The Two Popes … Trouble ahead?

A “Pope Emeritus” is a new concept in the Church. The question has to be whether this new type of pontiff is a welcome development  or an unacceptable break with Catholic Tradition. Is there a connection between Pope Benedict’s decision to adopt this new title and Francis’ insistence on describing himself as the Bishop of Rome? Is the existence of two popes a recipe for disaster? Could there be trouble ahead? Or – given the fact that the two popes seem to get along well together – are those commentators correct who argue that this really is a case of “two heads are better than one” – that it is beneficial for the Church to have the two very different papal characters in the Vatican? According to Fr Gruner, the issues surrounding “the two popes” are being discussed in the Italian media and in high places in Rome, so tell us what you think about Fr Gruner’s thoughts on the matter. Agree? Disagree? Not sure? Over to you…  

Was Pope Francis canonically elected?


Some time ago, Fr Paul Kramer emailed me this Letter to Pope Benedict by Alberto Villasana.

We had already had a brief discussion on our blog about Fr Kramer’s belief that the election of Pope Francis was invalid, so we decided to follow the advice of most exasperated drunks on the receiving end of a wifely lecture and “give it a rest.”

Then yesterday, the following email arrived from Fr Kramer so we thought it would be worth posting on the blog (with his permission) for the purposes of airing the issues.  Nobody should jump to the conclusion that Catholic Truth is alleging that Pope Francis is not the pope. We’re merely of the opinion that it is important not to ignore contentious claims just because they are contentious.  Your thoughts on the information in the email – now blog article – below, will be welcome.

Father Paul Kramer writes…

      Some people might question the report of Alberto Villasana — in fact some Opus Dei types are already doing that. In fact, long before Benedict’s announcement of impending resignation, a close personal friend of mine, the late Mons. Mario Marini, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission «Ecclesia Dei», informed me of the well organized plot in Rome, in the Northern Italian bishoprics, and in the French hierarchy, to pressure and coerce Pope Benedict to resign. From the beginning the Modernist progressives wanted him out. Cardinal Daneels publicly expressed his displeasure with the election of Cardinal Ratzinger immediately after the cardinals elected him. Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor likewise made the very telltale remark that same day, saying, “We didn’t get our man.” The one he referred to as “our man” was Mario Jorge Bergoglio SJ.

     Similarly for a long time as Pope John Paul II’s pontificate dragged on for longer years than expected, there was a movement among the progressivists to pressure him to resign. Cardinal Wojtyla was not their first choice in the 1978 conclaves. The first choice to emerge among the progressivists was Card. Sergio Pignedoli, and among the conservatives, Giuseppe Card. Siri. Pignedoli and Baggio both wanted to be pope, but it was clear already before the conclave began that Baggio would not be able to garner enough votes to be the no. 1 candidate of the ptogressivists. (Pathetically, and almost comically, Card. Gabrielle-Marie Garrone complained that none of the newspapers even mentioned him as a papabile.) Neither Siri nor Pignedoli could garner enough votes to be elected in the first and second ballots, but by the second ballot, Cardinal Luciani was in contention, so on the third ballot, the compromise candidate, Albino Luciani was elected. A fourth ballot was held to make it unanimous. I know this to be a true account because I heard with my own ears the “indiscretion” of one of the cardinal electors immediately after the conclave as soon as he returned to the college where he was lodging. There definitely was no “mistake” (as Wikipedia claims) in the Burke-Young tally of the voting in the August 1978 conclave: Luciani already won the papacy on the third ballot, but he himself insisted on a fourth ballot, which unanimously elected him.

    Almost immediately upon assuming the papacy, John Paul I’s pontificate was quickly turning into a potential catastrophe for ecclesiastical Freemasonry. He was going to purge the Vatican bank and remone it from Masonic control under Bishop Paul Marcinkus, and he announced to Cardinal Villot his intention to remove the three of the highest ranking Masonic prelates (Villot himself, Casaroli and Card. Ugo Polletti) from the Roman Curia and replace them with conservatives. About an hour later, Pope Luciani was dead. His body was discovered the following morning. The murder of the pope was carried out by P2 Freemasons. When Roberto Calvi threatened Licio Gelli to disclose the P2 involvement in Luciani’s murder, the order was given to kill Calvi. Already, three days before the death of John Paul I, Archbishop (and future Cardinal) Eduard Gagnon had said to Fr. Mario Marini, “They’re going to kill this pope. He is trying to make too many changes, and too quickly.” Three days later, Marini called Gagnon after having just learned of the death of Pope Luciani —  Marini asked Gagnon, “Do you remember what you told me three days ago?” Archbishop Gagnon replied, “I remember very well, and they did it.”

     Archbishop Gagnon not only predicted the murder of Pope John Paul I, but he also predicted the election of Cardinal Wojtyla as a compromise candidate in the second 1978 conclave. On the evening just after the election of Wojtyla, I was having dinner with Archbishop Gagnon, Fr. Marini, and some other clerics and religious familiar to all of us at a restaurant in the Monteverde section of Rome. Gagnon described how he had been having his dinner at a different restaurant in the city center the previous evening, when some journalists spotted him and asked him about the likely outcome of the conclave. The juornalists were mentioning all the names of the papabili that were floating around in the press & media, and brought up the name of the Brazilian (heretic) Card. Aloisio Lorscheider as a possible compromise candidate. Upon hearing the speculation about a possible compromise candidate, Gagnon said to them, “If a compromise candidate will be elected, the one to watch for is Cardinal Wojtyla.” After relating this to us, Gagnon then said with a smile, “I won’t be going back to that restaurant too soon.” So, John Paul II was not the choice of the progressivists in 1978, he was not “their man”, but a compromise candidate acceptable to both sides. 
      After some years, when it became clear that in moral and disciplinary matters John Paul would not budge from the traditional position, and he would seek a rapproachment with the SSPX, rather than a hard line, the progressivists grew increasingly impatient with him, and set in motion the movement to oust him. John Paul II even said while visiting  Ancona around 1995 or 1996 that he was not leaving and would stay put. Back then, “their man” was the other Jesuit heretic, Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini SJ. The Wojtylian pontificate lingered on and on as Cardinal Martini became old and decrepit (nearly 80 years old) when John Paul II finally died. Whereas in the 90s, in diplomatic circles and where the “good and the great” meet, when Martini was present, index fingers discreetly pointed him out as the next pope. By the time Pope Wojtyla died in 2005, it was too late for Martini — the ‘powers that be’ now wanted the younger Jesuit (heretic), Bergoglio to succeed the Polish pope. However, too many non-European cardinals rallied behind Ratzinger after his funeral homily for John Paul II, so they still didn’t get their man — they got the hated “German Shepherd”, also known as “God’s Rotweiller”, Joseph Ratzinger.

     After Pope Benedict issued Summorum Pontificum, freeing the celebration of the traditional Latin liturgy so hated by the progressivists, and after backtracking on some progressive positions of Vatican II, and reforming the liturgy of the Mass rite of Paul VI along conservative lines, the progressivists led by ecclesiastical Masons were determined to oust him. It even reached the point that death threats were transmitted to him. I was informed by a cleric close to Pope Benedict about the threats well before Benedict announced his resignation. So, I had no difficulty believng the reports of Fr. Santiago (a personal collaborator of Pope Benedict) and Alberto Villasana about the coercion, threats and pressures to oust Pope Benedict. Now that Freemasonry has “their man” at the top of the Vatican, we can expect to eventually hear a dissenting reaction from Pope Benedict and his followers, as Francis pursues the Masonic policy of the utter demolition of Catholicism and a radical reform of the Church that would transform it into a Masonic  “dogma free Christianity”, and merge it into intercommunion with the other denominations and non-Christian religions. Meanwhile, there is growing awareness among Catholics that “Francis” is increasingly manifesting himself to be exactly what St. Francis of Assisi foretold in his deathbed prophecy — “uncanonically elected”, and, “not a true pastor but a destroyer.” END