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
"(...) 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.
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg)
.jpg)
