Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Pro-Pope Francis Cardinals Seek His Resignation to Avoid Schism, Reports Times of London

The London Times newspaper is reporting that a group of cardinals who supported Pope Francis now want him to resign and be replaced by Cardinal Pietro Parolin because they fear his reforms will cause a schism “more disastrous” than the Reformation. The Times article draws on a report by the Vatican expert Antonio Socci, a prominent Italian Catholic journalist.

Antonio Socci reports that it is the curial faction of the Holy See that backed the election of Jorge Mario Bergoglio out of “impatience with the rule of his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI” that now wants Pope Francis to resign out of fear of an impending schism. The Times reports:

A large part of the cardinals who voted for him is very worried and the curia . . . that organised his election and has accompanied him thus far, without ever disassociating itself from him, is cultivating the idea of a moral suasion to convince him to retire.

It was the latter faction who now believed that the Pope should resign and who would like to replace him with Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican secretary of state, Mr Socci said. He believed that the group numbered around a dozen, but the importance of the members counts more than their number. Four years after Benedict XVI’s renunciation and Bergoglio’s arrival on the scene, the situation of the Catholic church has become explosive, perhaps really on the edge of a schism, which could be even more disastrous than Luther’s [who is today being rehabilitated by the Bergoglio church].

The cardinals are worried that the church could be shattered as an institution. There are many indirect ways in which the pressure might be exerted.

An expert on the Vatican gave this assessment of the latest development:

A good number of the majority that voted for Bergoglio in 2013 have come to regret their decision, but I don’t think it’s plausible that members of the hierarchy will pressure the Pope to resign. Those who know him know it would be useless. [He] has a very authoritarian streak. He won’t resign until he has completed his revolutionary reforms, which are causing enormous harm.

Antonio Socci reports that the significance of this development is that the group who want Pope Francis to resign are not the “conservative” cardinals who have opposed the Holy Father’s innovations, “What was significant, he said, was that the doubters were not the conservative cardinals who had been in open opposition to the Pope since early in his reign.”


Prayer to St. Joseph, the Protector of the Church

Father, you entrusted our Savior to the care of Saint Joseph.
By the help of his prayers may your Church continue to serve its Lord,
Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.

Editor’s note: this post originally appeared at EWTN Great Britain, but an editorial decision was made to remove it from the website. It is now a 1P5 exclusive. Our thanks to Deacon Nick Donnelly for allowing us to publish it here.

384 thoughts on “Pro-Pope Francis Cardinals Seek His Resignation to Avoid Schism, Reports Times of London”

  1. What!? Their all so wonderful pope is too much for them!? All this garbage has to come to the surface, and during this pontificate, that’s exactly what’s going on. The liberal dissidents are getting scared. That’s good! But what do they mean ‘being replaced by Card. Parolin’? It’s not like you can name the next Pope. What about the Conclave?!

    • Maybe they can name the next pope, conclave or no conclave. Is that what happened with the election of Francis and whatever workings behind the scenes which have been rumored?

      Color me cynical, but it seems blackmail, bribery, public humiliation/ shame and outright threat all have their place in both politics as well as in the affairs of the Church.

      Are we headed back to the era of three popes? Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, Pope Emeritus Francis and Soon to Be Pope Pietro Parolin (or whatever name he assumes)?

      Honestly, I think it will be a cold day in hell before Francis resigns.

      • Well, apparently, they want to turn the Church into a democratic regime. 4 years and you’re out. This is getting more and more unbelievable. I’m curious what will the Pope preach tomorrow. Will he find himself abandoned by all!? I think that, in the end, if any will show him respect and kindness, will be those neo-pelagians, crypto-lefevrists, pharisees, rigid people, triumphalists and other names I can’t remember at the moment, he’s been constantly accusing.

      • This might be the beginnings of what brings about an imperfect council to investigate the heresy of Pope Francis, and demand he recant or lose the papacy by his own lack of faith. I certainly hope Cardinal Parolin wouldn’t get elected though if such happens. He’d move really slow, but he wouldn’t be much better than Francis…

    • I guess they never expected the blowback they got. I guess they thought all Catholics would simply lie down and take it. In a sense, its good for Pope Francis to see that this is who his friends are. People who have no true loyalty to anyone but themselves. And when things get hot, they hold to no principles as they place faith in nothing and simply live for their own existence and pleasure. Such reports should entice Pope Francis to repent and defend the teachings of the Faith. Continue to pray, fast and evangelize.

      • Well, at least it speaks to the fact that there are large numbers of faithful Catholics, relatively speaking. And, there is an end to how much the corrupt prelates are willing to endure as far as mockery and the potential loss of income. The nuclear option of the laity. 🙂

        • Money, money is no problem at all. All they have to do is go back to George Soros and ask for a “small donation”. The devil’s last offer was all the kingdoms of the world.

          • Even GS has a limit to his funds, which incidentally, may be a bit thin since he is currently occupied with funding the overthrow of the Trump Administration. 😉

            Good point regarding the devil’s last offer.

      • pray, fast
        Some devils can only be driven out this way. And society is now overrun with them. Thank you for the reminder, especially because we are now in the Lenten season.

    • Remember Fr., they really don’t give a flying leap about ‘rules’ anymore. As an aside: What seems to be the problem here? Do they actually think he has gone ‘too far’ with the destruction…..I mean ‘reform’ of the Church? What a sad bunch of hooligans. How about someone who is actually CATHOLIC? That would be refreshing!

      • [As an aside: What seems to be the problem here? Do they actually think he has gone ‘too far’ with the destruction…..I mean ‘reform’ of the Church? ]

        Imagine you have a pile of rocks you want moved over there. But now the foreman you hired is over-filling the cart and it is beginning to bend and groan under the weight. You fear it may break altogether, and now your pile of rocks will be scattered here and there.

        In this scenario, you’re problem isn’t that the foreman is going to far. It’s that he’s going about it too recklessly and threatens to ruin the whole plan.

        Yes the devil wants the total ruin of the Church, but many of his pawns are just trying to “change it up a bit”

  2. Little too much hagen in your lio, Eminences? Afraid you’ll find that the Bergoglian Box does not close quite as easily as it was opened. By the way, thanks for admitting that you emphatically did NOT listen to the Holy Ghost in the last conclave.

    • So there are factions of Cardinals pulling for another Cardinal to become Pope before a conclave is established? Im not too knowledgeable about how a Pope is elected but can someone send me information pertaining to the rules?

      • The pastoral second vatican council may have removed the rigidity of the Conclave election process; along with the sacraments, salvation, Latin, …

        • Interestingly, Sacrosanctum Concilium, which was the impetus from the council for a reform of the liturgy, isn’t really that bad when you read it as its written. There are a few odd points, but for the most part, it’s good. It says Latin should remain, but in some places (the readings were targeted specifically if I remember correctly) the vernacular could be used. It also says that Gregorian Chant should have pride of place in the liturgy, but that other forms of music can be good, specifically polyphony (again, a perfectly fine statement), and it says the organ really should be the instrument used. Bugnini took the word “reform” and the formed a new, strange rite. It’s Catholic enough that it retains validity, but only just…

      • Look up Universi Dominici Gregis. This is the motu proprio of John Paul II establishing the current laws for a conclave. Be careful in your reading of it though. I’m finding people taking bits and pieces and coming up with all sorts of conclusions from it. And no, you can’t say “this cardinal should take his place!” before a conclave. It doesn’t work that way at all.

  3. “A large part of the cardinals who voted for him is very worried and the curia . . . that organised his election ” Another admission of the non-canonical status of that conclave.

    from Universi Dominici Gregis:

    “The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition. It is not my intention however to forbid, during the period in which the See is vacant, the exchange of views concerning the election.
    I likewise forbid the Cardinals before the election to enter into any stipulations, committing themselves of common accord to a certain course of action should one of them be elevated to the Pontificate. These promises too, should any in fact be made, even under oath, I also declare null and void.
    With the same insistence shown by my Predecessors, I earnestly exhort the Cardinal electors not to allow themselves to be guided, in choosing the Pope, by friendship or aversion, or to be influenced by favour or personal relationships towards anyone, or to be constrained by the interference of persons in authority or by pressure groups, by the suggestions of the mass media, or by force, fear or the pursuit of popularity. Rather, having before their eyes solely the glory of God and the good of the Church, and having prayed for divine assistance, they shall give their vote to the person, even outside the College of Cardinals, who in their judgment is most suited to govern the universal Church in a fruitful and beneficial way.”

    Automatically excommunicated, if that is what took place. Why is no one investigating this?

    • Because documents before 1965 have been abolished. It says that in the ‘It’s all over now’ document of Vat II. Didn’t you read that!? Wonderful document.
      They really don’t care what this or that says anymore. It can be even from the lips of Our Lord. Not that important. Everything is up for grabs now. If they can trample on the Eucharist with blaspheming words, they really wouldn’t care about the papacy.

      • You make an excellent observation. The perfect example is from last week when Kardinal Koch trashed Trent. They are making up the new rules while trashing the perennial Magisterium.
        Narcissism on steroids.

        • I have this feeling, as mr. Sammons describes in his article about how Protestants see only the 1st century and from the 16th onward, that we are in the same position. It’s the 1st century, and then a gap of 1900 years, till after the advent of V II. Everything in between is not certain what it was, but it was definitely a devilish and hellish institution, bent on suppressing the weak and poor, and condemning pretty much everyone to Hell.

          A man without a past has no future. I think these persons don’t or didn’t really love their parents and grandparents. And we can see in society the same thing. Why do they speak of abortion and euthanasia?! No past, no future. It’s all about them. Don’t care how they got here or what will they leave afterwards. One thing is for sure, they will leave destruction, anarchy and desolation in their wake. But the Church will be there to pick up the pieces, as she always has, and start rebuilding civilizations. It’ll take centuries, but she can do it.

          • These are questions that I suppose are seen as “worn out,” but you have to wonder, “Why did they enter the priesthood?” “Why did they stay?”
            Having had the good fortune to have experienced religious life, I always wondered “Why are they here?” All they do is use up oxygen, take up space, trash the rule, declare the sandbox all theirs, and make life miserable for everyone – all the while undermining the faith. And then abusing their personal power on top of it all.
            The laity are getting a good look now of what it is like while you are sporting a habit or a collar.
            It resembles the couple that freely marries, “I love you, you are perfect, now be what I want you to be.”
            It resembles purchasing a great work of architecture, stripping it of all its defining features and turning it into a McDonalds.
            I forgot – we’ve “done that” to most of our church buildings in this country.
            The priceless tapestry of the faith, gifted us by Almighty God through His Son, Jesus Christ, has been consigned to use as a drop cloth.
            The only reason they stay is for the pedigree, the position, the paycheck, bed and board, and to work out their contempt for the faith. They are seriously maldeveloped, disoriented and unbalanced.
            Mature men adjust and accommodate to the reality of the other or they move on.
            Now they can only move on to a geriatric facility – and on our dime.

          • As you drag others down with you, Scripture says it will be much harder on you for leading them astray…Repent and believe in the Gospel…

      • So you are pro schism and part if the Judas club…Attempting to drill holes in the barque of Peter…Creating fake-news (gossip) tsk, tsk, tsk…

    • Thanks for your post. The text you sighted enlightened me much. I will read more concerning it but me, like others who read this article are alarmed (and many have been stating this for a while) at the open admission (that has now apparently happened in a time where some of his “allies” are feeling nervous) that a faction of Cardinals actually campaigned for Pope Francis before he was elected. What other Cardinals were a part of this? As if the whole Conclave process was purely political and not Divine.

      • Nowhere does the document say that the latae sententiae excommunication imposed on pre-conclave conspirators invalidates the subsequent election.

        One crime that does carry such penalty (i.e. invalidation), IN ADDITION TO a latae sententiae excommunication is the crime of simony. HOWEVER, even there the document REMOVES the penalty of invalidation “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.”

        As such, if the document specifically removes the penalty of invalidation from a crime that incurs BOTH a latae sententiae excommunication AND an invalidation of the election, namely simony, there is no reason to assert that the crime of forming “pact, agreement, promise or other commitment”, which, according to the document incurs ONLY the penalty of a latae sententiae excommunication, should somehow also result in an invalid election.

        • Sincere question… Does Canon 171 apply to conclaves?

          Can. 171 §1.3, §2

          Can. 171 §1. The following are effected to vote:

          3/ a person under a penalty of excommunication whether through a judicial sentence or through a decree by which a penalty is imposed or declared;

          §2. If one of the above is admitted, the person’s vote is null, but the election is valid unless it is evident that, with that vote subtracted, the one elected did not receive the required number of votes.

          • I ask this because the St. Gallen “Mafia” had more than two members. And I’ve read that Pope Francis only won the election by a margin of three votes.

            I don’t know what to make of anything anymore. It just keeps getting weirder.

          • I agree with you. I would welcome his resignation but I doubt he will do it. We must continue to pray more and speculate less.

          • Can. 171 §1. The following are effected to vote:

            1/ a person incapable of a human act;

            2/ a person who lacks active voice;

            3/ a person under a penalty of excommunication whether through a judicial sentence or through a decree by which a penalty is imposed or declared;

            4/ a person who has defected notoriously from the communion of the Church.

            §2. If one of the above is admitted, the person’s vote is null, but the election is valid unless it is evident that, with that vote subtracted, the one elected did not receive the required number of votes.

            I think so, but §1.3 would not apply to a latae sententiae excommunication as it is neither imposed through judicial sentence or decree; it happens automatically — without sentence or decree — by virtue of the offending act itself. But even if I’m wrong there, according to §2 the election of Francis would still be valid unless the loss of votes by the excommunicated conspirators dropped Francis below the required number. But I don’t think that would be the case anyway.

          • The penalty of the crime of forming a “pact, agreement, promise or other commitment” (i.e. latae sententiae excommunication) is certainly stated in Universi Dominici Gregis, but it is not imposed by the document. Again, a latae sententiae excommunication is imposed automatically by virtue of the offending act itself.

          • I thought it was the nature of latae sententiae excommunication that it was imposed automatically? Is there a canon about latae sententiae being imposed or not imposed?

            Can. 1314 Generally, a penalty is ferendae sententiae, so that it does not bind the guilty party until after it has been imposed; if the law or precept expressly establishes it, however, a penalty is latae sententiae, so that it is incurred ipso facto when the delict is committed.

            I’m just asking questions. I’m not forming a firm opinion until Cardinal Burke shares his!

          • “I thought it was the nature of latae sententiae excommunication that it was imposed automatically?”

            It is, but canon 171 appears to be speaking only about ferendae sententiae excommunications as it stipulates that it is speaking about excommunications imposed by something that occurs after the fact; namely, a judicial sentence or decree of some kind; it says nothing about those imposed automatically.

          • Okay… I think I understand what you’re saying. Canon 171 only applies to those under excommunication by ferendae sententiae excommunication in virtue of it referring to; “a judicial sentence or through a decree by which a penalty is imposed or declared”. Latae sententiae excommunication being automatic is not incurred by a sentence or decree, its incurred by the act.

            Thank you for your explanation. I appreciate the clarity you provided.

        • Oh please! If you’re an expert on canon law, I would expect the idea that these cardinali want to have Parolin “take over” just might jump out at you before quibbling over the effects of latae sententiae! Suddenly we can appoint successor popes? Twilight zone.

          • Yes, appointing Parolin is a non-starter, but that doesn’t change the fact that neither Universi Dominici Gregis, nor canon 171, give us grounds to assert that Francis’ election was invalid.

      • Eventually those cardinals realized that their own souls are in great danger. Please confess your sins and ask God’s forgiveness. Be wise and truthful.

    • While we promote discussion of a great many topics here at 1P5, assertions that the pope is not the pope or any heretical or schismatic position position such as but not limited to sedevacantism are against our comment policy.

      6. Persistently advocating for unorthodox positions (ie., sedevacantism, the falsity of Catholicism, outright denials of doctrines or dogmas, etc.) will not be tolerated.

      7. Unless your name begins with “pope”, don’t declare anyone else whose name begins with pope an antipope. This is not your job. We allow reasonable and prudent speculation about the confusing nature of the two living popes, but definitive, declarative statements of such and/or accusations that others must reach the same conclusion are not welcome.

      Please familiarize with our policy and avoid such assertions in the future. We will ban for violations.

      Comment policy:

      • To Jafin’s point, nowhere does the document say that the latae sententiae excommunication imposed on pre-conclave conspirators invalidates the subsequent election.

        One crime that does carry such penalty (i.e. invalidation), IN ADDITION TO a latae sententiae excommunication is the crime of simony. HOWEVER, even there the document REMOVES the penalty of invalidation “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.”

        As such, if the document specifically removes the penalty of invalidation from a crime that incurs BOTH a latae sententiae excommunication AND an invalidation of the election, namely simony, there is no reason to assert that the crime of forming “pact, agreement, promise or other commitment”, which, according to the document incurs ONLY the penalty of a latae sententiae excommunication, should somehow also result in an invalid election.

        • Thanks for clarifying this. I’ve been feeling under the weather and a little off my game so explanations may be lacking 😉

      • Okay, Michael Voris, um, I mean Jafin, first off, I did not assert a sedevacantist position and secondly, are we not allowed to voice an opinion or concern questioning the validity of PBXVI’s resignation nor that of Francis’ election? An opinion is not allowed?

        I thought this blog was all about getting to the truth. It seems like viewership and popularity may be of higher precedence. You moderators and Steve are going to be quite busy putting out these little brush fires if that is what you want to occupy yourselves with, because many are questioning these things and trying to silence those with sincere questions is not in service to the truth.

        • The fastest way to get kicked out of here is not to post sedevacantist talking points. It’s to insult the writers, moderators, etc. Debate the point on its merits. Don’t make it personal. This is the rule of thumb.

          I would actually take your side on this matter, inasmuch as you’re asking questions, not making assertions. But your response could have (and should have) been to simply make that rebuttal. Let’s keep this thing on the rails, shall we?

          • Thank you for your response. Yes, you’re right, I should not have made a personal insult and I apologize for that. Kind of felt a little targeted, that’s all.

          • Steve,

            This is just a hunch, but… what if Pope Francis really did resign? The Church would have 2 former Popes and a third would be elected.

            You’d have a situation like the one in 11 Corinthians 12:.

            [11] For it hath been signified unto me, my brethren, of you, by them that are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. [12] Now this I say, that every one of you saith: I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I am of by; and I of Christ. [13] Is Christ divided? Was Paul then crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul? [

            That’s what it looks like, imho.


          • It is hard not to jab when you are being jabbed…Some of us speak before engaging the brain and I am sure there is forgiveness somewhere. The Pharisees are alive and well in 2017. Jesus and His Church will always have its’ clericalists…the gates of hell have not prevailed yet and by His word they won’t…

          • I echo others that it’s really hard to be Catholic these days. And it’s EASY to go off the rails at times. This is by far, the most difficult time in my whole life as a Catholic to watch and experience the beautiful Bride of Christ being tortured and crucified as she is being now. Even after Vat ll when they ripped out Communion Rails and mandated the ‘New Mass’ was it this bad. This is betrayal from the very shoes of Peter in an ugly and diabolical manner. But………that doesn’t mean that Francis is not the Pope. And it doesn’t mean that we have no Church left. We are asked and expected to go through this Passion just as Christ did. We are expected to PRAY FOR THE POPE, and PRAY FOR THE ERRING BISHOPS, that the Holy Spirit take the blinders off that Satan has so efficiently placed on them. PRAY THE ROSARY, PRAY THE ROSARY, PRAY THE ROSARY!!! Cannot say that ENOUGH!

          • Don’t forget Mark 9: 27-28:

            …his disciples secretly asked him: Why could not we cast him out? [28] And he said to them: This kind can go out by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.

            It’s from the Gospel for the Fourth Sunday of the Great Fast (2 weeks from yesterday).

            Prayer is absolutely necessary but fasting helps also.

          • [11] For it hath been signified unto me, my brethren, of you, by them that are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. [12] Now this I say, that every one of you saith: I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I am of Cephas; and I of Christ. [13] Is Christ divided? Was Paul then crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul? [

        • If your opinion is that Francis was not validly elected then, no, you are not allowed to voice that kind of sedevacantism here. Why? Because the Church has told us the election was valid.

        • I actually want to apologize. I jumped the gun a little bit. There’s been a lot of sedevacantism and craziness lately and, as I mentioned, I haven’t been feeling well, so I think I missed the point of the question and took it as an assertion. Too many people do that these days and I got a little trigger happy.

    • “Out, damn’d spot! Out, I say!”

      Does anyone have any of Father Guido Sarducci’s ‘Pope-on-a-rope-soap’ for these cardinals?

    • If Bergolio should resign (or be declared mentally unfit to hold office) why should any of the cardinals who lobbied for his election in the first place be permitted to cast a vote in the next conclave, having openly and admittedly bragged that they had done so?

    • If this was true God had listened and answered our praying to intervene to save His Son’s Church from any more severe damages which were caused by invalid, faked, heretical pope and his evil minions. Deo Gratias.

  4. I think they didn’t realize how quickly the destruction would happen. They probably figured their cushy careers were safe and they could have their cake and eat it, too.

  5. Oh, this is absolutely priceless. I don’t know what’s worse: the fact that we have cardinals actively campaigning to have the reigning pontiff resign while floating the name of their preferred candidate (yeah, that totally doesn’t violate the rules regarding papal elections, right?), or that these same cardinals apparently were arrogant enough to think they could let a man like Bergoglio off the leash and still be able to control him.

    For all the damage Francis/Bergoglio is causing the Church, part of me wants nothing more than to look these cardinals in the eye and say, “Gentlemen, you wanted him. Now, you have him.” From where I am sitting, it’s a little late to start whining about buyer’s remorse.

  6. From another sites combox: I think he’s on to something.

    “IF true (and I highly doubt it), the real story is that the group that elected him want to head off the regularization of the SSPX with a Prelature that would leave them essentially independent of the bishops.”

  7. The cause of schism is not Jorge Bergoglio. It is the TRUE implementation of Vatican 2. That is what is happening. Vatican 2 needs to be trashed in it’s entirety. The True Mass can be offered in the Vernacular….So, for me it’s not about nostalgia, its about the Salvation of Souls, which Vatican 2 has endangered worse than any heresy in Church history. Jorge is NOT a pope nor is Joe Joe Ratzinger. Both keen politicians implementing Vatican 2 methodically carefully and skillfully. Ratzinger is smarter than Jorge and knew how to win the hearts of those that claim to be traditionalists. All this is wonderful because ultimately it will lead to the repudiation of 99 percent of Vatican 2. Look at the fruits of Vatican 2….Not my opinion, look at it’s fruits…Not to mention FRUIT CAKES….

  8. I attempted to access the link via EWTN Great Britain, but it WOULD NOT open. I think the EWTN editors have prevented the article from populating on new screens or tabs.
    Can others attempt and verify or discredit my concerns?

  9. Why do they care if there is a schism? They do not care about the real teachings of Jesus Christ. They want to allow all sorts of sins! They are agents of the devil and he certainly does what a schism!

  10. Force him to resign and put in a pre-selected successor? Where is the Holy Spirit in that equation? And this makes clear what happened to Benedict. In Benedict’s case he was the victim of such diabolical predispositions. In Francis’ case it will be a Divine Form of Justice. No more rigged conclaves, the Cardinals better learn their lesson from this. And we the Church, better drain the swamp.

  11. Could these wonderful Cardinals who elected Brogoglio actually be campaigning
    for another one of their own…or are they pretending they don’t agree with Bergoglio.or as someone pointed out are they afraid of a regularization of SSPX ? On the other
    hand his dear friends may have noticed that his popularity is shrinking amongst the
    sheep and a new conclave might instill some hope in the poor things who respect the
    papacy. 🙂

  12. Twaddle…..Read the Canonical Law. …There appears to be cardinals who are out for themselves and not guardians of the Faith. Time to deal with their pride.

  13. So, these illustrious cardinals are worried are they? They see their ” boy” went off the rails a bit, exposed himself for who he is and what he desires for the Church. These cardinals fear a schism? I truly doubt it.
    I think what they fear is the faithful laity rising, along with the faithful prelates and priests and saying , ‘ NO MORE!” Please…..they do not fear a schism. They know that as PF keeps going, like a loose cannon, the more that will be exposed of their evil agenda, and the more the laity will rise up.

    These traitorous cardinals want a “softer Francis”. They want to lull the laity back to sleep.
    They want to change Christ’s Church and their “boy” didn’t pan out that well. They see and “feel” the RESISTANCE. And I pray a courageous and holy cardinal speaks and says, ” I call you by name, in all the charity I have Holy Father, but you are in heresy regarding………………………………………and we call on the faithful not to follow you, in the name of God Almighty, for His Church, for their very own souls.”

    what is so damn hard about that? ( sometimes an ugly word is needed to identify ugliness)

    • [I think what they fear is the faithful laity rising, along with the faithful prelates and priests and saying , ‘ NO MORE!” Please…..they do not fear a schism]

      Tomato, tamahto. They may not fear schism for the spiritual ramifications. But even the most modernist 1% wouldn’t be satisfied with getting their way if the other 99% cleared out. Schism ruins the plan, because it means the “reform” snapped under pressure and all the pieces fell out before they get the Church to where they want it to go.

      One could 100% agree with the most modernist interpretations of Francis’s intentions and still regret his papacy if one fears he is pushing to the point of breaking.

      • Could they fear their nightmare, Francis, is the faithful’s greatest inspiration to reclaim our faith and quite frankly tell Francis and his crew to leave our Church, for ‘they’ are in schism?
        Perhaps the failure of the reform is due to the Holy Spirit acting upon holy prelates and instilling in the laity a righteous duty to defend the faith.

    • And what’s this that they want to replace him with another Cardinal …Cardinal Parolin…do they know who the next pope will be… probably, as they plan to rig the papal election, just as was done with Francis.

      Only… this time the orthodox had better fight …for the Church that Jesus Christ established…otherwise…

      • I was told once that a pope can appointment his successor. Don’t know if anyone else has more exact knowledge of this? If it’s true, be afraid. Be very afraid.

    • “I think what they fear is the faithful laity rising, along with the faithful prelates and priests and saying , ‘ NO MORE!”

      I agree. PF has exposed them to an accounting.

    • You know what they really FEAR? The laity being SICK of them and not putting $$$$$$$$$$ in the collection box! They need to retire in style, BABY!!!!

      • Yes, if there is a schism, who’s going to carve up the assets? It would be a million times worse than the divorce wrangles about who gets the Mercedes and who gets the furniture. Given the lifestyle of cardinals resident in Rome, or anywhere else, you don’t want to half kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

  14. “He won’t resign until he has completed his revolutionary reforms” And what revolutionary reforms would those be? Francis talks a lot but from my perspective as a lay Catholic in the US, there have been no changes.

    Re:schism. People who seriously think there might be a schism haven’t thought about what that means in the 21st Century. Hundreds of years ago a schism meant some parishes – land and buildings – went to one part of the schism and some to another part. With modern communications and property laws, that is not likely to happen.

    I agree there should be a mandatory retirement age for popes. The College of Cardinals needs to set one an enforce it going forward.

    • More than that! The Church will be seen as just another human institution and no one would be able to kid themselves that the Holy Spirit chooses each Pope. Whilst even Cardinal Ratzinger drove home that point himself – the Holy Spirit DOES NOT choose each Pope, it would be disastrous for 2 popes to resign in quick succession.

      • Does anyone doubt that was one of the major agenda items of the Bergoglian conclave. Undermine the papacy, but before you tank it, use it to your advantage.

        • Well his supporters (and I know a few) would argue that there is a new vision for the Church which is friendlier and more humble and of the people. That’s the popular take. As you say, the Papacy is being done over but in order to decentralise, this requires a whole new vision of the Papacy as well.

          • His supporters range from atheists, clerical atheists, the catechetically ignorant, deprived and misinformed, and wanna be katholics who are unwilling to enter into the crucible of trying to abandon sinful lifestyles but all the while requiring ample doses of pretend, nannying and koochy-koo konsolations of kasperian proportions.
            The papacy is not being done over in order to decentralize.
            It is being prepared for “decentralization” in order to eradicate it.
            In a world the size of a pinhead there is absolutely no need for decentralization. Quite the opposite.
            These people hate Roman Catholicism and we need wrap our heads around that fact.
            The individuals propelling this agenda are nefarious and disingenuous. They are bad actors.
            We need wrap our heads around this brutal reality, get our helmets on and vest in our flak jackets. The war is on.

          • I agree. Visibly, publically, the Church is being eradicated by a process of serial humiliations mostly corrupting morals which was a masonic boast about how they were going to eradicate the Church. In 1917, in St. Peters Square (as it so happens!) St Maxmilian Kolbe watched a masonic parade celebrating their bicentennial. He saw them sporting the banner “Satan must reign in the Vatican. The Pope will be his slave”. I guess if nothing changes in Rome, at some stage, the high echelons of this sect will believe the time is now come for them to claim their prize by some sort of private anti-coronation. The only way I can get my head around all that’s happening is some epic blindness has fallen on a probably small cabal of maybe 12 men there, but they never take holidays unfortunately. Only God knows the way we can restore the Church. Humanly, it is impossible.

          • Read Malachi Martin who died in 1999. He has the blueprint. He was a Jesuit advisor to the pope at Vatican II. He also read the Third Secret of Fatima as the priest secretary to the Jesuit Cardinal Bea. In his book “The Jesuits”, he related that a future pope would destroy organized religion. It would be his goal to create a new spiritual belief system based on world unity. The actual blueprint comes from Teilhard de Chardin and his views on evolutionary Christianity. When Francis invited Maduro from Venezuela for a special visit, the curtain was drawn. This was followed by news out of China that he would accommodate Chinese Communism. This was followed by grave comments from Joseph Cardinal Emeritus Zen of Hong Kong. It is the task of Francis to merge Christianity and Communism and to topple capitalism and to create a managed economy. Finally, there have been reports of a concordat with the Democratic Party despite its radical moral beliefs in the name of social justice. Senator Obama had a first job out of Columbia as a “community organizer” under Joseph Cardinal Bernardin who evidently succumbed to complications from AIDS.

          • jbq21, do you have the actual page number for that prediction about a future pope ?

    • Who cares about such a precedent?
      Thankfully pope’s can resign. It is already a precedent.
      What is unprecedented is the exposé of theological corruption and utter mendacity dished out on a daily basis by this disoriented crew of deconstructionist secularists. It cannot be
      exceeded in its foul undermining of the faith. Have you read Edward Pentin’s interview with Cardinal Coccopalmerio? This bold crew is readying the dismantlement of the priesthood. Their agenda is to eradicate Roman Catholicism.
      The situation is so far worse than we can imagine, it has actually shaken those who support it, realizing that they have been outed, and as such their plans are jeopardized. Pope Bergoglio’s hubris has pushed the indiscretion envelope too far. They find there isn’t much camouflage any more and it might be best to ship him off to Patagonia.
      There is no honor among the likes of these.
      We are in the hands of atheists, secularists, ecumaniacs and protestants of the “new stripe” – deists at best.
      We are in emergency mode.

      • The only advantage that I can see from Pope Francis resigning is that it would enable the election of his successor before he has stacked the conclave deck with the likes of Cardinals Cupich, Tobin and Kasper.


        • That would be advantage enough.
          A conclave would also allow the interaction that is absolutely requisite to stifle the catastrophe that is upon us — and do not mistake the term for hyperbole.
          The demonic is upon us.
          We have been pretending for close to sixty years that the track we adopted on October 13, 1962 was appropriate. We can no longer be excused for giving the nefarious the benefit of the doubt.

          • If I recall correctly it opened on the 12th. On the 13th the opposition to the prepared agenda got up and junked it. They hijacked the Council and Pope John XXIII went along with it — the usual “work of the Holy Spirit” contrivance.
            It is amazing how the hijacking of the Council was October 13.
            A must read: “The Second Vatican Council: An Unwritten Story” by Roberto de Mattei, Loreto Press. It is worth every moment you give it.

          • That is fascinating for a number of reasons. Not only was October 13 the day of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima but in 1884 it was also the day on which Pope Leo XIII had the vision of Christ and Satan that led to the composition of the Prayer to St. Michael. And in A.D. 54, it was the day the reign of the Emperor Nero began…

          • The Bergoglian crew are all about reading the signs of the times, but it appears they only read comic books.
            You point to the real signs of the times.

        • Hi Thomas – I am willing to find out. Cardinal Parolin is no longer a viable option due to this article. I wonder how many votes Cardinal Burke would garner. The Holy Spirit might carry the day this time, after all who knows what could await the Conclave Cardinals of a supernatural nature.

          • I think that the Holy Spirit might have actually wanted Pope Francis, if only to root out the heretics in our midst. With the tares being so obviously exposed among the wheat, perhaps the final harvest is closer than we realize

          • I’ll grant you, Thomas, that this has made many of us think about what it must have been like during the Arian heresy when even the bishops all around caved and adopted the lie, or in revolutionary Russia where almost everyone turned against the truth out of fear. It’s a way of testing our mettle, something that robs us of sleep and causes fearful sweating as we lay awake late at night. But, in the end, it makes us ask ourselves, “OK, Marine, are you finally willing to stick with your oath regardless of the consequences? Or are you going to run?” There’s a virtue in stark choices.

  15. A holy angelic pope [Peter the Roman?], who will be associated with the great catholic monarch, about to come? What is clear is the end is nigh for Pope Francis and I dread his ending. Immediately after AL, I just thought it was going to be downhill for him and my comment saying so was deleted on another site.
    This comes on the heals of news of their ‘building a large, singular, extravagant church which is to embrace all creeds with equal rights : Evangelicals, Catholics, and all denominations, a true communion of the unholy with one shepherd and one flock. There is to be a Pope, a salaried Pope, without possessions. All [appear] to be ready, many things finished; but, in place of an altar, are only abomination and desolation. Such is the new church to be … ; but God designed otherwise. – Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich.
    It gets much worse before it gets better.

    • Bishop Fulton Sheen preached of a “Church without a cross”. He thought that Communism would create a fake church to rival that of Rome. Instead, it is Rome which has been infiltrated. Here in the Archdiocese of Saint Louis, I have gone to Mass at some 50 different parishes. In a majority, the crosses are coming down and being replaced with murals of the resurrection. in one downtown historic Irish parish, the only cross in the sanctuary is one carried in procession. If you go to the bulletin, you can see this same cross blown up to about ten times its size to make it appear that it is hung on the wall. In another in the near downtown area, the church was remodeled and a mural went up. I found the cross sitting out behind the garage. Who knows where the corpus went?

  16. Undoubtedly the band of malefactors who confected the current abomination would be armed, armored, and salivating for their next stab at the deconstruction of Roman Catholicism, I am nevertheless indulging myself with this shot of utter joy.
    I just don’t think they will succeed the next time.
    Bring him down. Make it happen. Send him back to Patagonia.

  17. I believe that Francis should step down; and the next pope ELECTED as the Universi Dominici Grigis states. I think this pope’s letters and “plans” should be discarded across the board. The article stated the “Bergoglio Church” and in fact this man has attempted to subvert CHRIST’S church with his own designs–all intentional under the pretense of forgiveness and mercy! My grandmother used to tell me to beware of evil as it rarely arrives with its true motives, but poses as something good and beautiful. Along with Francis a few fake cardinals should likewise move on to other pastures. They are sowing weeds in ours!

  18. We know that Pope Francis’s election was rigged by the “St Gallen mafia” of Danneels, Kasper, Martini & C°, in blatant contradiction to the Constitution “Dominici Gregis Universi” issued by John Paul II under threat of excommunication (therefore IMHO this makes Bergoglio’s election invalid).
    Now these gentlemen-plotters are becoming scared because their candidate is a bit too radical and is upon to trigger a schism. And so they want to oblige him to resign (like they probably obliged Benedict to resign) and rig a new conclave to elect Parolin who will be as invalid a pope as his predecessor…
    Useless to wonder whether they care if the Holy Spirit is in control of their clerical conspiracy. Their agenda is the only thing that matters.

    • 1. Please read the comment policy; this is not a forum to express your opinions on the invalidity of Francis’ election.

      2. Nowhere does Dominici Gregis Universi say that any latae sententiae excommunication incurred by pre-conclave conspirators invalidates the subsequent election.

      One crime that does carry such penalty (i.e. invalidation), IN ADDITION TO a latae sententiae excommunication is the crime of simony. HOWEVER, even there the document REMOVES the penalty of invalidation “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.”

      As such, if the document specifically removes the penalty of invalidation from a crime that incurs BOTH a latae sententiae excommunication AND an invalidation of the election, namely simony, there is no reason to assert that the crime of forming “pact, agreement, promise or other commitment”, which, according to the document incurs ONLY the penalty of a latae sententiae excommunication, should somehow also result in an invalid election.

      • Then one may wonder which was the aim of John Paul II when he issued this Constitution if Pope Francis’ election is not invalid. In no way it prevented the plot to succeed.
        Let me think at the very least that it was seriously flawed since a bunch of cardinals who voted for him were already excommunicated ipso facto latae sententiae, before the conclave began. .

      • Naturally, one would think that posting such an article would only lead to more souls being led to believe or at least question the legitimacy of Francis. All of that being said without reading “Dominici Gregis Universi”.

        It reminds me of a time I was at a secular event when someone told me she follows Voris. They began telling me how much they learn from him and how terrible the scandals are that happen in the Church. Well, she knew more than most Catholic’s do and finally when asked where she attends mass she replied, “No, i’m not Catholic, I just enjoy following the news he reports”.

        This is not to say that 1P5 has the same effect, though after reading this article should we not have a certain level of understanding when people do question Francis validity?

        Since Francis papacy is valid then don’t we have to accept the his modern ways? If not, where shall we go?

        • Francis’ duty as the Successor of Peter is to confirm the brethren in the faith once delivered to the saints. Thus, we are bound to follow him to the extent that he fulfills this duty. But when he departs from it, we need to resist. Just because he was validly elected doesn’t mean cannot fall into error.

  19. I’m not holding my breath in anticipation of the liberal cardinals effecting a coup on Bergolglio. It was a fun thought though.

      • Would it be described as a coup even if it were?
        Lets get it through our head, “mental reservation” is the moral application of choice for ecclesiastics. We are called to be wise as serpents and gentle as doves. Lets start using our heads when evaluating the comportment of this group of altar boys. They aren’t angels. They are men with some serious issues about faith and the exercise of power.
        Does anyone really believe they didn’t apply some sort of heat on Benedict? He did not just leave because of his health, knowing full well that he was indeed surrounded by wolves — and the wolves were not just after him — they were and are after us. Knowing this would Benedict have jumped the Barque without pressure?

        • “Pray for me that I will not flee out of fear of the wolves” (Benedict XVI)
          If true Benedict resigned under pressure and this fact alone can make his successor’s election invalid.

      • My my use of the word coup isn’t exactly what the article implies. The plan appears to be to ‘convince him to resign.’

  20. Hey man, you want to WORSHIP LUTHER? YOU GOT IT! Luther’s Evil Spirit of Division is now upon the Church in Rome! Since Jorge invoked that Reprobate out of hell, LUTHER WILL FINISH THE JOB FOR YOU, BABY!

    You know what they really FEAR? The laity being SICK of them and not putting $$$$$$$$$$ in the collection box! They need to retire in style, BABY!!!!

    You don’t want to sink the ship, if you are still in it, BABY!

      • They are working off a report by Antonio Socci. Let’s see what Sandro Magister has to say. It all seems a bit too good to be true.

          • I believe I get your drift.
            This is the kind of “rumor” that speaks a deeper truth.
            There is trouble in the house.

          • Hi Steve – The Good Lord works in mysterious ways, Let His Will be done in all things, including an unsuspecting media.

          • The answer, humanly speaking, is right in the text of the article:

            An expert on the Vatican gave this assessment of the latest development:

            A good number of the majority that voted for Bergoglio in 2013 have come to regret their decision, but I don’t think it’s plausible that members of the hierarchy will pressure the Pope to resign. Those who know him know it would be useless. [He] has a very authoritarian streak. He won’t resign until he has completed his revolutionary reforms, which are causing enormous harm.

          • Hi Steve – It might bring Benedict back on the scene though, and a word from him, might just be the breathe needed to dislodge Francis from his precarious perch. If that occurs during Lent, it will cause a dilemma for me though, how could I refrain from singing from the rooftop the refrain we must refrain from shouting during Lent. A full throated – ALLELUIA!

          • Which seems to suggest that the whole thing is not going the way that Jorge Bergoglio and company had planned, that the liberals don’t seem to be in favour of a schism, that they had anticipated taking the whole Church in their own direction, and that the tide is definitely moving against them.

          • Hey, watch what you say about black cats. I have two of them (black cats, that is) and they are good upright Christian cats. One is named “Faith” and the other is named “Hope.” And just in case you really want to know, I have a large patterned calico named “Charity.”

          • Hi Susan – Be a good CAT-echist, you never know who those you love will associate with and you want them to stay strong in their commitment to Faith, Hope and Charity.

    • Hi Gabriela – The Dubai might gain overwhelming support, among the Cardinals, in that case. A classic case of being damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t.

  21. A short anecdote helps measure how far and how fast this papacy has degenerated in the last few months. Two or three years ago, I subscribed to so I was permitted to post comments on articles that appeared there. (Posting is free here at 1P5, but I encourage others to do as I have and to decide the privilege is worth paying for anyway.) Gradually, I became alarmed at Pope Francis’ actions and remarks, and I would from time to time post [very mild] criticism. However, many of my posts were simply not allowed. In fact the editor censored just about anything critical anyone wrote about Jorge Bergoglio back then. But that was then and today is today evidently. Imagine my surprise when I read at that site the article I will link to below, where the author, Phil Lawler (by the way, a damned good writer!), says in one place that he can “… no longer pretend that Pope Francis is merely offering a novel interpretation of Catholic doctrine. No; it is more than that. He is engaged in a deliberate effort to change what the Church teaches.” The tide is turning and laymen are at last awakening from the Bergoglian nightmare!

    • It’s one thing to say that we ought to give Pope Francis the benefit of a doubt and pray for the holy Father and interpret his sayings with charity, but how about reminding everyone that the Catholic Church teaches (1) the Pope is not infallible in everything he says and does; (2) the Pope is the servant of Sacred Scripture and Tradition, not its master; (3) the Pope has the authority to defend the Faith, not to change it !!!

      • I believe that’s what Lawler is suggesting here, Leba. In a way, it’s good he has taken time to come to this place. It shows this is not pleasant for him, and that it is something he HAS to do, not that he wants to do. I feel the same. I am compelled to act, but I’d do anything to have it otherwise. The Faith my parents handed on to me (gratias eis!) makes me do it.

        • Thank God that your faith compels you to do so! I heartily agree with your conclusion: “The tide is turning and laymen are at last awakening from the Bergoglian nightmare!” I feel that Pope Francis still has some “fight” left in him, that he will not back down and accept the suggestion to resign, that the orthodox Cardinals will not accept a nominal replacement for the Pope, and that there’s still no guessing as to how the whole thing will unfold.

          • You know what, Leba? This has taught me something else. We don’t have faith from our own efforts; it’s a gift. In my case, my father and mother gave it to me and — who knows why? — it stayed with me. I truly do not understand it, but I’m grateful. It surprises me that I’m not more distraught than I am, given the cataclysm in Rome that I thought was a fact of ancient history, something that happened long, long ago and wouldn’t reoccur. I assumed I’d never have to worry about it. Usually, I’m one of those people who “loses it” in an emergency or when some loved one dies. But I feel somehow assured that everything will turn out all right, regardless of what Bergoglio or his minions try to do. I will admit it’s comforting to know other Catholics are as alarmed as I am about Pope Francis; there’s “safety in numbers,” so to speak.

          • Yes Johnny, I resonate with your words. It’s great to hear that your personal faith has such strength, despite the circumstances. Truly it is something of a mystery how we get the gift of faith and how that it sustains us even in the midst of crisis. But God is in control. The modernists like to teach that personal faith is somehow induced by the individual’s own efforts, but Sacred Scripture says, “…let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith..” (Hebrews 12:1,2). And if Jesus is the author of our faith then I’m sure He intends to bring our faith to its fulfilment, by His own omnipotence and grace. I have the same sense of assurance that you have.

          • Same here. I spent 2013 and 2014 defending Francis against various detractors. It seemed to me at that time that his focus on poverty was perhaps something that Christ intended for the Church (after all, Jesus talks a great deal about our responsibility to the poor, the hungry, the sick). I did not like the constant off-the-cuff interviews, nor especially the fallout of “Who am I to judge?”, but I was very ready to give the Pope the benefit of any doubt, and to take it all as a kind of Jesus-eating-with-the-tax-collectors papal style.

            But the first conclave in 2014 changed everything (in my understanding, that is, not in the reality of the papacy). It became very clear, not only in the men handpicked to lead the Synod, but in the caustic and disrespectful remarks he addressed to the assembled bishops at the close of the synod, that the Pope was personally responsible for the “Kasper” agenda, that it was not Kasper’s agenda but his own.

            Even then I tried to see some way around it. But the 2015 synod drove in the final nail. And then Amoris was the realization of everyone’s worst fears: a legitimately-elected Pope teaching error, albeit in a non-infallible context.

            Since Amoris in 2016, he has become increasingly authoritarian. He promotes Amoris incessantly, as if it were a new Gospel to replace the old; he makes vicious, openly ad hominem attacks on the ‘dubia’ cardinals and anyone else who raises concerns, both in his own statements and also through obvious proxies; he sits back and watches with apparent gladness as various bishop’s conferences openly interpret Amoris to mean that sin is no more and the Eucharist is a mere supper, thereby clearly signaling that this is his exact intention with the text; in general, he presents himself as a replacement for Christ and Amoris as a replacement for the Gospel. The homily Lawler comments on is perhaps the most strikingly obvious example of this replacement strategy.

            My previous ultramontanism has been (in a good way) uprooted and weeded out of me. What remains is a more clear understanding of just how precarious the Church’s situation has always been. It is only by the Holy Spirit that this kind of monstrosity has not happened hundreds of times before; the fact that God has allowed it to happen now means that we are being tested like Job. If so, then we had better pass.

          • Yep, I think a lot of us pretty much came to the same ugly realization at the same time, much to our HORROR and AMAZEMENT.

    • Yes, I read the article. I was happily surprised by the ‘revelation’ of what is really going on in the Papacy. As I’ve said before, even before these ‘Cardinal supporters’ of Francis’ were asking for his resignation, the Holy Father had overplayed his hand, to the benefit of the faithful, especially the ‘blind’ faithful. I had no doubt that eventually even the blind would be restored to sight.

  22. I’m extremely skeptical of this story. Pressuring a Pope to resign is a canonical crime, and identifying a papal successor by name without regard to the prerogatives of a conclave is bizarre.

    Plus, Bergoglio is far too arrogant to resign. I could be mistaken, but this man is hell bent on splitting the Church. He will not let up until he’s stopped by an external power, human or divine.

  23. It is one thing to say that they think Francis should resign, it is another to say that they want to put Parolin in his place. What ever happened to a conclave?

    • Maybe they forgot the old Italian saying that translates into English as follows:

      “He who goes into conclave as Pope, comes out as Cardinal.”

  24. There can only be hope that the Pope take the advice of the Cardinals an go ahead an retire for the good of the world wide Roman Catholic Church.

  25. Those who take the position that urging Francis to resign is utterly futile are absolutely correct. The instigation of the Bergoglian revolution is the sole raison d’etre of this pontificate/regime. He can no longer enjoy the confidence that his own anointed successor will replace him. But the fact that he recently conceded that “history may record that I split the Catholic Church” attests to the fact that he is determined to stick it out to the bitter end.

  26. And just how do they propose to replace him with Cardinal Pietro Parolin? The same way they installed Francis in the first place? The sheer arrogance of these frauds is breathtaking

  27. Pope Francis resign? Never gonna happen. “Never”…as in “Not EVER”. And those who think this is even a possibility are hopelessly naive. Not surprising that it is the same liberal idiots who voted for him in the first place who are considering this.

  28. To be on the RIGHT PATH and to be PLEASING in the eyes of The Lord, Pope Francis must change his SPIRITUAL DIRECTOR and get one from THE DIVINE Retreat Centre, or from THE SEHION, Kerala, INDIA.

    • I hate to be a rancid old cynic, but a massive schism might endanger the cardinals’ 4,000 square foot apartments, generous allowances, chauffeur driven cars. Not that I’m suggesting such base motives influence their thinking.

  29. If the Pro-Francis cardinals want him removed, then something is afoot.
    Would Parolin be any better? And the utter hubris to think that they can dictate who will take ever. But then again, they are probably right. They machinated the rise of Bergoglio to power after all.

  30. The real story here is the insinuation that when a group of cardinals has had enough of a pope, he ought to just throw in the towel and go away.

    Is this story telling us something about the demise of Benedict XVI?

    I’d be delighted if Francis would disappear but this is very dangerous territory we’ve entered. Thanks, Benny. You made quitting “mainstream”.

  31. I am glad to hear cardinals openly talking about a potential schism.

    I recall reading ~4 years ago that “four years of Bergoglio” were all that we needed …

    If His Holiness loves this church, he will make way for someone new and continue his ministry as Pope Emeritus.

  32. I suggest we go back to one Pope at a time.

    No more emeritus Popes. Ever.

    Just answer the Dubia.

    Another fine mess they’ve gotten themselves into!

  33. The Freemasons are intent on taking the papacy. The only one I ever knew wore the sign of the papacy around his neck. And we know from Anne Catherine Emmerich that this happens… What I see happening is that Pope Francis never played into their hands entirely and now they are fed up with him and want him gone, too. If they want Cardinal Pietro Parolin, then I would assume he’s on their side. His actions in the Knights of Malta money laundering case is extremely suspect. The outcome of that fiasco was to invalidate anything that was set in place after the removal of Boeselager, which included the investigation of the fund. That was what the FMs in the curia needed to do, and they accomplished it. Cardinal Parolin played a personal hand in all of that. It doesn’t smell right. You can bet your bottom dollar that the FMs in the curia who are voicing concerns about schism want precisely that. So now they pose two equally agreeable outcomes: Parolin or schism. Either way, they win.

    Also, I have to say, it’s ironic seeing the policing of anti-Pope Francis rhetoric coming from 1P5 staff. I’ve never read so much criticism against our Pope as I do in this blog. And the comments section is downright vitriolic. I’m not crazy about his ways either, but I think you guys are way off track.

    • Not sure what the great mystery is, Claire. Francis deserves criticism when he recklessly departs from his duty to confirm the brethren in the faith once delivered to the saints. Don’t like it, take it up with Aquinas and take your comments elsewhere. With that said, this kind of valid criticism obviously does not extend to specious accusations that Francis is, therefore, not a legitimate pope. Deciding that for ourselves is Protestantism, and that’s why we put a stop to it. Criticizing those, however, who are manifestly unfaithful to Tradition is quintessentially Catholic.

      Also, I find it ironically telling that you lay the Maltastrophy squarely at the feet of Parolin, indicting the entire thing as a masonic coup, only to scrupulously ignore the pivotal role that Francis played in that whole debacle. If you want dishonest reporting aimed at exonerating Francis rather than telling the truth, there plenty of other websites you can visit.

      UPDATE: Why do you upvote your own comments?

    • Okay if you want to use that metaphor, then lay on the track. Either the train from the left or the right will run you over.

  34. Christians need to brand together to defend Rome. A war is coming. The Anti-Christ from the East operating today as a infamous satanic death cult Ottoman will invade soon. Time to warm up the bombers….

    • The Antichrist will be a Jew. The Beast [] controls Islam/Muslims [and also LDS and JW. Also, apparently, no one can be an Episcopal Bishop without being a Freemason]. It appears that the Beast has now seized the papacy.

  35. I’m guessing many cardinals think of the “Pope Emeritus experiment” as a serious failure for a number of reasons—but mostly because such an act casts an unnecessary shadow on the legitimacy of the next papacy. I can’t imagine having TWO Popes Emeriti as something any cardinal would crave, nor the notion that a drummed up “vote of no confidence” from the College of Cardinals automatically means a Pope must resign. Plus, I doubt seriously that Pope Francis would continue to be silent after any resignation.

    And who is to say that Pope Francis’s replacement would be more to their liking? Papal elections can be pretty surprising. Be careful what you wish for.

    • You are right, but the modernist cardinals and the mafia’s members don’t think like us. They believe that a conclave is only a game of political influences since they succeeded in electing Bergoglio. This time they may be tricked by the Holy Spirit who can truly jump in the next conclave and elect a holy man, not the one they selected in their gang.
      In that sense we may rejoice that they look tired of Bergoglio and are considering to get rid of him.

  36. Even if he was validly raised, and even though sedevacantism is just a fancy way to say protestant; the man is clearly a heretic. It will be to (whats left) of the Church after this man is gone to decide between formal or material.

    Like it or not, were stuck with a pope that’s about as Catholic as that Jack Chick guy was. We dont get the popes we might need. We get the ones we deserve. All the whining about good Catholic l, bad Catholic, blah blah blah but in the modern age of speculative everything we forget that God judges nations and peoples collectively, not one by one in matters like these. The only individual judgement will be once we assume room temperature.

      • To me he is the False Prophet, no question about it.

        The Second Beast
        11 Then I saw another beast[a] which rose out of the earth; it had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon. 12 It exercises all the authority of the first beast in its presence, and makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound was healed. – Revelation 13:11-12 (RSVCE)


        a. 13.11 another beast: i.e., the false prophets.

        Note: those worshiping the first beast actually worship Satan, the dragon, who has given his authority to the beast. [Cf. Rev 13:4].

        • Do you think he is “THE” false prophet or “A” false prophet? Do you think we are really at the End?

          • THE, and at the two battles of the End, and the great day of the LORD when the Nations are judged [NOT the general judgment of the living and dead at the final resurrection i.e. after that is the first resurrection with the reign of the martyrs = liberty and exaltation of Holy Mother Church = the revival and expansion of the Church after years of persecution cf. The Navarre Bible New Testament Compact Edition Explanatory Not to Rev 20:3].

          • The Book of Revelation is quite confusing. When the Nations are judged is that the period of peace foretold by Fatima?

          • My Take:
            The period of peace, which some refer to as the Age of Mary has just concluded. It is a period without a World War i.e., after World War I & II and specifically the period following the fall of the Soviet Union/Communism.

            One of the two upcoming battles of the end is the battle of Armaged′don, where the Nations are assembled for battle by the 3 demonic spirits issuing from the mouth of the dragon and from the mouth of the beast and from the mouth of the false prophet [cf. Rev 16:12-16 (RSVCE) – It is at Armaged′don that the Nations are judged. Israel [and all with her] is on the wrong side with mystery Babylon. They lose.

            Our Lady is with Russia.

            The other battle [to me in Europe – that’s where the are] concludes when the beast and the false prophet are captured and thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with brimstone. [cf. Rev 19:19-21 (RSVCE) –

  37. The main issue here is not in questioning the validity of cardinal Bergoglio’s election that obviously was rigged by a “mafia” (I much appreciate the word “mafia”: It’s members are very despicable men) that blatantly contravened the Constitution University Dominic Greg is.
    No, the issue lies in the suspicious conditions of Pope Benedict’s resignation. Since it is highly probable that Benedict resigned under pressure, then his resignation would be invalid.
    But we have no proof of this, only clues.

  38. I pray this story has foundation.

    May we be delivered soon from this evil Pontificate.

    Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

    PS: Fr Spadaro SJ – your days will likewise be shortened.

  39. All of this suggests that Pope Francis was not legitimately elected in the first place and the folks who arranged this realize their “stalking horse” is creating too much havoc. What to do about it? Personally, I think a schism might not be such a bad thing. Since most Catholics are really Protestants why not let them have their own ‘Church’ with Pope Francis in charge. The other side could have Cardinal Sara. Didn’t Christ say many are called and few are chosen? Seems like time for a little choosing.

  40. If the ‘fear of a schism’ part of this story is substantially true, it may indicate that support for the four cardinals is significantly greater than it appears to those looking in from the outside. The pope’s relentless efforts to drag the Bride of Christ through the mud may be waking up increasing numbers of cardinals who are then coalescing around the Dubia Four. If the four cardinals’ supporters were as pitifully few as has ostensibly been the case up to now, I can’t see how the Bergoglian Cabal would bother giving the possibility of schism a second thought.

    • Old Popes don’t retire. They either die in Office or they are no longer Pope.

      Until 4 years ago.

      All change started with that change.

  41. interesting article from NCR….2nd paragraph especially….where we are now…

    Coming out in the Open

    Msgr. John Esseff, a priest for 63 years and an exorcist in the Diocese of Scranton, Pa. for over 40 years, said the face of the devil that is becoming more clearly seen in public. Previously, he said we saw more of what he calls an apathetic demon that appeals to the lower weaknesses of human nature such as the sexual revolution and all that comes with it.

    “Then, came the apostate demon,” Msgr. Esseff said, “that denies the sacrificial nature of human life is possible. We are told we will never able to achieve this kind of holiness or goodness or unity—it just can’t be done,” he said. “This is a real apostasy; not just in politics but also in churches, convincing people that holiness is unattainable.”

    Now, according to Msgr. Esseff, we are seeing the stage of the antichrist where the evil one is not afraid to show himself to humanity. Msgr. Esseff referred to Scripture: “This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.” (1 John 4: 2-3)

    “It’s not Trump they are against but Jesus,” Msgr. Esseff said. “The devil is saying, ‘no way are you reigning in this country, we are coming out against you!’”

    The spell is nothing to fear if our trust and our hope is in God, Msgr. Esseff said. “Anyone who would even begin to put God back into place is going to have the forces of hell against them,” he said. “Our Lady of Fatima has given us the key to deal with this: Increase prayer and reparation [such as making Five First Saturdays].

    “It’s the Fatima message and it’s coming at this time of the 100th year anniversary much more clearly,” Msgr. Esseff said. “Our Lady warned us about it at Fatima where she said the final battle will be against marriage and the family. This is not about politics, it’s about God.”

  42. Resignation is not Catholic. “Emeritus” Popes are a feature of our current problems. Christ built His Rock on Peter, and Pope BXVI’s resignation went right to the heart of that. We questioned Christ’s clear Word then; we question it now in matrimony.

    Another “emeritus” Pope will only add to our current woes. The current change agents likely do not fear, but aim for this outcome.

    How will a Pope Tagle, (for instance) with a Pope Emeritus Francis advising him, bring healing to the breach? Pope Benedict XVI chose a contemplative “retirement”. I doubt Pope Francis would choose that path.

    Such an outcome would lock in the revolution over the long term, including any number of future living “emeritus” Popes.

    IF he does resign, then we should reject the whole premise. We should have done so already.

  43. Will the cardinals who voted for Bergoglio have as complacent ears to the “mafiosi” in the next conclave as they did in 2013 ? That’s highly unlikely.
    They know for sure now that the man they placed on the Seat of Peter is a catastrophe for the Church.
    Probably this time they will hear from the Holy Spirit the name of God’s candidate and they will elect him instead of the mafia’s candiate Parolin who may prove himself even worse, if this was possible, than Francis.

    • I wish I was sanguine about the ability of the cardinals (who schemed to put Francis in the papacy) to listen to the Holy Spirit. …It seems to me that these are men without faith, and thus not open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

  44. The Catholic Church as we have known it for many centuries is ending. The schism is here. The “Francis” faction will hold the Vatican and Curia, while the faithful will go into the wilderness to organize as the Catholic Church which will in time overwhelm this misbegotten bunch of heretics. But neither I or subsequent future generations will live to see that day. God does not work his efforts in our life times, his machinations are for eternity. I now understand how the Israelites felt as they trudged into the desert after that fracas with the golden calf.

    • We’re not alone. When all seems lost, the renewal will come. We’re going through a great trial of our faith that the Little Flower spoke of when she said that she wished she could be around in a hundred years for the sufferings that Catholics would endure for Christ.

    • Just keep fighting, we were born in this age for this purpose. As long as we have our Faith, we have the eternal Church.

  45. Talking about the election etc is to miss the main point. That will not change. Too complicated and difficult to prove. Bergoglio said when elected that he had a feeling it would not be for a long time, 4 or five years. This now happening would be according to script. Parolin is probably a diversion. A worse one may surface.
    Are they scared about a schism? If the objective is destruction the opposite is true. The only plausible explanation for the scared trial balloon is that they feel they overplayed their hand and that a heavy correction is coming.
    Another possibility is that Bergoglio is so transparent and uncouth that he is spoiling
    the plan.
    But all is tactics……. focus on that because the source for the trial balloon, the London Times, tells you all. To substitute B. for a velvet glove heretic would be a coup.
    On the other hand human machinations aside Our Lady Mother of the Church will defend it and the confusion of the heretics will happen. Maybe it already has.

  46. May God bless the Bride of Christ – his Holy Church. I pray the “morning offering” prayer daily asking for strength for our Holy Father. We do not know all the evils that besiege him and the pressure he is facing from so many flanks.

    I always thought that the election of a Pope was non-political and an individual Cardinals drive. I am VERY surprised that there was a lobby that elected Pope Francis. Truth – like a candle – cannot be hid under a basket. It always outs itself.

    Lets pray the end to this story restores the Tabernacles back to our main altars, a reverence for the Real Presence and devotion to our Lady – in the 100th year of the Fatima Apparition.

  47. Yesterday I mentioned an article by Phil Lawler concerning what he himself called the current “disastrous papacy.” Some of us here have been the object of censorship at in the past because we criticized Pope Francis. But, as noted yesterday, the winds of change are blowing strongly at the CCO site now, and a full realization of the Bergoglian devastation is in the air. Today I read an article dealing with this matter written by the CEO there, Jeff Mirus (linked below). He has regularly shown himself much more reticent than Lawler when it comes to criticizing the pope. But I think that, if read correctly, this article is more damning vis-a-vis the pope even than Lawler’s.

    • Well, you’ll have to be more explicit in the grounds for your confidence, because I only read yet another exercise in Mirus verbosity and painful circumlocution. If duelling were legal I’d challenge this insufferably prolix and overeducated person to smooth-bore, muzzle-loading pistols at 50 feet simply to prod him into some vague form of manliness. Bah, away with Mirus!

      • Well, my comment came from seeing his lumping Bergoglio in with popes like Alexander VI and Stephen of the same number, a very low bar indeed for comparison! And he says in passing, “… it is also possible that our present cardinals will regard the current pontificate as a frightening object lesson in allowing Christianity to serve the secular values of the declining West.” He seems to be admitting Francis is far more interested in promoting the programs of cheap left-wing politics than in teaching the truth.

        • Yes, I guess you’re right there. I just prefer the directness and plain speech of Phil Lawler or Steve Skojec to Mirus’ prolix evasions and contortions. His wordiness alone makes him suspect in my eyes. I’ve generally found that those who want to obscure the truth do so at great length, using many words. Compare Amoris Laetitia, at almost 300 pages, to Humanae Vitae, at around 15. But I digress . . .

          • I agree that many words are usually a sign of duplicity, and I think they most certainly were in the case of AL (which I have not, cannot, and will not read – I have to depend on commentators and a quick read of the offending footnote). I see this morning that Bergoglio has joined the overpopulation alarmist crowd. Ask me if I’m at all surprised. Reading over Jeff Mirus’ short list of bad popes and considering the great evils explained there, I still come to the conclusion that the current one wins the title of The Most Disastrous Papacy in History.

          • Yes. I can’t figure out why he included John Paul I in that list, or why he excluded Pope Honorius. But definitely, Pope Francis is the worst of that list. His heresies, his continual stream of insults, his constant distortion of the Gospel, topped off by arrogance and authoritarianism that disrespects the legitimate rights of subordinates.

  48. It says a great deal that EWTN Britain decided to take this news down. Had Mother Angelica still been among us, it would have stayed up.

  49. Please Almighty God the next pope has real faith and leadership and will encourage, the all too many prelates who have made public their faithlessness too, them to retire early and remain silent until their demise. Card.’s Kasper, Marx, are at the top of that retiree list ( sadly the list will need to be very, very long)

  50. It would be such a blessing if Pope Francis would resign. If not pray for a divine intervention as soon as possible.

    • In truth, I think divine intervention would be preferable. The damage that would be done to the papacy by two successive resignations would be great, I think. Benedict is an outlier, an anomaly. Another resignation would be a trend.

  51. The ‘church’ is the body of believers who trusted Jesus for remission of sins and salvation. No one goes to the Heavenly Father except by Him. Clearly stated in the Bible.

  52. What? They pray to a dead human being? St. Joseph??? How about doing it God’s way according to the bible. 1 Timothy 2:5 – For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave himself as a ransom for all people.

  53. Please say this isn’t going to be another Avignon Papacy episode! It was bad enough back then, and it will be even worse today. However much I hate the actions of this Pontificate, and pray for the salvation of the person of the Holy Father, I think it might be best if Francis doesn’t resign.

    Firstly, he isn’t likely going to do it: he has tasted power, and has become enamoured of it. However much he pretends to distance himself from pomp and circumstance, he loves it.

    Secondly, to resign would give the impression that the Office of the Papacy is a job, rather than a calling of the Lord. There is a reason why a 700 year chasm exists between Celestine’s and Benedict’s resignations. It seems, for all want and purpose, that we are returning back to the Renaissance Papacy, where factions are trying to get their candidate onto the Supreme Chair.

    If this is Modernism, then God make me a Promethean Neo-Pelagian!

  54. Of course this could be the case because the existing Pope is going to see the truth and deliver the truth. So therefore it is necessary to try and find another person to destroy the truth.

  55. So who is going to be the fulfillment of St. Malachy’s Prophecy of the Popes? Will Pope Francis turn out to be ” Petrus Romanus ” (Peter the Roman) or will it be Cardinal Pietro Parolin who has the name and is Italian?

  56. “It all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is”. According to the Jesuit writer, Malachi Martin who died in 1999 in his book “The Jesuits”, there would be a future pope who would destroy organized religion. His goal would be to create a new spiritual belief system based on world unity. Actually, the blueprint would be the writings of Teilhard de Chardin who was another Jesuit.

  57. Since EWTN first posted this editorial that they later took down, I think of the obvious reasons why EWTN took it down. It makes me think of the obedient position that the religious are forced to take because of the title “Pope”. That forced upon position is not a position subject to the laity. We, the laity are the poor, that Jesus spoke to the religious about, “The poor you will always have with you”.

    To mention my lay ministry, I have had my songs played on EWTN, my family was invited to play World Youth Day 2016 where we performed a one hour show. As the father of my family, I see the problems that are not only dividing the religious in the church, but the laity are being dramatically effected. My friends do not know what to believe. Good Pope? Bad Pope?

    As there is so much confusion and division, I am convinced of what Jesus said concerning confusion and division. Especially when fear and anger rises in the laity in the Catholic church, only one summation and conclusion can be deduced.

    I am at peace trusting Mary in “The Rosary”, and Jesus in “The Divine Mercy Chaplet”. These are my weapons of choice with of course “the wearing of the brown scapular”.

    I really see a time worse than the atom bomb of Hiroshima, because “faith” in every soul is at stake. Will Jesus find any faith when He returns in His Second Coming? Hang on in the roller coaster ride for your life. God bless you


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...