TRUTH OR FICTION

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

Socci & Bishop Gracida: On Francis’s “Dubious” Conclave, St. Bellermine’s “Dubious Pope” & the “Universal Acceptance” Thesis of Francis is False

The Catholic Monitor
Frà Alexis Bugnolo – gloria.tv

Vatican expert Sandro Magister is the creator of the www.chiesa.espressonline.it website. In 2015, the site had an article “On the election of Pope Francis” which was authored by a unnamed “professor of canon law.” 

The article presented evidence from journalist Antonio Socci that it disagreed with which said there may have been serious irregularities against Pope John Paul II’s apostolic constitution “Universi dominici gregis” that “regulated the vacancy of the Apostolic See and the election of the [new] Roman pontiff.” 

The constitution governed the 2013 conclave which because of serious irregularities could have invalidated the conclave that elected Francis thus making him an antipope according to Socci. 

The post states that Francis’s authorized biographer from Argentina Elisabbeta Piqué revealed in her book “Francis. Life and revolution” that:

“In the election of Pope Francis… [a cardinal] shuffles the pieces of paper placed in the urn, he realizes that there is one more: there are 116 and not 115 as they should be. It seems that, by mistake, a cardinal placed two pieces of paper in the urn: one with the name of his chosen one and one in white, which had remained attached to the first. Things that happen. Nothing to be done, this vote is immediately canceled, the sheets will be burned later without having been seen, and we proceed to a sixth vote »; and this indiscretion would have been confirmed by some cardinal.” [https://chiesa-espresso-repubblica-it.translate.goog/articolo/1350960.html?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=it&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui,sc: “Elisabetta Piqué, ‘Francesco. Life and revolution’, Lindau, Turin, 2013, pp. 39-40.?”]

Mexican journalist Jose Munguia who studied theology at the Gregorian University in Rome says that “Piqué knew [Francis], [and] through Francis himself, what happened inside the conclave.” [https://www.ultimostiempos.org/en/blog-en/item/81-antipopes-conclave.html]

Getting back to the professor’s article, he next said that according “Antonio Socci, in the volume ‘It is not Francis. The Church in the great storm'” there is probable cause of “nullity of the election of Jorge Mario Bergoglio” as pope”:

It is not worth dwelling on the inferences that invariably follow the conclusion of each conclave, based on alleged revelations by subjects kept to a strict secret. In any case, according to this news Antonio Socci, in the volume “It is not Francis. The Church in the great storm” (3), supported the thesis of the nullity of the election of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, which was perfected on May 13, 2013. In fact, in his opinion, one would have erroneously (not however in bad faith, but out of superficiality and approximation, “and the nullity of the election does not absolutely represent a judgment on the person”: his goodness!) applied n. 68 of the apostolic constitution “Universi dominici gregis”promulgated on February 22, 1996 by John Paul II who regulates the vacancy of the Apostolic See and the election of the Roman pontiff.

This rule states that if, during the counting of the ballots, the scrutineer in charge verifies, by taking them visibly one by one from the ballot box, that the number of ballots does not correspond to the number of voters, they must be burned and a second ballot proceeded (4). 

Instead, according to Socci, n. 69, which pertains to a subsequent step and states that if in the counting of the votes the scrutineers find two ballots folded so as to appear to have been filled in by a single voter, if they bear the same name they must be counted for only one vote, if instead they carry two different names, neither of the two votes will be valid, but in neither of the two cases the ballot is annulled (5).

Therefore “a vote that had to be considered valid and scrutinized” (p. 110) would have been canceled: the provisions of the constitution “Universi dominici gregis” having been transgressed, according to the provisions of n. 76 the election of Francis would therefore be null and void, without any declaration on the subject, conferring no right on the elected person (“Quodsi electio aliter celebrated fuerit, quam haec Constitutio statuit, aut non servatis condicionibus pariter hic praescriptis , electio eo ipso est nulla et invalida absque ulla declaratione, ideoque electo nullum ius tribuit “). 

Among other things, in the opinion of Socci (which spreads in further assumptions about the trend of the votes not supported by any feedback and on which I do not delay here), a fifth vote would have been immediately carried out in contrast with the no. . 63 which imposes, in the days following the first, “duo suffragia erunt ferenda, tum mane tum vespere”: according to the author, “on the afternoon of March 13, with that further vote, the regulation was forced and the the elderly cardinals to an unexpected stress by making them vote again “(p. 116)…

… Ultimately: «Bergoglio’s election to the papacy simply never existed. It is not even a problem that can be healed a posteriori because you cannot heal what has never existed “(p. 111). 
[https://chiesa-espresso-repubblica-it.translate.goog/articolo/1350960.html?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=it&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui,sc]

Magister’s professor in the post disagrees with Socci’s thesis and says that apparently the Universal acceptance thesis put forward by John Salza that was promoted by former One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec is part of the answer to Socci:

Antonio Socci finally argues: “Even if only a dubious judgment were expressed on the validity of the procedures followed that 13 March 2013, it can be considered that the conclave must be redone because the doctrine teaches that” dubius papa habetur pro non papa “(a dubious pope he considers himself not to be pope), as the great doctor of the Church and Jesuit cardinal St. Roberto Bellarmino writes in the treatise “De conciliis et ecclesia militant” “(pp. 7, 122). Socci’s Conclave 
 
On the contrary, even if what is reported had happened, the procedure followed, as demonstrated, would have been integrally “ad normam iuris”: the election of Pope Francis, having reached the expected majority on the fifth ballot (the first, I remember, occurred May 12), would be valid, there would be nothing to heal, there would be no doubt, much less “positive” and “insoluble” (as the law postulates), about its validity.

Given the total juridical groundlessness of these suppositions, even if one wants to give credit to the information on which he claims to take root, the bogeyman – rashly agitated – of the current sitting on the chair of Peter of a dubious pope also vanishes. However, canon law has constantly and unanimously taught that the pacifica “universalis ecclesiae adhaesio” is an infallible sign and effect of a valid election and a legitimate papacy (10): and the adhesion of the people of God to Pope Francis cannot be in no way in doubt. .[https://chiesa-espresso-repubblica-it.translate.goog/articolo/1350960.html?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=it&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui,sc]

On March 23, 2019, Bishop Rene Gracida who would have to be part of such a “universal acceptance” demonstrated that Salza’s thesis is false:

https://abyssum.org/2019/03/23/why-do-intelligent-men-pursue-the-application-of-an-obsolete-concept-universal-acceptance-to-the-problem-of-the-invalidity-of-the-papacy-of-francis-the-merciful-in-this-day-and-age-of-instant-elec/

WHY DO INTELLIGENT MEN PURSUE THE APPLICATION OF AN OBSOLETE CONCEPT “UNIVERSAL ACCEPTANCE” TO THE PROBLEM OF THE INVALIDITY OF THE PAPACY OF FRANCIS THE MERCIFUL IN THIS DAY AND AGE OF INSTANT ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION AROUND THE WORLD

I am in receipt of an email from Steve Skojec, publisher of the website OnePeterFive in which he defends his posts in which he argues for the validity of the election of Francis the Merciful on the basis of the “universal acceptance” of Francis’ election by the world’s Catholic population. 

The idea of “universal acceptance” of the election of popes of the past may have had it’s origin in the first centuries of the Church when popes were chosen by acclamation of the assembled citizens of Rome, and perhaps later when the princes and kings of Europe decided on the legitimacy of papal contestants in the time of the Avignon captivity of the papacy.

But the idea of “universal acceptance” as the principle determining the validity of Francis’ claim to the Chair of Peter is absurd in this day of instant electronic communication. There is not a world-wide Pew or Gallup poll that can determine the degree of “acceptance” of the Bergolian regime as valid by the world’s Catholic population.

From the moment that Francis appeared on the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica improperly dressed and accompanied by men of known or suspected homosexual orientation many Catholics besides myself were shocked and dismayed.

Almost immediately almost every word publicly uttered by Francis shocked Catholic sensibilities, such as telling the woman with several children to “stop breeding like rabbits.” Many Catholics withheld their “acceptance” and adopted a wait-and-see attitude.

Then the Amoris Laeticia debacle unfolded and now an even larger percentage of Catholic around the world began to express reservations about the ‘papacy’ of Francis the Merciful. There was never universal acceptance of the validity of Jorge Bergoglio.

One thing is certain, the popes of the Twentieth Century were aware that the election of future popes was now no longer subject to the interference of kings and princes as in the past, now the corruption of the democratic processes for choosing the heads of nations was threatening the papal conclaves of the Church. Pope Paul VI, perhaps alarmed by the forces for radical reform of the Church follow the lead of his recent predecessor and published a revision of the Apostolic Constitution which governs papal conclaves.
  
It is unthinkable that Pope Saint John Paul II was unaware of the plotting that began with the St. Gallen Mafia in the early 1990s.

 His magnificent Apostolic Constituion, Universi Dominci Gregis, was his prescient action to head off the corruption of the conclaves of the future. Yet, the rot at the center of the hierarchy had progress to such point that Jorge Bergoglio was almost elected instead of Joseph Ratzinger, but the St. Gallen conspirators succeed in 2013 with the election of Francis the Merciful.

What is the sure test of the validity of the election of a cardinal to the papacy? It is not the medieval concept of ‘universal acceptance.’ It is compliance with the law of the Church. The Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis is the only law in effect since it was published by Pope Saint John Paul II in 1992.

If there is one characteristic that is common to the leadership of the Church since the Second Vatican Council is disregard for law, all law, divine law and canon law. Men who would be architects of the Church of the Future ignore the law of God and the law of His Church. That is why some cling to the outmoded concept of ‘universal acceptance’ of a man who obtained the Chair of Peter through the manipulations of many who by their immoral lives reveal their contempt for law, all law, including Divine Law.

His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, having known a prodigious amount of information on this,
was fully knowledgeable in the details of dogmatic and doctrinal principles which previous
to his Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis, could and would be applied to resolve
questions about the validity of a particular historic Papacy, and that His Holiness categorically
and specifically intended to dispense with, and utterly to preempt, the need for, and use of,
any principles which had been applied historically to resolve ambiguities and doubts
about the incumbency of any Pontiff putatively emerging from a Conclave to which His
Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis applied.

 This means that because the status of Monsignor Bergoglio can be determined completely
by a fair and just application of Universi Dominici Gregis without reference to any guidance
external or extrinsic to such Constitution, having recourse to such historic doctrinal and
dogmatic concepts, e.g., universal acceptance, is neither material nor relevant, and never
necessary or proper for the rational discernment of the question of whether or not
Monsignor Bergoglio was validly elected as a true Roman Pontiff.  The “scienter” Promulgation
determines this certainty of discernment confined within the “four corners” of the Constitution:

“This Constitution  .   .   .  is to be fully and integrally implemented and is to serve as a guide
for all to whom it refers.  As determined above, I hereby declare abrogated all Constitutions
and Orders issued in this regard by the Roman Pontiffs, and at the same time I declare
completely null and void anything done by any person, whatever his authority, knowingly
or unknowingly, in any way contrary to this Constitution.”[Promulgation Clause, Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis]


This language does not admit of any exception, and certainly not an exception based on
the degree to which a putative Pope has “acceptance” as such.  “Universal acceptance”
originated in an age before the printing press, a time when what was required was known
by few and what was performed was understood by even less.  It simply has no place
in discerning a Conclave called subject to Universi Dominici Gregis.  What Skojec,
Does not seem to understand is that, long in advance and lawfully, His Holiness, Pope
John Paul II, has forbidden anyone from resorting to “universal acceptance”
or any other principle extrinsic to Universi Dominici Gregis to discern the outcome of papal election.

Thus, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, having known a prodigious amount of information on this,
was fully knowledgeable in the details of dogmatic and doctrinal principles which previous
to his Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis, could and would be applied to resolve
questions about the validity of a particular historic Papacy, and His Holiness categorically
and specifically intended to dispense with, and utterly to preempt, the need for, and use of,
any such principles which had been applied historically to resolve ambiguities and doubts 
about the incumbency of any Pontiff putatively emerging from a Conclave to which His
Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis applied.
  
This means that because the status of Monsignor Bergoglio can be determined completely
by a fair and just application of Universi Dominici Gregis without reference to any guidance
external or extrinsic to such Constitution, having recourse to any such historic doctrinal and 
dogmatic concept, e.g., universal acceptance, is neither material nor relevant, and never 
necessary or proper for the rational discernment of the question of whether or not 
Monsignor Bergoglio was validly elected as a true Roman Pontiff. The “scienter” Promulgation
determines this certainty of discernment confined within the “four corners” of the Constitution:


“This Constitution . . . is to be fully and integrally implemented and is to serve as a guide
for all to whom it refers. As determined above, I hereby declare abrogated all Constitutions
and Orders issued in this regard by the Roman Pontiffs, and at the same time I declare
completely null and void anything done by any person, whatever his authority, knowingly
or unknowingly, in any way contrary to this Constitution.” [Promulgation Clause, Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis]


This language does not admit of any exception, and certainly not an exception based on 
the degree to which a putative Pope has “acceptance” as such. “Universal acceptance” 
originated in an age before the printing press, a time when what was required was known 
by few and what was performed was understood by even less. It simply has no place
in discerning a Conclave called subject to Universi Dominici Gregis. 

Some do not seem to understand that, long in advance and lawfully, His Holiness, Pope
John Paul II, has forbidden and anyone from resorting to “universal acceptance”
or any other principle extrinsic to Universi Dominici Gregis in order to discern the outcome.
[https://abyssum.org/2019/03/23/why-do-intelligent-men-pursue-the-application-of-an-obsolete-concept-universal-acceptance-to-the-problem-of-the-invalidity-of-the-papacy-of-francis-the-merciful-in-this-day-and-age-of-instant-elec/]

Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia. 

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes:  

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1 – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020: 
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1 What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”: 
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it. 

About abyssum

I am a retired Roman Catholic Bishop, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.