March, Tuesday 24th., 2020 Fear, Power & Money: Alleged McCarrick Abuse Victim Shares Shocking Insights into Abuser’s Reign
March, Tuesday 24th., 2020 "...On the endgame for Sankt Gallen, Grein talks about the opening of
borders and the socializing of everything, and he speculates that “the
idea is that the United States is the most powerful country in the
world, and if they can get the United States to do that, then they can
come forward and take over the entire world with the communistic agenda
and be in power. That’s what I believe that they have had in mind for
themselves, and that’s what they want to go forward with. But they
haven’t been able to do it because, what Bella Dodd said, is that,
because of the patriotism, and because of the belief in Jesus Christ.
And we need today to rise up and have ourselves believe in Jesus Christ
more than we ever have in our lives. And we need to rise up right now.”..."
DR. Taylor Marshall AND JAMES GRIEN McCarrick's Victim Speaks Out on McCarrick and St Gallen w James Grein (Dr Marshall #188)
What is the connection between the St Gallen Mafia meeting in Switzerland and the early studies of ex Cardinal Theodore McCarrick in Sankt Gallen Switzerland? Informed Catholics know that the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI and the election of Pope Francis were tied to the Saint Gallen Mafia, but McCarrick's victim James Grein breaks open the story. Dr Taylor Marshall interviews "James" Grein from the New York Times story, and reveals how the young Theodore McCarrick made connections with his family in Sankt Gallen Switzerland and how this event shaped McCarrick's ecclesiastical career and the movement against Pope Benedict XVI with his eventual resignation. Archbishop Vigano's testimony and the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI make sense now in light of this discovery of McCarrick's historic connection with the city of Sankt Gallen Switzerland. James Grein also explains the importance of McCarrick as a fundraiser and the importance of the Vatican Bank in the pontificate of John Paul II. If you are interested in the resignation of Pope Benedict and the unusual election of Pope Francis, you must see this video to connect the dots.https://youtu.be/CvYs6fo-HiE
Fear, Power & Money: Alleged McCarrick Abuse Victim Shares Shocking Insights into Abuser’s Reign
Steve Skojec December 11, 2018
OnePeterFive
Abuse. Conspiracy. Hush money. Bribes. Power players. Politics.
Global agendas. The threat of violence. These are some of the themes
that James Grein, the alleged longtime abuse victim of former cardinal
Theodore McCarrick, discussed with Dr. Taylor Marshall in a new podcast interview.
Grein, who claims to have been abused by McCarrick for 18 years,
beginning at age eleven, explained the close family connection he had
with McCarrick – a connection that began even before he was born.
“He had been part of the family,” says Grein, “since 1950. Probably
’48, when he met my uncle – my mother’s younger brother – at Fordham
University. And they did everything together. And my grandfather adopted
him, basically, because he had no father. And so he became the very
fabric of the family.”
Grein says his grandfather took a liking to McCarrick immediately and offered to help pay his way through school.
He then revealed something interesting: “My grandfather was from
Sankt Gallen, Switzerland.” Grein says McCarrick first traveled to Sankt
Gallen to meet his grandfather’s friends. “Sankt Gallen is not a very
large city. And my grandfather knew everybody. And so he introduced
McCarrick to everybody. And in fact, he went there on a regular basis –
on a yearly basis – probably for 20 years.”
Grein says McCarrick went to visit a language school in Sankt Gallen
in 1951 and came back a different man – someone who wanted to be no
longer a parish priest, but a power player within the hierarchy of the
Church. When McCarrick came back, says Grein, his grandfather – a
wealthy and influential man – introduced him to powerful members of the
American episcopacy like Cardinals Spellman and Cooke.
Marshall brought up the Sankt Gallen “Mafia” – the group that
conspired against Pope Benedict and sought to replace him with Jorge
Bergoglio.
“This is really key … that it begins in Sankt Gallen,” says Marshall.
“This [conspiracy] really goes into the ’90s. But before that, there’s
this connection with McCarrick and Sankt Gallen. Do you see that there’s
an organic connection between McCarrick’s work in the ’50s and then
later on with the conspiracy, they say, to remove Benedict XVI?”
“Yes,” responds Grein. “I’ve known this, and I’ve felt this for a long time.”
“This is where it all starts.”
Although he does not substantiate or elaborate on the claim, Grein says he believes that Pope Benedict was forced out of office. “I now believe he was a predatory man for all his life.”
Grein makes clear that McCarrick had a “pretty good ego” and “needed
to be in power … needed to be the number-one person in the room” at any
given time.
And his means to obtaining power was not just his facility for
building relationships through charisma and strategy, but his focus on
fundraising.
“It’s all surrounded by that wonderful little word called money,” Grein says.
Grein discusses McCarrick’s facility for getting large donations from
wealthy families like the hotel magnates the Hilton family. The
fundraising was often done, alleges Grein, under a pretense (emphasis
added):
He [McCarrick] was traveling on
the guise that ‘I’m raising money for the poor.’ And that, he was, he
needed money for the poor. Well…I won’t say that. I don’t think they
gave a lot of money to the poor. I think they gave a lot of money to
themselves. And they used the guise of, uh, of the poor always. It’s
always how we’re going into South America, we’re going into Africa, and
how these small, uh, communities need money because they have
nothing…it’s an amazing game that he played. So he played everybody in
the room to give him money, and he played his superiors by giving them
the money so that they would leave him alone, and he was there in the
middle, and he got to do anything he wanted to do, and what he wanted to
do was prey on young people so that he could enjoy, have his own ideas
and his own little world where he was the king of the world and he could
just prey on and take anyone that he wanted to. And that nobody could
possibly, possibly grow better than he. And as it progresses, he’s
introduced to some of the most powerful people in the world, and some of
the most powerful people in the world believe him. They don’t know
what’s behind the mask. And those of us who knew what was behind
the mask – the Viganòs, the James Greins, and the other people in the
world – were too afraid to come out because he would kill us. Literally.
The implicit threat of violence, reiterated by Grein – who says in
the interview that he now has a security detail – underscores the reason
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò went into hiding in fear of his life
following his own revelations of the extensive ecclesial cover-up of the
McCarrick abuse, going all the way to the pope.
Grein discusses how McCarrick would use blackmail, threats, and
coercion to force him to stay with him and to keep quiet about the
abuse. He would also tell Grein that he should go to confession “only to
him.”
“In essence, I lost faith in the Church,” says Grein, “and gained only faith in him.”
Grein relates a story in which he threatened McCarrick in turn:
The last time I saw him in 2012,
at my mother’s funeral … I told him if he didn’t come and say my
mother’s funeral Mass, I was gonna open my mouth. Well, he was under
sanctions, now that I know that. But he came, and he said to me at the
end of the luncheon, “Don’t you know how powerful I am? I am the most
powerful man in the United States. Nobody can touch me, and if you say
anything at all, you’re going to go down. You’re going to be the bad
guy. It is impossible for me to go down.”
Grein says that because of threats like this, he was hugely relieved when another story of McCarrick’s abuse broke in
New York in the summer of 2018. It detailed accusations against
McCarrick by another boy, who was also a minor at the time the abuse was
alleged to have taken place decades ago.
“I hit my knees immediately and thanked God. And it took me two days
to get off my knees to go talk to somebody. And finally I was able to
tell my brothers and sisters, who I tried once before, and they, they
didn’t want to believe me. They didn’t want to hear it. I don’t blame
them. And that I was finally going to be free. It was my turn. It was my turn. That’s just how huge it is.”
“It’s amazing,” says Grein, “that, uh, you hide all this stuff,
because if you tell somebody else, who else is gonna do this to me? You
know, uh, you hear all about the trafficking now, thank goodness I
didn’t tell anybody, because I could have been trafficked everywhere.
[Like] those poor kids that were in Pennsylvania. And it’s all over
Syracuse, New York now, too.”
Grein also claimed that he was not the only one subject to
McCarrick’s abuse. He was aware of others. “There were four of us” who
would always go to a fishing camp with McCarrick, he says.
“Did you get the impression that there were other priests, bishops,
anyone in the hierarchy that was aware that he had this double life?”
Marshall asked.
“Every one of his secretaries had to know.” Grein says. “In Metuchen,
in Newark, even when he was with Cooke in New York. Had to know. And I
know that there are some prominent politicians who know also. ‘Cause I
was introduced to them as somebody of interest. I know that Cardinal
Wuerl knows. And, uh, that’s…that was just, uh, the day that I met Wuerl
at the Hilton in Washington, D.C. right after he was made the
archbishop of Washington, D.C. was a very hard day for me to take. I’m
gonna stay right there because it’s in my case that’s…needs to be
quieted right now.” The Money, the Knowledge, and Viganò
Pivoting to Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s accusations, Marshall
asked Grein: “Viganò says that Francis knew. Benedict knew. The
apostolic nuncios knew. That Meyers in Newark knew. Metuchen knew. He
names a lot of names. Were you surprised by that, or did you know that
they all knew?”
“I knew that they all knew,” answers Grein. “I knew that John Paul II knew.”
“How does that make you feel about John Paul II and Benedict? That they knew?” asks Marshall.
“I’ll take John Paul II first. John Paul II changed his needs. He
needed money. He needed his, uh, his papacy to be raised up. He had a
lot of projects that he wanted to do. And the only way he was getting
any kind of money donated to the Church was through McCarrick. And he
didn’t want to shut that off. And so he…while he knew he needed
McCarrick as his tool to get as much money into the papacy as possible…”
“How much money are we talking here?”
“Five hundred million, maybe? Two hundred ten, we know for a
fact. Two hundred ten, we know for a fact, but I know there was much
more coming from the Hiltons, from the, uh…and from the left-wing agenda
in the United States. And so that, uh, it was a, it was a faucet. And,
uh, John Paul did not want to turn off that faucet. Because he needed
that money to, uh, in all of the aura of feeding the poor, it was no
longer really feeding the poor, it was making him, uh, his legacy much
stronger, and where he can be, uh, he can expand into more countries.”
“Benedict didn’t like that. Wanted to tie up all the loose ends.
Because he saw through what John Paul was doing, and he needed to say,
‘Well, this has got to stop. We are part of a church. We are not part of
a money-gaining…we’re not looking for power here through money.’ So
Benedict really wanted to tie things together. And he got the best guy
to do it. Viganò. He tied up all the loose moneys that were in the
United States, across the world, he got ’em all together.”
“Vatican bank?” Marshall interjects.
“Vatican bank, you got it. And he pulled it all together. And a lot
of the 45 million, or the 55 million that was pulled out of the United
States and brought to the Vatican bank…there’s always, I talked to A.G.s
[attorneys general] about that, I’ve wanted to talk to some stronger
men in the United States, um, about a RICO investigation on that,
because it’s definitely laundering. But that’s another story.”
Grein says later on that while John Paul II was part of the agenda
for the Sankt Gallen group, he didn’t change things fast enough for
them. The Impact of McCarrick on the Larger Church
Grein claims that Cardinal Cupich of Chicago is now becoming “the new
McCarrick” in terms of his connection to Rome and influence within the
American clergy. “There’s no doubt, because Francis needs an ally in
America, and McCarrick is too dirty.”
Grein admits that he remains frustrated with how much of the
corruption is still going on. “Every morning I come downstairs and I
read, you know, OnePeterFive or Complicit Clergy,” he says, “and I read
this stuff, and I just, sometimes I have to just go for a long run
because I’m so angry. Why are these people doing these things, they’re
still doing it? But finally they’re being exposed.”
“If we go back and look at the influence of Sankt Gallen being the
the epicenter of the antichrist. And how they have finally forced people
into doing things that they don’t really want to do. Things are
happening faster today out of Sankt Gallen because they are becoming
impatient. They’ve been waiting a hundred years for their turn to step
forward. It’s not happening as fast as they want it. So Benedict was
cleaning up, and they said, ‘No, no, we can’t clean up, because if you
clean up, we’re toast. Sorry. We’re done. And so we need to have
somebody who can come in and help us. And so that we can carry out
everything that we need to do.’ And if you go back and listen to what
McCarrick said, about, he was approached by some very significant people
that he knew, and that needed him to bring up Francis, and let’s
politicize this.”
In this, Grein was referencing a talk given by McCarrick at Villanova University in 2013, shortly after Bergoglio was elected to the papacy. In it, McCarrick says that
before the conclave, “nobody thought there was a chance for Bergoglio.”
Then he related how he was visited by a “very interesting and
influential Italian gentleman” not long before the conclave was to take
place. This man had a proposition: he wanted McCarrick to use his
influence to “talk up” Bergoglio. “If we had five years,” the mystery
man is said to have speculated to McCarrick, “the Lord working through
Bergoglio in five years could make the Church over again.”
McCarrick claims to have gone on to do just that, telling his fellow
cardinals that they should “elect someone from Latin America who could
identify with the poor.”
On the question of that “prominent Italian gentlemen,” Grein does not
claim specific knowledge, but he has a theory: “I don’t think it was
Italian. I think it’s Swiss. He just covered it so that they couldn’t
connect the dots. Or, if it was an Italian gentleman, then it was
definitely a politician. But he says, oh, an influential man. Did he
know him? He may have passed a note: ‘If you don’t do this, you’re out.’
These people are very, very powerful.”
On the endgame for Sankt Gallen, Grein talks about the opening of
borders and the socializing of everything, and he speculates that “the
idea is that the United States is the most powerful country in the
world, and if they can get the United States to do that, then they can
come forward and take over the entire world with the communistic agenda
and be in power. That’s what I believe that they have had in mind for
themselves, and that’s what they want to go forward with. But they
haven’t been able to do it because, what Bella Dodd said, is that,
because of the patriotism, and because of the belief in Jesus Christ.
And we need today to rise up and have ourselves believe in Jesus Christ
more than we ever have in our lives. And we need to rise up right now.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
TWELVE VALID CARDINALS, i.e. CARDINALS APPOINTED BY POPES
BENEDICT XVI AND SAINT JOHN PAUL II, MUST ACT SOON TO REMOVE FRANCIS THE
MERCIFUL FROM THE THRONE OF SAINT PETER BEFORE HE DAMAGES THE
INSTITUTIONAL CHURCH EVEN MORE THAN HE HAS ALREADY DAMAGED IT.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++AN
OPEN LETTER TO THE CARDINALS OF THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND OTHER CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN FAITHFUL IN COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE
Recently many educated Catholic observers, including bishops and
priests, have decried the confusion in doctrinal statements about faith
or morals made from the Apostolic See at Rome and by the putative Bishop
of Rome, Pope Francis. Some devout, faithful and thoughtful Catholics
have even suggested that he be set aside as a heretic, a dangerous
purveyor of error, as recently mentioned in a number of
reports. Claiming heresy on the part of a man who is a supposed Pope,
charging material error in statements about faith or morals by a
putative Roman Pontiff, suggests and presents an intervening prior
question about his authenticity in that August office of Successor of
Peter as Chief of The Apostles, i.e., was this man the subject of a
valid election by an authentic Conclave of The Holy Roman Church? This
is so because each Successor of Saint Peter enjoys the Gift of
Infallibility. So, before one even begins to talk about excommunicating
such a prelate, one must logically examine whether this person exhibits
the uniformly good and safe fruit of Infallibility.
If he seems repeatedly to engage in material error, that first raises
the question of the validity of his election because one expects an
authentically-elected Roman Pontiff miraculously and uniformly to be
entirely incapable of stating error in matters of faith or morals. So
to what do we look to discern the invalidity of such an election? His
Holiness, Pope John Paul II, within His massive legacy to the Church and
to the World, left us with the answer to this question. The Catholic
faithful must look back for an answer to a point from where we have
come—to what occurred in and around the Sistine Chapel in March 2013 and
how the fruits of those events have generated such widespread concern
among those people of magisterial orthodoxy about confusing and, or,
erroneous doctrinal statements which emanate from The Holy See.
His Apostolic Constitution (Universi Dominici Gregis) which
governed the supposed Conclave in March 2013 contains quite clear and
specific language about the invalidating effect of departures from its
norms. For example, Paragraph 76 states: “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 null and void, without any need for a declaration
on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected.”
From this, many believe that there is probable cause to believe that
Monsignor Jorge Mario Bergoglio was never validly elected as the Bishop
of Rome and Successor of Saint Peter—he never rightly took over the
office of Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and
therefore he does not enjoy the charism of Infallibility. If this is
true, then the situation is dire because supposed papal acts may not be
valid or such acts are clearly invalid, including supposed appointments
to the college of electors itself.
Only valid cardinals can rectify our critical situation through
privately (secretly) recognizing the reality of an ongoing interregnum
and preparing for an opportunity to put the process aright by obedience
to the legislation of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, in that Apostolic
Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis. While thousands of
the Catholic faithful do understand that only the cardinals who
participated in the events of March 2013 within the Sistine Chapel have
all the information necessary to evaluate the issue of election
validity, there was public evidence sufficient for astute lay faithful
to surmise with moral certainty that the March 2013 action by the
College was an invalid conclave, an utter nullity.
What makes this understanding of Universi Dominici Gregisparticularly
cogent and plausible is the clear Promulgation Clause at the end of
this Apostolic Constitution and its usage of the word “scienter” (“knowingly”). The Papal Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis thus
concludes definitively with these words: “. . . knowingly or
unknowingly, in any way contrary to this Constitution.” (“. . .
scienter vel inscienter contra hanc Constitutionem fuerint excogitata.”)
[Note that His Holiness, Pope Paul VI, had a somewhat similar
promulgation clause at the end of his corresponding, now abrogated,
Apostolic Constitution, Romano Pontifici Eligendo, but his does
not use “scienter”, but rather uses “sciens” instead. This similar term
of sciens in the earlier abrogated Constitution has an entirely
different legal significance than scienter.] This word, “scienter”, is a legal term of art in Roman law, and in canon law, and in Anglo-American common law, and in each system, scienter has substantially the same significance, i.e., “guilty knowledge” or willfully knowing, criminal intent.
Thus, it clearly appears that Pope John Paul II anticipated the
possibility of criminal activity in the nature of a sacrilege against a
process which He intended to be purely pious, private, sacramental,
secret and deeply spiritual, if not miraculous, in its nature. This
contextual reality reinforced in the Promulgation Clause, combined with:
(1) the tenor of the whole document; (2) some other provisions of the
document, e.g., Paragraph 76; (3) general provisions of canon law
relating to interpretation, e.g., Canons 10 & 17; and, (4) the
obvious manifest intention of the Legislator, His Holiness, Pope John
Paul II, tends to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the legal
conclusion that Monsignor Bergoglio was never validly elected Roman
Pontiff.
This is so because:1. Communication of any kind with the outside
world, e.g., communication did occur between the inside of the Sistine
Chapel and anyone outside, including a television audience, before,
during or even immediately after the Conclave;2. Any political
commitment to “a candidate” and any “course of action” planned for The
Church or a future pontificate, such as the extensive decade-long
“pastoral” plans conceived by the Sankt Gallen hierarchs; and,3. Any
departure from the required procedures of the conclave voting process as
prescribed and known by a cardinal to have occurred:each was made an
invalidating act, and if scienter (guilty knowledge) was present, also
even a crime on the part of any cardinal or other actor, but, whether
criminal or not, any such act or conduct violating the norms operated
absolutely, definitively and entirely against the validity of all of the
supposed Conclave proceedings.
Quite apart from the apparent notorious violations of the prohibition
on a cardinal promising his vote, e.g., commitments given and obtained
by cardinals associated with the so-called “Sankt Gallen Mafia,” other
acts destructive of conclave validity occurred. Keeping in mind that
Pope John Paul II specifically focused Universi Dominici Gregis on
“the seclusion and resulting concentration which an act so vital to the
whole Church requires of the electors” such that “the electors can more
easily dispose themselves to accept the interior movements of the Holy
Spirit,” even certain openly public media broadcasting breached this
seclusion by electronic broadcasts outlawed by Universi Dominici Gregis.
These prohibitions include direct declarative statements outlawing any
use of television before, during or after a conclave in any area
associated with the proceedings, e.g.: “I further confirm, by my
apostolic authority, the duty of maintaining the strictest secrecy with
regard to everything that directly or indirectly concerns the election
process itself.” Viewed in light of this introductory preambulary
language of Universi Dominici Gregis and in light of the
legislative text itself, even the EWTN camera situated far inside the
Sistine Chapel was an immediately obvious non-compliant act which
became an open and notorious invalidating violation by the time when
this audio-visual equipment was used to broadcast to the world the
preaching after the “Extra Omnes”. While these blatant public
violations of Chapter IV of Universi Dominici Gregis actuate
the invalidity and nullity of the proceedings themselves, nonetheless in
His great wisdom, the Legislator did not disqualify automatically those
cardinals who failed to recognize these particular offenses against
sacred secrecy, or even those who, with scienter, having recognized the
offenses and having had some power or voice in these matters, failed or
refused to act or to object against them: “Should any infraction
whatsoever of this norm occur and be discovered, those responsible
should know that they will be subject to grave penalties according to
the judgment of the future Pope.” [Universi Dominici Gregis, ¶55]
No Pope apparently having been produced in March 2013, those otherwise valid cardinals who failed with scienter to
act on violations of Chapter IV, on that account alone would
nonetheless remain voting members of the College unless and until a
new real Pope is elected and adjudges them.
Thus, those otherwise valid cardinals who may have been compromised
by violations of secrecy can still participate validly in the “clean-up
of the mess” while addressing any such secrecy violations with an
eventual new Pontiff. In contrast, the automatic excommunication of
those who politicized the sacred conclave process, by obtaining
illegally, commitments from cardinals to vote for a particular man, or
to follow a certain course of action (even long before the vacancy of
the Chair of Peter as Vicar of Christ), is established not only by the
word, “scienter,” in the final enacting clause, but by a
specific exception, in this case, to the general statement of invalidity
which therefore reinforces the clarity of intention by Legislator that
those who apply the law must interpret the general rule as truly
binding. Derived directly from Roman law, canonical jurisprudence
provides this principle for construing or interpreting legislation such
as this Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis. Expressed in
Latin, this canon of interpretation is: “Exceptio probat regulam in
casibus non exceptis.” (The exception proves the rule in cases not
excepted.) In this case, an exception from invalidity for acts of
simony reinforces the binding force of the general principle of nullity
in cases of other violations. Therefore, by exclusion from nullity and
invalidity legislated in the case of simony: “If — God forbid — in the
election of the Roman Pontiff the crime of simony were to be
perpetrated, I decree and declare that all those guilty thereof shall
incur excommunication latae sententiae. At the same time I remove the
nullity or invalidity of the same simoniacal provision, in order that —
as was already established by my Predecessors — the validity of the
election of the Roman Pontiff may not for this reason be challenged.”
His Holiness made an exception for simony. Exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis.
The clear exception from nullity and invalidity for simony proves the
general rule that other violations of the sacred process certainly do
and did result in the nullity and invalidity of the entire
conclave. Comparing what Pope John Paul II wrote in His Constitution on
conclaves with the Constitution which His replaced, you can see that,
with the exception of simony, invalidity became universal.
In the corresponding paragraph of what Pope Paul VI wrote, he
specifically confined the provision declaring conclave invalidity to
three (3) circumstances described in previous paragraphs within His
constitution, Romano Pontfici Eligendo. No such limitation exists in Universi Dominici Gregis. See the comparison both in English and Latin below:Romano Pontfici Eligendo,
77. Should the election be conducted in a manner different from the
three procedures described above (cf. no. 63 ff.) or without the
conditions laid down for each of the same, it is for this very reason
null and void (cf. no. 62), without the need for any declaration, and
gives no right to him who has been thus elected. [Romano Pontfici Eligendo,
77: “Quodsi electio aliter celebrata fuerit, quam uno e tribus modis,
qui supra sunt dicti (cfr. nn. 63 sqq.), aut non servatis condicionibus
pro unoquoque illorum praescriptis, electio eo ipso est nulla et
invalida (cfr. n. 62) absque ulla declaratione, et ita electo nullum ius
tribuit .”] as compared with:Universi Dominici Gregis, 76:
“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 null and void, without
any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no
right on the one elected.” [Universi Dominici Gregis, 76:
“Quodsi electio aliter celebrata 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.”]Of course, this is not the only feature of the
Constitution or aspect of the matter which tends to establish the
breadth of invalidity.
Faithful must hope and pray that only those cardinals whose status
as a valid member of the College remains intact will ascertain the
identity of each other and move with the utmost charity and discretion
in order to effectuate The Divine Will in these matters. The valid
cardinals, then, must act according to that clear, manifest, obvious and
unambiguous mind and intention of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, so
evident in Universi Dominici Gregis, a law which finally
established binding and self-actuating conditions of validity on the
College for any papal conclave, a reality now made so apparent by the
bad fruit of doctrinal confusion and plain error. It would seem then
that praying and working in a discreet and prudent manner to encourage
only those true cardinals inclined to accept a reality of conclave
invalidity, would be a most charitable and logical course of action in
the light of Universi Dominici Gregis, and out of our high
personal regard for the clear and obvious intention of its Legislator,
His Holiness, Pope John Paul II. Even a relatively small number of
valid cardinals could act decisively and work to restore a functioning
Apostolic See through the declaration of an interregnum government. The
need is clear for the College to convene a General Congregation in
order to declare, to administer, and soon to end the Interregnum which
has persisted since March 2013. Finally, it is important to understand
that the sheer number of putative counterfeit cardinals will eventually,
sooner or later, result in a situation in which The Church will have no
normal means validly ever again to elect a Vicar of Christ. After that
time, it will become even more difficult, if not humanly impossible,
for the College of Cardinals to rectify the current disastrous situation
and conduct a proper and valid Conclave such that The Church may once
again both have the benefit of a real Supreme Pontiff, and enjoy the
great gift of a truly infallible Vicar of Christ. It seems that some
good cardinals know that the conclave was invalid, but really cannot
envision what to do about it; we must pray, if it is the Will of God,
that they see declaring the invalidity and administering an Interregnum
through a new valid conclave is what they must do. Without such action
or without a great miracle, The Church is in a perilous situation. Once
the last validly appointed cardinal reaches age 80, or before that age,
dies, the process for electing a real Pope ends with no apparent legal
means to replace it. Absent a miracle then, The Church would no longer
have an infallible Successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ. Roman
Catholics would be no different that Orthodox Christians. In this
regard, all of the true cardinals may wish to consider what Holy Mother
Church teaches in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, ¶675,
¶676 and ¶677 about “The Church’s Ultimate Trial”. But, the fact that
“The Church . . . will follow her Lord in his death and
Resurrection” does not justify inaction by the good cardinals, even if
there are only a minimal number sufficient to carry out Chapter II of Universi Dominici Gregis and operate the Interregnum. This Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis,
which was clearly applicable to the acts and conduct of the College of
Cardinals in March 2013, is manifestly and obviously among those
“invalidating” laws “which expressly establish that an act is null or
that a person is effected” as stated in Canon 10 of the 1983 Code of
Canon Law. And, there is nothing remotely “doubtful or obscure” (Canon
17) about this Apostolic Constitution as clearly promulgated by Pope
John Paul II. The tenor of the whole document expressly establishes
that the issue of invalidity was always at stake. This Apostolic
Constitution conclusively establishes, through its Promulgation Clause
[which makes “anything done (i.e., any act or conduct) by any person .
. . in any way contrary to this Constitution,”] the invalidity of
the entire supposed Conclave, rendering it “completely null and
void”. So, what happens if a group of Cardinals who undoubtedly did not
knowingly and wilfully initiate or intentionally participate in any acts
of disobedience against Universi Dominici Gregis were to meet, confer and declare that, pursuant to Universi Dominici Gregis,
Monsignor Bergoglio is most certainly not a valid Roman Pontiff. Like
any action on this matter, including the initial finding of invalidity,
that would be left to the valid members of the college of cardinals.
They could declare the Chair of Peter vacant and proceed to a new and
proper conclave. They could meet with His Holiness, Benedict XVI, and
discern whether His resignation and retirement was made under duress, or
based on some mistake or fraud, or otherwise not done in a legally
effective manner, which could invalidate that resignation. Given the
demeanor of His Holiness, Benedict XVI, and the tenor of His few public
statements since his departure from the Chair of Peter, this recognition
of validity in Benedict XVI seems unlikely. In fact, even before a
righteous group of good and authentic cardinals might decide on the
validity of the March 2013 supposed conclave, they must face what may be
an even more complicated discernment and decide which men are most
likely not valid cardinals. If a man was made a cardinal by the
supposed Pope who is, in fact, not a Pope (but merely Monsignor
Bergoglio), no such man is in reality a true member of the College of
Cardinals. In addition, those men appointed by Pope John Paul II or by
Pope Benedict XVI as cardinals, but who openly violated Universi Dominici Gregis by
illegal acts or conduct causing the invalidation of the last attempted
conclave, would no longer have voting rights in the College of Cardinals
either. (Thus, the actual valid members in the College of Cardinals
may be quite smaller in number than those on the current official
Vatican list of supposed cardinals.) In any event, the entire problem is
above the level of anyone else in Holy Mother Church who is below the
rank of Cardinal. So, we must pray that The Divine Will of The Most
Holy Trinity, through the intercession of Our Lady as Mediatrix of All
Graces and Saint Michael, Prince of Mercy, very soon rectifies the
confusion in Holy Mother Church through action by those valid Cardinals
who still comprise an authentic College of Electors. Only certainly
valid Cardinals can address the open and notorious evidence which points
to the probable invalidity of the last supposed conclave and only those
cardinals can definitively answer the questions posed here. May only
the good Cardinals unite and if they recognize an ongoing Interregnum,
albeit dormant, may they end this Interregnum by activating perfectly a
functioning Interregnum government of The Holy See and a renewed process
for a true Conclave, one which is purely pious, private, sacramental,
secret and deeply spiritual. If we do not have a real Pontiff, then may
the good Cardinals, doing their appointed work “in view of the
sacredness of the act of election” “accept the interior movements of
the Holy Spirit” and provide Holy Mother Church with a real Vicar of
Christ as the Successor of Saint Peter. May these thoughts comport
with the synderetic considerations of those who read them and may their
presentation here please both Our Immaculate Virgin Mother, Mary, Queen
of the Apostles, and The Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy
Spirit.N. de Plume Un ami des Papes
__________________________________________