"Strictest Secrecy": Francis Breaks His Oath
Francis voted for Cardinal Ratzinger in the 2005 conclave as a "transitional pope", he says in the interview book "El Sucesor" ("The Successor") to be published on 3 April. Excerpts were published on …More
Francis voted for Cardinal Ratzinger in the 2005 conclave as a "transitional pope", he says in the interview book "El Sucesor" ("The Successor") to be published on 3 April.
Excerpts were published on 31 March by the Spanish daily ABC. Francis said he was "used" by other cardinals who tried to block Ratzinger's election.
Although cardinals take an oath to maintain strict secrecy about everything related to the election, both during and after the conclave, it was credibly reported that Bergoglio came second in the final ballot.
Now Francis is one of those breaking their oath. He chattered that a group of cardinals had engaged in a "full-blown manoeuvre" by putting his name forward "to block Ratzinger's election and then negotiate for another, third candidate".
He said he had won 40 of the 115 votes of the cardinal electors in the Sistine Chapel - "enough to stop the candidacy of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, because if they had continued to vote for me, he would not have been able to reach …More
Excerpts were published on 31 March by the Spanish daily ABC. Francis said he was "used" by other cardinals who tried to block Ratzinger's election.
Although cardinals take an oath to maintain strict secrecy about everything related to the election, both during and after the conclave, it was credibly reported that Bergoglio came second in the final ballot.
Now Francis is one of those breaking their oath. He chattered that a group of cardinals had engaged in a "full-blown manoeuvre" by putting his name forward "to block Ratzinger's election and then negotiate for another, third candidate".
He said he had won 40 of the 115 votes of the cardinal electors in the Sistine Chapel - "enough to stop the candidacy of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, because if they had continued to vote for me, he would not have been able to reach …More
- Report
Social media
Change post
Remove post
His own guilty-conscience is becoming too huge for this sitting man dressed in white, to live with. He's trying, now, to manipulate events and even time, just to quiet that obnoxious 'voice' he hears in his head. So, just like a broad-flat bodied crab.... he goes sideways. (just to confuse and save its/his hide) He knew exactly why Benedict XVI left and who made Him leave (which is the most …More
His own guilty-conscience is becoming too huge for this sitting man dressed in white, to live with. He's trying, now, to manipulate events and even time, just to quiet that obnoxious 'voice' he hears in his head. So, just like a broad-flat bodied crab.... he goes sideways. (just to confuse and save its/his hide) He knew exactly why Benedict XVI left and who made Him leave (which is the most important aspect). Anything that this man says or writes now is just: looking for a way to redeem his name (not his soul) - he knows he will go down in history (if there will be one) as the most destructive Anti-Catholic Church, Anti-pope that has resided in the Vatican.
Can an elector vote for oneself?
Sean Johnson
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Yes, and it’s the most commonly asked question in the conclave: “Is it I, Lord?”
Wilma Lopez shares this
- Report
Remove share
In new book, Francis says he was 'used' in 2005 conclave: Ratzinger 'was my candidate'
If true then WHY did he allow himself to be a candidate in 2013 that was backed - and promoted - by the notorious St. Gallen 'mafia'? This has all been reported in several books, notably The Great Reformer [sic] by Austen Ivereigh. Francis is attempting to re-write the narrative!
John A Cassani
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
@Orthocat Honestly, I think it’s plausible. Ratzinger had majority support, and could have been elected by simple majority if they wanted to drag it out to 28 or 32 or how ever many ballots it took to trigger that option. I remember hearing that Martini even consented to Ratzinger, but told him his mandate was to reform the curia, and if he failed, he needed to get out of the way. Anyway, I could …More
@Orthocat Honestly, I think it’s plausible. Ratzinger had majority support, and could have been elected by simple majority if they wanted to drag it out to 28 or 32 or how ever many ballots it took to trigger that option. I remember hearing that Martini even consented to Ratzinger, but told him his mandate was to reform the curia, and if he failed, he needed to get out of the way. Anyway, I could see the liberals thinking that a few years of Ratzinger would trigger a groundswell favoring a liberal Pope. That never happened, but the College of Cardinals was well corrupted by 2013, and Bergoglio had his wide support. I just think this is a plausible scenario, though it is also very possible this is just an instance of a liar telling lies.
Bergoglio wasn't elected because the College of cardinals was corrupted. He was elected because the BXVI resignation was not expected. Usually, the pope is known to be failing for about a year before he dies--lots of time for politicking. It was just a few weeks between the resignation and pre conclave assembling of Cardinals. To many of them Bergoglio was an unknown. and they failed to realize he …More
Bergoglio wasn't elected because the College of cardinals was corrupted. He was elected because the BXVI resignation was not expected. Usually, the pope is known to be failing for about a year before he dies--lots of time for politicking. It was just a few weeks between the resignation and pre conclave assembling of Cardinals. To many of them Bergoglio was an unknown. and they failed to realize he was concealing his 1970s Jesuit ideology.
Sean Johnson
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
And here I was, thinking Pius XII was already the aforementioned “transitional pope.”
Now Francis is trying to link himself to Benedict XVI? After all the ways he has undone his (and John Paul II's) legacy? Sure the last 2 popes had their issues, but Francis' reign has been a disaster!
Sean Johnson
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
There’s no substantial doctrinal difference between Francis and BXVI. Francis is just a bit more reckless about he goes overthrowing Tradition, where BXVI tried to hide the rupture called Vatican II. Even BXVI’s lament over Traditionis Custodes was simply a disagreement over the means taken (BXVI wanted to lure the Lefebvrists in and let reconciliation work its self-censorship magic, whereas Francis …More
There’s no substantial doctrinal difference between Francis and BXVI. Francis is just a bit more reckless about he goes overthrowing Tradition, where BXVI tried to hide the rupture called Vatican II. Even BXVI’s lament over Traditionis Custodes was simply a disagreement over the means taken (BXVI wanted to lure the Lefebvrists in and let reconciliation work its self-censorship magic, whereas Francis feels no need to play such games).
Boanerges Boanerges
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Breaking his oath means nothing to him, except maybe an opportunity to offend God. The false prophet is not to be trusted, whatever he says.