commitment from Bergoglio before the conclave of 2013, would not back down this time. The "team" then successfully organized the campaign to Ivereigh's delight.

The revelation caused such a stir that Cardinal O'Connor published a correction and Vatican spokesman Lombardi at the request of four cardinals named issued a disclaimer.

And to this, Antonio Socci writes:

Mysterious delay

Antonio Socci

"(...) To date, there is no explanation of the unusual delay for Pope Bergoglio to appear on the loggia of St. Peter the before the people.

Between the white smoke and the first appearance, it took twice as much time as with Benedict XVI. Why? What happened? And what about the strange episode when Bergoglio entrusted Scalfari to report this together with the first papal interview on October 1, 2013?

Bergoglio explained, 'When I was elected Pope in the conclave, I asked before I accepted the option to retire for a few minutes in the room next to the balcony facing the square. My head was completely empty and a great fear had fallen upon me. So it passed and I calmed myself, I closed my eyes and every thought disappeared, and to refuse the office, which the liturgical procedure allows. I closed my eyes and felt no fear or emotionality any more. '

Then, said Bergoglio further, I jumped like a shot and went into the room where the Cardinals were waiting for me and the table on which lay the acceptance. I signed, and the Cardinal Chamberlain countersigned and then there was the Habemus Papam on the balcony.'

It would be interesting to understand why the white smoke was given at 19.06 clock, about an hour before the Habemus Papam, which was at 20.12 clock. The white smoke could certainly not have been given before Bergoglio accepting the election, since there is only with the signing of the declaration of acceptance a new pope and must take this assumption of free will, and therefore may not take place before the anticipated white smoke ,

It would also be interesting to understand the whys and the wherefores of this election acceptance after Bergoglio had indeed not accepted according to his Jesuit vow, not to accept.

The aforementioned Scalfari interview was in fact confirmed by Bergoglio himself, who had published it in an anthology of the Vatican publishing house a month ago. Why are these questions and circumstances not resolved and put to rest?"

Many New Cardinals in a Short Time

As far as Antonio Socci, he suggests the lifting of secrecy for the Cardinals. This could, said the Italian journalist, answer all the questions raised in his book. He would then like to acknowledge the facts.

But until now it has not been confirmed by any canon that the election held has been canonically correct. The sequence of the conclave will be described by Elisabetta Pique in the Pope's biography. The Argentine journalist and Pope-friend here based it directly on her personal recollections of the Pope's words himself. It's a procedure that had been confirmed by an unnamed cardinal to the Corriere della Sera.

If the conclave had been concluded, like he, Socci, describes it in his book, then the election would be invalid and thus there would be no white-robed incumbent on the Chair of Peter and all official acts since then would be null and void.

"The problem is now that Pope Bergoglio has announced the creation of new cardinals for the upcoming February 15 and may add up to 19 cardinals to be created in February 2014. Why so many appointments in such a short time? To shift the relationships in the College of Cardinals? There is a certain restlessness in the ecclesiastical world, because it is suspected that today progressives in the Curia will push for a future conclave with an axis shifted toward a more modernist leftist.

Apart from the fact that the Pope is 78 years old, we are constantly hearing about a possible resignation. Before that happens, maybe someone wants a progressive revolution in the College of Cardinals. Thus, there can be no opposite pendulum swing by a startled Cardinal majority.

The conclave of 2013 had by no means a "progressive" majority. Bergoglio was only chosen because cardinals served up all kinds of stories to get their votes. From the transitional pope, to a pope of necessity, a pope in the southern hemisphere, but always with the assurance that the Argentine would stand in continuity with Benedict XVI. and John Paul II. It was not a coincidence that Bergoglio was found again at the recent Synod of Bishops in the minority. The result is the work of personal conversion. Thus, if the College of Cardinals were turned upside down with a view to a future conclave?" Thus is the final question of Antonio Socci in his essay, on 21 December, and thus one day before the little friendly papal Christmas message to the Curia staff in the daily newspaper Libero had been published.

What Happened in the Conclave After the "Fourth" Ballot? - Eponymou...

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael on December 29, 2014 at 5:30pm

Shortly before he died in 1226, St. Francis of Assisi called together the members of his order and warned them of great tribulations that would befall the Church in the future, saying:

Act bravely, my Brethren; take courage, and trust in the Lord. The time is fast approaching in which there will be great trials and afflictions; perplexities and dissensions, both spiritual and temporal, will abound; the charity of many will grow cold, and the malice of the wicked will increase.

The devils will have unusual power, the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff and the Roman Church with loyal hearts and perfect charity. At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavour to draw many into error and death.

Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it.

There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the immense mercy of God.

Then our Rule and manner of life will be violently opposed by some, and terrible trials will come upon us. Those who are found faithful will receive the crown of life; but woe to those who, trusting solely in their Order, shall fall into tepidity, for they will not be able to support the temptations permitted for the proving of the elect.

Those who preserve their fervour and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and, persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent men from the face of the earth. But the Lord will be the refuge of the afflicted, and will save all who trust in Him. And in order to be like their Head [Jesus Christ], these, the elect, will act with confidence, and by their death will purchase for themselves eternal life; choosing to obey God rather than man, they will fear nothing, and they will prefer to perish [physically] rather than consent to falsehood and perfidy.

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.

(Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi, [London: R. Washbourne, 1882], pp. 248-250;

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael on December 29, 2014 at 7:54pm

"I must confess I was wrong about Pope Francis"

Alfredo Rostgaard
Christ guerrilla
1969

I confess my mistakes about Pope Francis

Breno Altman
Opera Mundi /Carta Maior [Brazil]

Dec. 24, 2014

I come from a Jewish family hardwired to Socialist ideas and to atheism for four generations.

The last one in my lineage to believe in God must have died in the beginning of the last century.

Christmas is to me a date with no special significance, even though I have learned to respect those who celebrate the birth of Jesus.

But I wish to take the opportunity of this Christmas Eve to make a confession.

A year and a half ago, I wrote for Opera Mundi one of the most flawed articles of my journalistic career. The title says it all ... : "Pope Francis is the modern counter-revolution."

I realize that the admission of mistakes is not a custom that is much appreciated within my profession. We belong, after all, to that group of professions in which credibility depends on getting information and predictions right. When a mistake is made, the path out is usually to fit reality within the straightjacket that we had written. Or to let the time go by, expecting readers to forget the grievous errors committed. In the worst case scenario, an 'our mistake' column is published discreetly just for the record.

The mistake [this time] was, however, so absurd that it would be shameful not to admit it in public. Not that it would make any difference to anyone. Just out of the desire to remain at peace with my conscience.

The summary of the absurd analysis is in the paragraph below, in which I commented on the thinking of the new pontiff, then recently elected:

"There is no difference whatsoever in [his] approach...from the one preached by John Paul II and Benedict II. The same dogmas are still standing: the centrality of religious faith on political and social issues, the irascible combat against women's right to the interruption of pregnancy, and the affirmation of heterosexuality as the only possible erotic-affective relationship."

Do you want more?

"Devoid of aristocratic rites and battling the old corrupt curia, the Catholic Church presents itself with a new face, capable of captivating the world to the same ideas of all time."

Or still...

"Francis' style... brings youth, sympathy, and humility to the rotten language of his predecessors. Despite refuting any alteration to the set of decisions that removed Catholic groups from supporting popular struggles, his oratory in favor of the poor rejuvenates the Vatican."

In order to end it like this:

"The rightwing finds, in this renewal, a good reason for enthusiasm. A strengthened and cherished pope is a noteworthy instrument for any stratefy of reduction of the influence of the left in low-income social strata, especially in Latin America."

Pope Francis has since then belied all these arrogant predictions.

Besides battling the Vatican court and their interests, he launched a crusade to take Catholicism back to being in touch with social movements, embracing their goal.

He struggles to reform the Church's discourse on civil rights, including subject that had up to now been forbidden, such as the welcoming of sexual diversity and the defense of women's health when faced with religious dogma. He reached out his hand to the Latin-American left, supporting Progressive experiences and disavowing the links between Catholic organizations and conservative conspiracies. If that were not enough, pope Francis was decisive in the talks that led the United States to re-establish diplomatic relations with Cuba, after over fifty years of rupture.

I made the mistake of comparing him to his predecessors, patriarchs of the Ultramontane reaction that had established itself in the Church since the 1980s. The appropriate comparison would have been, however, with the age of John XXIII, who led the reform of the institution in the 1960s and opened up space for Liberation Theology. The Argentinian pope, by the way, may be less strong than the head of the Vatican II Council, but his program is deeper and more heretical.

The first person to try to open my eyes to the mistakes I made and published was Joao Pedro Stedile, the brave leader of the MST [Landless Workers' Movement] and of Via Campesina [Peasant Way], currently one of the main lay interlocutors of Francis. It took me a long time to listen to him. I gradually realized that I had been contaminated by [personal] prejudice and ravings.

Living and learning.

I recognize today that the pope is leading a revolution in Catholicism, that must be observed and shared by the Progressive forces in the planet. I don't know if he will be victorious, because the reactionary currents may still have immense strengths. What matters, though, is that the Midnight mass will be celebrated tonight, for the second year in a row, by a Pope who has showed his commitment to the poor and to change.

As for myself, were I a Christian, some penance for the rash conclusions of 2013 would be in order. The good thing for Atheists is that self-criticism is enough.

I confess my mistakes about Pope Francis