The implications beneath the Rorate parable are deeply troubling.But there is at least one thing I do not quite understand: how could Benedict be sufficiently persuaded that he would be replaced with a like-minded successor (Scola/Ouellet), so persuaded that he resigns, all the while "Team Bergoglio" was sufficiently persuaded they could be victorious in a conclave, so persuaded they risked prolonging the Ratzingerian line in the form of a younger, conservative successor?A possible key to solving this riddle might be that faction of cardinals in the conclave who owed their scarlet to Tarcisio Bertone. Could Bertone have delivered the votes he controlled to Bergoglio after having assured Benedict he would work to ensure a continuation of the Ratzingerian line? Bertone certainly fits the description of somebody very much in the trust of Benedict, and were not many of the leaked documents out of the Secretary of State's office, ostensibly aimed at embarrassing Bertone, but perhaps with ulterior motives as well. Just why was Bertone on the loggia when Pope Francis was elected? And yet, if Bertone is the culprit in the Rorate parable, why does he seem to have been left in the cold during this pontificate?
It's not a "theory". These are events of the recent past, just some specific details are missing.
Rorate: Sounds right to me!
If these reports are true, we also have a perfect explanation for the recent Synod: it was recompense for Cardinal Kasper. The Holy Father owed him for his papacy and so gave him the opportunity to present his pastoral concerns regarding civilly re-married Catholics to his colleagues, which the HF seems to share. Having had his hat handed to him during the Synod by Cardinals Burke, Pell, et. al., one can only hope that Cardinal Kasper now realize the error of his theological ways (and that the Holy Father himself now knows who is on the side not only of our Lord, but Reason). Then again, we shouldn't expect too much intellectually from a man who studies Schelling: that's absolute philosophical garbage.
Remembedr when Benedicts valet stole from him? Now that hes resigned the whole Vaticanleaks thing has gone away. He might have gotten sick of the constant harassment and the pro Bergoglio crowd offered him a way out.
M.J. was not too keen on Ratzinger for he did not discharge his duties as Pope but, rather, continued the same effete ecumenical praxis of his predecessors and although he deserves credit for resurrecting the Roman Rite, he did so only as an act of tolerance to we benighted barbarians.The fact that this is a topic is owing to the flat-out bizarre behavior of Bergolio but it is worth noting that politicking for the Papacy is tradition and this fiasco tends to distract from focusing on Bergolio's actual words and behavior which, if it hasn't already, will present the Cardinals with a fish or cut bait moment vis a vis forcing him out of the Papacy.As for Kasper and Bergolio having learned any lessons, it may just be the case that he has learned whom to slice and dice out of the picture (reassignments, promotions to positions of diminished influence ) so he can implement his agenda.Look, he came to the Papacy with the intent to implement his mercy vis a vis the divorced and remarried and he told the world that publicly on his plane trip back from the irreplaceable and critically necessary World Youth Day.O, and as an aside, 1 Cor warns Popes that they are guilty of mortal sin if they do not preach the Gospel.So, which of the modern Popes have preached the Gospel to protestants jews, atheists, mahometans, buddhists, and/or Amway Salesman?None have, have they?
Report from Rome, among others, speculate that the papal politicking resulted in the excommunication of the participants of the politicking but if that is the case, those involved received automatic excommunications long before that event.And what about CDF Prefect, Cardinal Ratzinger (and Pope John Paul II who approved it) who declared that the Encyclicals against Modernism and Religious liberty and the decisions of the PBC were essentially voided and were no longer in effect.Well, there is a series problem which such a claim...http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10prasc.htmThe deeper one digs the uglier it gets.There is absolutely no doubt that we have a new church with a new way and there is absolutely no doubt that the fathers of V2 had no use for the pre V2 Church and so they blew it up - pastorally.It exists still because they could not destroy her for Jesus is the head of His Church but He will not force the modern Popes and Prelates to discharge their duties.All the is a consequence of sin - especially mine and those of my ilk -but do not be fooled by claims of continuity; none exists and Ratzinger was probably the most dangerous of all the modern Popes owing to his intellect and knowledge but he clearly wrote many heretical things prior to his election and he clearly denied original sin etc etc and it has all been throughly documents by James Larson in War Against Being.
Johannes de SilentioYour theory that Bertone could have been the one who convinced Benedict XVI that the Papacy would be in safe hands, then helped deliver votes to Bergoglio, seems possible. But the Spanish-language press has recently added two other cardinals' names to the four mentioned by Iverleigh: O'Malley of Boston and Schoenborn of Vienna. http://www.radioformula.com.mx/notas.asp?Idn=460165&idFC=2014 Schoenborn, a Ratzinger intimate of many years who has sadly moved in the direction of his fellow German-speaking bishops more recently, seems a plausible candidate for a cardinal close to Benedict who may have helped convince him that the Papacy would stay with another "Communio" type like Scola or Ouellet, but then used his influence to help elect Bergoglio.
Schoenborn makes a lot of sense as a Bergoglian co-conspirator, but he alone could not have persuaded Benedict to abdicate. I do remember reading somewhere Schoenborn indicating that he voted for Bergoglio from the first ballot. As for Bertone, he knew about the Pope's decision months in advance. About how many cardinals can that be said?
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/author-cardinals-differ-over-claim-of-conclave-campaigning/The 2013 papal conclave that elected Pope Francis is news again now that four cardinals have denied a new book’s claim that they campaigned for Pope Francis to be elected — though the book’s author has clarified the Pope himself was not a part of their supposed campaign.
Post a Comment