, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Francis Dowager Countess Not Amused

It’s been a bit busy so I haven’t had time to post lately. However, this below post came across my screen and I am reposting it below. You, dear reader can consider it the followup to the following post (see here).

The post contains very important information, however what makes it even more “interesting” is its signaling effect. It would appear, that Francis is directly attacking Benedict XVI, claiming that the “corruption” in the Vatican that Francis claims that he and the C9 are cleaning up, was due to the Benedict pontificate. Could be a bad translation, but the intent is self-evident.

If this is the case and it most likely is, than what we are dealing with is an escalation of the CIVIL WAR inside the Sacred Vatican Walls. It is highly probable that the Curia is moving against Francis, and Francis is striking out and attacking the one person who he thinks is the main threat. In other words, he fears that with a pope emeritus around, he could be deposed much easier than if he had no rival living across the garden. Furthermore, Francis must see Benedict as a threat since with Francis deposed and a reinstated Benedict, history could would read the deposal of Francis as the deposal of a FALSE POPE.

Please recall, that according to the Bologna Buenos Aires Theology School, whatever Francis says is holy and binding in the future. Provided that he is not declared a FALSE POPE. (see here)

I will leave here, but keep this in mind going forward.

Please read the post below with emphasis and [comments] and am republishing this post… (see original here)


Pope Francis Blames Benedict for Corruption Passes Buck on Chaoqui

Edit: there are suggestions that Francesca Chaoqui is a member of the Italian Secret Police, but it’s impossible to believe that Pope Francis didn’t know more about her when she was brought on board, than he suggests in his interview. [Of course Francis knew. According to Sandro Magister (here and here), Francis insisted on hiring her against the advise of many senior clerics]  She was a high profile appointment obviously conceived to present a more open, inclusive Vatican.  It’s difficult to discern what he’s saying, but it also looks like he’s accusing Pope Benedict of the corruption he’s pretending to fight with the C9, made up mostly of some of the most liberal and princely Cardinals of the Church.  It’s hard to call most of them Catholic [It was Benedict who started the reforms to clean up the corruption. Andrea Gagliarducci on his MondayVatican blog has done a great job of documenting the reforms that BXVI initiated and Francis inherited. (see one example here)].

(Paris) The Vatileaks 2 scandal is substantiated in a lawsuit by the Vatican court. Therein, none of the   details are spared that  make for all the ingredients of the perfect Sex, Crime and VaticanStory. That the bustling Francesca Chaouqui should betray her Vatican mentor, Msgr. Lucio Angel Vallejo Balda, since the police of the Vatican  showed up, makes them even more interesting to the media and even more embarrassing for the Vatican. Her appointment shall be directly attributed to Pope Francis on the recommendation of Msgr Vallejo Balda

When questioned by journalists,  Pope Francis  gave reply on the return journey from Africa regarding Vatileaks 2. His full answers:

Question: There is much talk about Vatileaks. Without going into details about the process, which takes place just: How important is the free and secular press in uncovering the corruption.

Pope Francis: The Free Press, the secular and ecclesiastical, but professional in any case: The professionalism of the press may be secular or religious. It is important that it has professionals and that the messages are not tampered with. For me it is important because the accusation of injustice and corruption is a good work. The professional press have to say anything, but without falling into the three most common sins: disinformation, which is to tell only half the story, and the rest not; defamation, if the non-professional public spotted the people; and the defamation that has things to say, which takes the reputation of a person. These are the three flaws that threaten the professionalism of the press. We need professionalism. And when it comes to corruption, it’s good things to say: “Corruption exists here, here and here.” And if a truly professional journalist was wrong, he apologizes.

Question: We could get into the COSEA appointing Monsignor Lucio Angel Vallejo Balda and Francesca Chaouqui.?Think of having made a mistake?

Pope Francis: I think that was a mistake. Vallejo joined because of the role he had and did have up until now: he was secretary of the Prefecture for the Economic Affairs of the Holy See. How did she get in: I am not sure, [Francis caught telling outright lie. But he is the king pope.] but I think I am right in saying that it was he [Ed. note: Vallejo Balda]who said she was someone who was well acquainted with the world of business relations. [Here is how Magister “charitably” described the Chaouqui hiring: “More than two months have passed since the unhappy appointment of Monsignor Battista Ricca as “prelate” of the Institute for Works of Religion and more than a month since that, no less unhappy, of Francesca Immacolata Chaouqui (see photo) as a member of the commission for the reorganization of the financial-administrative Vatican offices. Both of these appointments (Ed. note: Ricca and Chaouqui) were made by Pope Francis, the first through his own highly personal decision. And for both of them, immediately afterward, there came to light grave counter-indications about which the pope was initially in the dark. And yet, in late August, no correction of course appears to be in sight.” (see here)] They worked and when the work was complete, COSEA’s members kept some positions in the Vatican. Mrs. Chaouqui did not stay in the Vatican: some say she was angry about this. [Interesting that Francis would know about Chaouqui’s “anger”. Why would Francis even possess personal information regarding someone who he claims he is not sure how that person “got in”?] The judges will tell us what her real intentions were, how they did it. It did not come as a surprise to me, I didn’t lose any sleep over it because they showed everyone the work begun with the commission of nine cardinals, [Once again, Andrea Gagliarducci has documented the that the reform “works that begun with the C9 actually was begun by Benedict. And according to Gagliarducci, it was Francis who let the “corruption” back into the Vatican] to root out corruption and the things that are wrong. There’s one thing I want to say, not about Vallejo and Chaouqui. Thirteen days before John Paul II’s death, during the via Crucis, the then Cardinal Ratzinger, talked about the filth in the Church. He denounced the first one. Then John Paul II died and Ratzinger, who was a dean on the “pro eligendo Pontefice” Mass, talked about the same thing. We elected him because of his openness about things. It is since that time that there has been corruption in the air in the Vatican. [Can’t wait to see how Gagliarducci treats this last passage in next weeks MondayVatican. Stay tuned sports fans!] Regarding the trial: I have not read the charges in full. I would have liked the whole thing to have been over and done with before the Jubilee but I don’t think that’s possible because I want all the defence lawyers to have time to do their job and the freedom of defence.”

Question: How will you proceed, to prevent the recurrence of these things?

Pope Francis: I thank God that there is no longer Lucrezia Borgia! [laughs] But I do not know, with the Cardinals, to do away with the Commission. Not true? Thank you.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi/Vatican Reports translation
Image: Mil