“The Dictator Pope”: Mysterious New Book Looks “Behind the Mask” of Francis
(12-01-2017, 05:42 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Sister, I respect the Holy Father and I pray for him fervently. That does not, however, mean that I am blind to the catastrophe that his Pontificate has become.

I don't think I am blind either. But I hardly know how to talk about this pontificate. Tongue tied I am ...

As for the book, I imagine there's plenty of substance, here, alas. There may well be exaggerations and distortions, as well, though. I want to be prudent.

Still, your point about "magic circle" is taken, Vox. I've known enough magicians and masons in my life to know this kind of stuff is not paranoid. Not at all.

We are facing dark things. It is very, very hard to know how to communicate them. I fear the sensational book copy alone will put off a vast majority of people.

Quote:Quote from the Amazon blurb:

The inside story of the most tyrannical and unprincipled papacy of modern times.

Jorge Bergoglio was elected Pope in 2013 as a liberal and a reformer. In fact, he had long been known in his native Argentina as a manipulative politician and a skilful self-presenter. Behind the mask of a genial man of the people, Pope Francis has consolidated his position as a dictator who rules by fear and has allied himself with the most corrupt elements in the Vatican to prevent and reverse the reforms that were expected of him.

 Note - it doesn't put me off. I want to read this.

But sometimes "less is more". Many people can't handle things like this ... they call you "extremist" and just "switch off".

I wonder how the book will do. The tragedy here will be if the author is saying a lot that has substance and he just gets written off as a nut.
Click to see at Amazon
[Image: charles-coulombe-120h.png]

Hear the FIRST CHAPTER on my YouTube Channel:

See my Three Books here at Amazon: viewauthor.at/RogerBuck
Important, relevant Truths simply have to be told. Prudence here is the KEY, as it it when dealing with the power of certain Jewish lobbying groups, and the realities of the post-Temple religion. These things must be talked about.
But I lament the lack of sensitivity and an awareness of "how things'd play in Peoria", an understanding of the importance of how HOW one says things -- the words used, the emphasis given, ways of putting things that'd stave off cognitive dissonance or almost reflexive reactions and mental associations. E.g., there's a huge difference between, say, talking about "AIPAC, the ADL, and many Jewish leaders" and "the Jews" --- even though it's perfectly OK by most people to speak of "Catholics" or "Muslims" or "the British" as groups, and even though that fact "isn't fair." That is just the reality of the world we live in, given media power. You either play the hand you're dealt correctly, or you lose. That's poker.
And it's the same sort of thing here, with Francis. The Truth about his irascible power-mongering and lack of respect for Truth, doctrine, the liturgy, and faithful Catholics has to be spoken of and dealt with. There's just a way to do it, and a way not to do it, and context matters (e.g., I'd speak of all this differently here than I would at CAF, for ex. -- ha, not that I'd go to CAF, but you get the point). You play a poker hand differently against weak players than you would strong players (at least you do if you know what you're doing), and it's that way in real life when it comes to spreading ideas.

(The above is one my of biggest peeves about running a forum. So many who are aware of what AIPAC and the ADL are up to, and what post-Temple Judaism actually is, lack all prudence when talking about it -- and defeat the very purpose of this place with their imprudent writings. Awareness and talk about all that sort of thing is, given our conditioning in the West, almost reflexively associated with Nazism -- and, of course, some who hold such ideas are actually Nazis. Those are facts, but Nazism and Catholicism are completely incompatible. True ethnic hatred or any form of true racism is not wanted here. Exquisite prudence and true charity for all are imperative when talking about anything involving ethnic groups, racial differences and tensions, and post-Temple Judaism.)
T h e   D u d e t t e   A b i d e s
I don't see anything wrong with Francis changing after becoming pope.  Just recently he expressed how "change" is necessary in fidelity to God and man. Albeit this is a weak point, it's in response to what I could understand the article
From one good read to another...
May I plug my just published effort also just out on Amazon et al
RE-ENTRY (Classical Apologetics Deciphered) by Frederic John Herriott
Have tried to cover all bases here and throw a life-line to those in greatest need.
Now badly in need of a few good readers to help spread the word.
(11-30-2017, 08:52 PM)VoxClamantis Wrote: From OnePeterFive:

“The Dictator Pope”: Mysterious New Book Looks “Behind the Mask” of Francis
 Steve Skojec Steve Skojec November 30, 2017

Colonna then transitions to an opening chapter exposing the work of the so-called St. Gallen “Mafia” — the group of cardinals who had been conspiring for decades to see to it that a pope of their liking — a pope like Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio was capable of becoming — would be elected. Formed in 1996 (with precursor meetings between progressive European prelates giving initial shape to the group as early as the 1980s) in St. Gallen, Switzerland, the St. Gallen Mafia was originally headed up by the infamous late archbishop of Milan, Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini. The group roster was a rogue’s gallery of heterodox prelates with a list of ecclesiastical accomplishments that reads more like a rap sheet than a curriculum vitae. (In the case of Godfried Danneels, implicated in some way in about 50 of 475 dossiers on clerical sexual abuse allegations that mysteriously disappeared after evidence seized by Belgian police was inexplicably declared inadmissible in court, this comparison transcends analogy.)

Brother Alexis Bugnolo makes a case that this 2013 election was in fact invalid, if JP II is correct.  

RC: Br. Alexis, your blog From Rome has devoted substantial space to uncovering and documenting the "Team Bergoglio" Affair, and maintains a detailed chronology of eventsbeginning with the release of Austen Ivereigh's biography of Pope Francis in November of last year. Could you give a brief summary of the key points in the "Team Bergoglio" Affair for our readers, explaining what is at stake and why it is important?

Br. A: Austin Ivereigh alleges that 9 Cardinals collaborated to garnish 25 votes for Cardinal Bergoglio in the first ballot of the 2013 Conclave on March 12 of that year. Their mutually shared intention and collaboration is morally equivalent to an agreement or pact to vote for Bergoglio and not to vote for anyone else. Those who participated by soliciting or promising votes were excommunicated in virtue of the papal law Universi Dominici Gregis of Pope John Paul II, paragraph 81, with ipso facto excommunication. Since that law does not exempt the papal election from the general norms of canon law, and since the 1983 Code does not exempt papal laws from its own norms, unless specified, any irregularity must be judged according to the 1983 Code, which declares invalidly elected those who were excommunicated at the time of the election and/or won their election by counting votes of excommunicated electors. It is highly morally improbable that Cardinal Bergoglio did not collaborate in the work of this group of Cardinals, whom Ivereigh names "Team Bergoglio". Thus, because, as Bergoglio admitted in March of this year, he was elected by no more than 80 votes, 76 being the necessary - thus of the approx 20 cardinals who did promise their votes - it is highly morally improbable that less than 4 met the conditions for excommunication. Thus, it is highly probable that the election was canonically invalid. Thus, the Cardinals should move an investigation and hold a trial, in virtue of the authority granted them in the papal law, paragraphs 4-5.

Brother Bugnolo provides a lot of critical info on the machinations that went into the 2013 conclave, admitted by Francis' biographer, Austin Ivereigh.


Jorge Bergoglio professed doctrines incompatible with the Catholic Faith before the conclave that elected him.  The conclave itself is very suspect and according to JP II's own law, seems to qualify as being invalid.  Bergoglio then professed doctrines incompatible with the Catholic Faith at regular intervals after the election.  

If there ever was a dubious papal claimant (and there have been dozens in Church history), it would be him.
Osfhank wrote:

"This may be an unpopular view here, but shouldn\t we be respecting the Holy Father and praying for him, rather than spreading derogatory things about him?  He is the successor of St. Peter, after all, and Christ's vicar on earth.  We would be better served to pray for him daily, whether or not we agree with everything he does.Sr. Christina M. Neumann ~ https://ourfranciscanfiat.wordpres.com VoxClamantis Wrote:"

I would assert that praying for Francis and being critical of his statements are not mutually exclusive.  

You are right in that we should avoid derogatory statement towards an ostensible Pope, but some of us are very unsure about his legitimacy.  Of course, we should always be careful about using disrespectful language.

However, massive error is coming from Francis' mouth and pen that is causing scandal among Catholics, undermining any Faith they have left.  We have a duty to let the Catholic Truth, that can never be changed, be known and to shine a light on such destruction.

It is extremely unfortunate this has to be done.  No one wants this unprecedented terrifying problem.  But there it is, lying naked and hideous in front of our eyes.

"Peter has no need of our lies or flattery. Those who blindly and indiscriminately defend every decision of the Supreme Pontiff are the very ones who do most to undermine the authority of the Holy See-----they destroy instead of strengthening its foundations."-----Melchior Cano, Theologian from the Council of Trent

St. Thomas Aquinas, in many passages of his works, upholds the principle that the faithful can question and admonish Prelates. For example: “There being an imminent danger for the Faith, Prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects. Thus, St. Paul, who was a subject of St. Peter, questioned him publicly on account of an imminent danger of scandal in a matter of Faith. And, as the Glosa of St. Augustine puts it (Ad Galatas 2,14), ‘St. Peter himself gave the example to those who govern so that if sometime they stray from the right way, they will not reject a correction as unworthy even if it comes from their subjects.’” -Summa theologiae (Turin/Rome: Marietti), 1948, II.II, q.33, a.4.

Referring to the same episode, in which St. Paul resisted St. Peter “to his face,” St. Thomas teaches: “The reprehension was just and useful, and the reason for it was not trivial: there was a danger for the preservation of evangelical truth ... The way it took place was appropriate, since it was public and open. For this reason, St. Paul writes: ‘I spoke to Cephas,’ that is, Peter, ‘before everyone,’ since the simulation practiced by St. Peter was fraught with danger to everyone.” -Super Epistulas S. Pauli, Ad Galatas, 2, 11-14, (Taurini/Rome: Marietti, 1953), lec. III, nn. 83-84 Martin Luther

 St. Robert Bellarmine teaches us that

Quote:“just as it is licit to resist a Pontiff who attacks the body, it is also licit to resist a Pope who attacks the soul or …. above all, who attempts to destroy the Church. I say,” St. Robert continues, “that it is licit to resist him by not doing what he orders, and by preventing his will from being executed” (1).

Fr. Francisco Suarez, S.J., also defends this position: “If [the Pope] gives an order contrary to good customs, he should not be obeyed. If he attempts to do something manifestly opposed to justice and the common good, it would be licit to resist him. If he attacks by force, he could be repelled by force, with the moderation appropriate to a just defense.” 
  1. De Fide, disp. X, sec. VI, n. 16, in Opera omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1958), vol. XII, in Xavier da Silveira, La nouvelle Messe de Paul VI: Qu'en penser? (Chiré-en-Montreuil: Diffusion de la Pensée Française, 1975), pp. 323f.
Fr. Cornelius a Lapide, S.J., argues: “Superiors can, with humble charity, be admonished by their inferiors in the defense of truth; that is what St. Augustine, St. Cyprian, St. Gregory, St. Thomas and others declare about this passage (Gal. 2:11).

Dominican theologian Francisco Vitoria teaches us:

Quote:Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, O.P., poses these questions: “A Pope must be resisted who publicly destroys the Church. What should be done when the Pope, because of his bad customs, destroys the Church? What should be done if the Pope wanted without reason to abrogate Positive Law?” 

His answer is: “He would certainly sin; he should neither be permitted to act in such fashion nor should he be obeyed in what was evil; but he should be resisted with a courteous reprehension. Consequently ... if he wanted to destroy the Church or the like, he should not be permitted to act in that fashion, but one would be obliged to resist him.  
“The reason for this is that he does not have the power to destroy. Therefore, if there is evidence that he is doing so, it is licit to resist him. The result is that if the Pope destroys the Church by his orders and actions, he can be resisted and the execution of his mandates prevented.” (5) 

  1. Obras de Francisco de Vitoria (Madrid: BAC, 1960), pp. 486f.
To Sister's point, here is a good post from Father Z's site; we should always pray for the Pope.


Do you remember that, no too long ago, some wags in Rome clandestinely slapped up some posters “manifesti” on the walls of Rome addressing themselves – in the Roman way – to Pope Francis?   The posters were hurriedly removed.

[Image: Preghiamo.png?w=651]

Now I read from Marco Tosatti that there are new “manifesti”, small in format, with various petitions.
The manifesto features a smiling Francis surrounded by a Rosary and these petitions (my translations and comments):
  • perché Roma torni alla fede [That Rome return to the faith]
  • perché la Madonna venga prima di Lutero [That Mary come before Luther – a reference surely to the horrid stamp from the Vatican Post featuring Luther and Melanchthon beneath the Cross]
  • perché la fede venga prima della politica [that faith come before politics]
  • perché Pannella e Bonino non siano più additati come esempi [that Pannella and Bonino not be taken as exemplary – The former is the architect of divorce laws, the later infamously pro-abortion.]
  • perché il papa torni a parlare con i cardinali prima che con i giornalisti [that the Pope starts again to speak with cardinals before journalists – surely a reference to the Four Dubia Cardinals v. superannuated Communist editor Eugenio Scarfari.]
  • perché il papa non perseguiti sacerdoti e ordini religiosi che non gli piacciono [that the Pope not persecute priests and religious orders that he doesn’t like – perhaps referring to the 3 CDF officials that were sacked and also to the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate – today I read at Rorate that their sisters are forbidden now to accept postulants.  HERE]
  • perché il papa non taccia davanti a chi combatte famiglia e vita. [that the Pope not remain silent towards those who fight for the family and for life – If I recall, the March for Life in Rome got a cool reception from His Holiness]
The essential message is clear: pray for the Rosary for Pope Francis. There’s nothing wrong with that.

Put this together with the posters of last February and also with TODAY’s release of the sharply critical book, in Italian and now in English, by the pseudoanonymous “Marcantonio Colonna”, The Dictator Pope (more about that HERE and buy today in English US HERE – UK HERE), and you see that resistance is rising towards, at least, those who surround the Pope and towards the Pope himself.

And wasn’t there an incident in Rome recently involving a truck with a billboard about the late Card. Caffara, which was shushed away from the area around Vatican City?

REMEMBER: As I wrote the other day,
Quote:Most of you do not have to read this stuff.  Some of us do.  Most do not.  Be wary, in yourself, of the vice of curiositas.  Yes, there is a kind of “curiosity” which leads to sin.

This manifesto, however, frames the problems in prayers.  Is it critical of the Pope?  The petitions are clearly also statements of discontent with the present state of affairs.

It is always good to pray for the Pope.

Please share!
"There are in truth three states of the converted: the beginning,  the middle and the perfection. In the beginning, they experience the charms of sweetness; in the middle, the contests of temptation; and in the end, the fullness of perfection."
-- Pope St. Gregory

“One day, through the Rosary and the Scapular, Our Lady will save the world.”
-- attributed to Saint Domenic
[-] The following 1 user Likes CaptCrunch73's post:
  • Pulvis
I want this book to sell in a huge way. I want for Francis to know that the world is on to him.

Sales ranking at Amazon right now:
Quote:#471 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)

#2 in Kindle Store > Kindle eBooks > Religion & Spirituality > Christian Books & Bibles > Catholicism

#2 in Kindle Store > Kindle eBooks > Religion & Spirituality > Christian Books & Bibles > Bible Study & Reference > Biographies > Popes & the Vatican

#2 in Books > Christian Books & Bibles > Catholicism

T h e   D u d e t t e   A b i d e s
[-] The following 1 user Likes VoxClamantis's post:
  • Pulvis
I'm writing a blogpost on it later this afternoon, with links to Steve Skojec's reviews on One Peter Five, and my thoughts, tho' I can't afford to buy it. So, anyone who has read it in the past two days, please post your thoughts here, if you don't mind being quoted.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
I am halfway through this book. Some of the content I had already read about. Much of it is new. All I can say at this point is I cannot even begin to express the sadness I feel. It is like reading a screen play from Dan Browne. I hope our Lord brings this to a close soon!
"Memento, homo, quia pulvis es, et in pulverem reverteris"

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)