Hattip to commenter Greg Mockeridge. An interesting new book about Pope Francis has come out. Rorate Caeli gives us the details:
This aspect of Pope Francis’ Pontificate is now the object of a book, recently published with the significant title The Dictator Pope (https://www.amazon.it/Papa-Dittatore-Marcantonio-Colonna-ebook/dp/B077M5ZH4M
The author is an Oxford-educated historian who hides under the name of “Marcantonio Colonna”. His style is sober and documented, but his accusations against Pope Bergoglio are numerous and strong. Many of the elements he has based in the formulation of his accusations are well-known, but what is new is the accurate description of a series of “historical pictures”: the intrigue of Pope Bergoglio’s election, piloted by the “St. Gallen Mafia”; Bergoglio’s Argentinean behavior and actions before his election; the obstacles Cardinal Pell encountered after having attempted a financial reform of the Curia; the revision of the Pontifical Academy for Life; the persecution of the Franciscans of the Immaculate and the decapitation of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta.
The mass-media, always ready to lash out with indignation at any episode of bad government and corruption, are silent about these scandals. The foremost merit of this historical study is having brought them to light. “Fear is the dominant note of the Curia under the law of Francis, along with reciprocal suspicion”. It is not only about informers who are seeking to obtain advantages by reporting a private conversation – as Cardinal Müller’s three members of staff discovered. In an organization where morally corrupt people have been left in place and even promoted by Pope Francis, underhanded blackmail is the order of the day. A priest in the Curia said ironically: “The saying goes that it is who you know that counts not what you know. In the Vatican, here’s how it is: what you know counts more than who you know.”
Marcantonio Colonna’s book, in short, confirms what Cardinal Müller’s interview conceals: the existence of an atmosphere of espionage and delation which the former Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith attributes to a “magic circle” conditioning the Pope’s choices, whereas the Oxford historian reports it as Pope Francis’ modus gubernandi and compares it to the autocratic methods of the Argentinean dictator Juan Peron, of whom the young Bergoglio was a follower.
One might respond that nihil sub sole novum (Ecclesiaste 1, 10). The Church has seen many other deficiencies in government. However, if this pontificate is actually bringing about a division among the faithful, as the three cardinals highlighted, the motives cannot be limited to the Pope’s way of governing, but have to be sought in something which is absolutely unprecedented in the history of the Church: the separation of the Roman Pontiff from the doctrine of the Gospel, which he has, through Divine mandate, the duty to transmit and guard. This is what is at the heart of the religious problem of our times.
Go here to read the rest. PopeWatch has obtained a copy of the book and will provide a review after it has been read. Go here to snag a kindle copy from Amazon.
I got a copy on kindle (kindle app on my PC ) and am 40% through reading it. What staggers me is the corruption that is allowed to persist in the Vatican – homosexual permissiveness, outrageous financial corruption, the ‘old boy’s network’. It is legion that the Vatican is corrupt – but to the extent revealed in this book – mind boggling, and soul destroying of those involved, most of them cardinals and arch-bishops. Disgraceful.
Forget the new evangelization. It’s been a total failure. What we need is a new Pentecost. We need the intervention of the Holy Spirit with our wolves in shepherd’s clothing.
I thought the saying was “It is what you know about whom you know that counts.”
The fish rots from the head down. Has anyone identified a single salutary thing about this papacy?
It makes us really appreciate what we had Art!
Here’s an interesting question for canon lawyers: what if it emerges that Benedict was blackmailed into abdicating (as you suggested, by threats against his brother)? Is this papacy valid at all?
I don’t know if it would come down to a question of canon law, but rather to the perception of most Catholics. Of course anything short of Benedict admitting that he was blackmailed into resigning would be insufficient probably to establish it as a fact in the mind of most Catholics, and short of a deathbed statement, I don’t see that happening, if blackmail did occur. Something occurred, since his statement of ill health almost five years on, looks more false every passing day.
With what could the enemies of the Church blackmail Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI? Did he do something wrong earlier in life that would cause a massive public outcry? Was his brother Father Georg Ratzinger being threatened in some way? Surely whatever these two men might have hypothetically done (for which blackmail is being made) cannot possibly be worse that what Jorge Bergoglio is doing today.
I pray for an end to this Papacy. Even my devout Evangelical and Pentecostal Protestant friends and family members loved Benedict because he was (in their words) very Biblical. But they all know Bergoglio is a heretic. He exemplifies everything they hate about the Catholic Church. Of course, the liberal main stream Protestants (e.g., UMC, ELCA, EC USA, PC USA, etc.) all love Bergoglio because he’s so open minded and fair and kind and tolerant and non-divisive, and best of all, a Latin American – a Hispanic! I could puke!
This being the year of the 100th anniversary of Fatima it is most appropriate that ‘The Dictator Pope’ make it’s appearance. Most appropriate because it confirms what we believe is part of the 3rd Secret regarding the corruption at the top of the Church. Pope John XXIII had the opportunity of revealing the Secret when something might have been done to correct the problems in the Church. Instead he called Vatican II which only made the corruption in Church teaching and management the accepted way of life.
Has anyone identified a single salutary thing about this papacy?
Not a few have observed it has had the virtue of exposing the worldwide vice of the Prelature to many who have been willfully blind heretofore.
ABS has long known he has been abandoned to the wolves allowed to roam wild within the sheep gate and, thus, all alone with no where and no one to turn to, save Jesus.
And Ratzinger, as Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine the Faith, was an abysmal failure at his gig – how many were subjected to Bell, Book, and Candle during his reign of world wide heresy within the Church?
And, as Pope he wrote a trilogy in which he flatly stated the author of John’s Gospel was not John but just some unknown guy named, John; and he wrote that Luke erred in his Gospel etc etc
O, and Ratzinger also indeed did write in favor of adulterers being allowed to receive communion and he is four square in favor of what Franciscus is doing and he agrees with Franciscus that the Justice of God is cruelty…
And ABS has just scratched the surface and has not noted his refusal of original sin, or his writings that we “know” that at the atomic level consecrated bread is just bread etc etc etc etc etc etc
ALL of the weird ravings of Ratzinger can be read at the
War against being
website
http://waragainstbeing.com
Benedict XVI: It seems to me that in the theme of divine mercy is expressed in a new way what is meant by justification by faith. Starting from the mercy of God, which everyone is looking for, it is possible even today to interpret anew the fundamental nucleus of the doctrine of justification, and have it appear again in all its relevance. (Well, so much for Trent)
Servais: When Anselm says that Christ had to die on the cross to repair the infinite offense that had been made to God, and in this way to restore the shattered order, he uses a language which is difficult for modern man to accept (cfr. Gs 215.ss iv). Expressing oneself in this way, one risks likely to project onto God an image of a God of wrath, relentless toward the sin of man, with feelings of violence and aggression comparable with what we can experience ourselves. How is it possible to speak of God’s justice without potentially undermining the certainty, deeply established among the faithful, that the God of the Christians is a God “rich in mercy” (Ephesians 2:4)?
Benedict XVI: The conceptuality of St. Anselm has now become for us incomprehensible. It is our job to try again to understand the truth that lies behind this mode of expression. For my part I offer three points of view on this point.
“Only where there is mercy does cruelty end, only with mercy do evil and violence end. Pope Francis is totally in agreement with this line. His pastoral practice is expressed in the fact that he continually speaks to us of God’s mercy. It is mercy that moves us toward God, while justice frightens us before Him.”
+++++++++++ end quote +++++++++
Who’n’hell wants back on the throne Bishop Emeritus Ratzinger who thinks God’s Justice is cruelty when we already have a Pope Francis who believes the same damn thing?
Wny’n’hell do you think Ratzinger is jake with the new mass and says it is the same Rite/
It is because he, Ratzinger, clearly does not believe that one of the four sacrificial aspects of the Holocaust (Mass is the holocaust) is the sacrifice of propitiation and which internet is appeasing the Just anger of God towards we sinful men.
Why the hunger for an old material heretic when we have a new one?