Discover more from Pope Head Post
Andrea Cionci: Latest Insight into The Ratzinger Code
New Messages from Archbishop Gänswein and Peter Seewald
The journalist Andrea Cionci has once again asked me to republish one of his latest articles. Originally published here.
_______________________
NEW RATZINGER CODE MESSAGES from ARCHBISHOP GAENSWEIN and PETER SEEWALD
It was a reader who pointed out to us a resounding new message by Pope Benedict XVI in "broad mental reservation."
As already discussed previously, this concept taken from moral theology is a way to "not bear false witness," (8th commandment), but at the same time not reveal the truth to the bad guys or those who do not deserve it HERE.
In short terms, it is just like speaking to those who have ears to hear. It is a subtle communicative style that requires an intelligence, openness to truth and faith, intellectual honesty, and the courage to take responsibility. This is why the book The Ratzinger Code, which will be presented today in Civitanova Marche on 18 February 2024 in Udine and in 24 and 25 February 2024 in Rome, constitutes a way of intellectual, moral, and spiritual discernment.
This new Ratzinger code-style message has highlighted another message, rampant throughout Archbishop Gänswein’s comments brought into focus only today.
We read in the photo appendix of Ein Leben, an authorized biography of Pope Benedict XVI by Peter Seewald what follows.
The photo shows the cardinals gathered in consistory and the caption states, "An act that has changed the papacy forever: on 11 February 2013, in the Vatican’s Consistory Hall, Benedict XVI announced his resignation to the dismay of the assembled cardinals. It is the first time in the history of the Church that a sitting Pope has resigned. Benedict mentions the weakening of his strength as justification."
Read it again carefully and think about it for a moment. Isn't there something that doesn't add up?
"This is the first time in the history of the Church that a sitting Pope has resigned."
Yet, we have had ten abdicating Popes in history, six in the first millennium and four in the second. Everyone knows Celestine V who, as Dante writes, "made the great refusal out of cowardice."
How could Benedict XVI be the first ever Pope that resigns for the first time, at least in the sense of abdicating?
As we have already pointed out here in The Ratzinger Code regarding the "thousand years" HERE, the word "resignation" does not mean "abdication” but a loss of the ministerium, i.e. the power to "administer the papacy." In fact, Benedict retained the Petrine munus, being Pope, the divine investiture. How is this possible? All canonists agree that munus and ministerium are inseparable: if you give up the munus, the ministerium automatically lapses as well. It does not work the other way around though. To give an earthly example: if one returned one’s driver's license (munus) to the DMV, their ability to drive a car (ministerium) would also lapse. Nevertheless, it is not true that if one decides not to use the car, then his license is revoked.
What everyone pretends to or does not understand is that only in the case of an impeded See, the Pope loses the ministerium while retaining the munus. If the Pope is a prisoner, confined, exiled, he loses the ability to be Pope but retains the title and office, the investiture. So, if a conclave is convened when the legitimate Pope is impeded and not abdicatory, then an anti-Pope is elected, whose actions shall be nullified from beginning to end. A perfect clockwork antiusurpation device that we have reassembled in 900 articles, 600 podcasts, 105 lectures and in a volume sold in 20,000 copies that, as definitive proof of its veracity, is continuously obscured by the legacy MSM. This is why Ratzinger is the first reigning Pope (i.e., maintaining the munus, the office, the investiture), who resigns and freely offers himself to his own dethronement, to the loss of the ministerium because an illegitimate conclave is convened. It is Ratzinger's "canonical ring," which makes use of the extraordinary contrivance of the ancient Roman and Papal six-hour-clock of Castel Gandolfo to tell the truth all the time.
The second light bulb that lit up for us concerns a recurring phrase of Archbishop Gänswein that has so far not been understood in its broad mental reservation. We quote from the Italian magazine Famiglia Cristiana:
Question: "Did you try to dissuade him?" (from the decision to resign ed.). - Answer: "I Instinctively said 'No, Holy Father, it is not possible,' but then I immediately understood that he was not communicating to me something to discuss, but a decision that had already been made.”
Again from the Italian National Newspapers Il Corriere and Il Giornale: "It was a very hard blow. I told him, 'Holy Father, you cannot do that.' But he explained to me that he had struggled and suffered, but he no longer had the physical and mental strength to exercise that responsibility." Again from another Italian Publication Il Faro Romano: "Did you tell him he couldn't do it?" - "Yes, yes, I did. I said it directly, just as I am talking to you now. Holy Father, no. One can think about reducing commitments, I understand. But either leaving or giving up, is impossible. Pope Benedict let me speak. And then he said, 'As you can imagine, I have thought well about this choice, I have reflected, I have prayed, I have struggled. And now I am communicating to you a decision already made, not something to be discussed. It is not a quaestio disputanda, it is already decided. I tell it to you, but you mustn't tell it to anyone."
Archbishop Gänswein taught canon law at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome, so how can he say that it is impossible for the Pope to resign (abdicate)? It is not impossible at all. There is in fact a specific canon law that concerns the renunciation of the munus, the abdication, namely Canon 332.2. Moreover, the Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis speaks of "valid renunciation of the Pontiff in accordance with canon law n. 332.2." Thus, the Pope may very well abdicate by renouncing the munus. What he cannot do, as Gänswein rightly notes, is to renounce the ministerium only. And here, is Pope Benedict's dramatic response: look it's not something to argue about, it’s a decision already taken.
Taken by whom? By himself? It is not specified. The poor Holy Father was saying that others, the enemies from the Sankt Gallen Mafia, who had Bergoglio as their chosen one, had already decided that he would be exiled and confined. That is why he underwent other people's choices when he gave up the ministerium. And that was because his forces, meaning also the "political forces," his friends in the Curia and in the hierarchy, had failed.
The first politically correct meaning that passed of this exchange was that of an emotional and dismayed reaction by Gänswein, (no, Holy Father, you cannot do it!") which would be followed by Pope Benedict's rock solid and unyielding decision.
The second meaning that we have discovered as of late is much more technical, precise, and Teutonic: the canonist Gänswein objects to Benedict that the Pope cannot give up the ministerium only, and Pope Ratzinger says to him: look I didn't choose this, others have already decided that I have to leave, it's a decision already taken. As far as I am concerned, I freely choose to offer myself to the impeded See and, indeed, I announce this, I declare it. And so the Vicar of Christ, through his own Sacrifice and Word, disintegrated the church of the Antichrist, as confirmed to Seewald in Agamben's words. HERE
That Declaratio, which predicted what would happen, namely the loss of the Pope's ministerium at the so-called hora vigesima “the 20th hour” of 28 February 2013, which is 1 p.m. on 01 March 2013 according to the Roman six-hour-clock (and thus immediately after the illegitimate conclave was convened) HERE, was prophetic, but meant complete and absolute vindicated justice, also. The Pope prophesied his own impediment and told the truth. The word, the logos, the verb, leading into temptation (as a testing), acceptance, self-sacrifice, resurrection equals The Vicar of Christ in the footsteps of God.
The enemies of Christ, the gnostics of ecclesiastical freemasonry, try to manipulate the Declaratio with a fraudulent translation, HERE. They swap the words, disguise them as the devil always does, who is only able to disguise what is done by God. In fact, God makes the Pope by granting him the munus, and the only thing they can do is to give the world a false Pope, an antipope, a caricature, an ape. Nevertheless, time reveals the truth, and canon law is blind justice: if the pontiff's renunciation is not made in accordance with can. law n. 332.2, with renunciation of the munus, the election is null and void, without any intervening declaration on the matter. This is what is written in the Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis, the identikit manual for the interpretation of said Canon. Bergoglio and his minions are already doomed here and probably in the afterlife, but that is not for us to judge. What is certain is that everything they have done to try to overthrow and undermine the faith will have to be undone and purified. One more heart-clenching consideration. We have noticed over the years a progressive change of perspective on Benedict XVI's part.
In 2016, in his Last Conversations, Benedict is open minded about the fate of the Church. In the medieval irish monk’s Malachi's Code HERE to the question, "Could you be the last Pope as we know it?", he responds with an incredible “Anything and everything is possible." So, it is reasonable to think that in 2016 Benedict's view that visible canonical church could end, having to be resurrected "outside the synagogue" or, perhaps, it could be restored. It remains unknown.
In May 2020 after four years, the Holy Father realized that no one had caught the avalanche of the Ratzinger code messages he had included in Last Conversations. So, he seemed resigned to the end of the Church as we know it, so much so that in the caption of Ein Leben, quoted just above, we can read that "Benedict XVI changed the papacy forever." That is to say that in 2020 according to his thought that the canonical Church is doomed and the papacy will have to rise again in a catacomb-like, clandestine way, as he had already prophesied in 1969 and as is actually happening thanks to Don Minutella and the other courageous priests who have cried out for the truth.
We can imagine Pope Benedict's pain. But in 2020 we started our inquiry with the first article on his Latin errors in the Declaratio, and in August 2021 we made the key acquisition: the Declaratio was not an abdication but an announcement of the forthcoming impeded See. An epochal turning point: we like to imagine that on that day Pope Benedict, informed by a beaming Archbishop Gänswein, indulged in a Fanta and a Strudel: those Germanic and forbidden "delicacies" that the holy man indulged in as "extravagances" only on his birthday. (Fanta was born in Germany in the 1930s) HERE.
And so, in the readings chosen by Pope Benedict for his funeral, HERE the music changed: in both the first reading from Isaiah and the second reading from St. Peter the Apostle the concept of waiting a little longer, holding fast to test the faith recurs, but "Is it not yet a very little while Till Lebanon shall be turned into a fruitful field, And the fruitful field be esteemed as a forest? In that day the deaf shall hear the words of the book, And the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity and out of darkness."
And the Psalm 23, 22, "You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies." Not to mention the ad hoc chosen passage of the Gospel that says "The veil of the temple was torn in half".
Pope Benedict died knowing that the fire had been set and was spreading the power of truth everywhere in the world.
The first ones to be burned by it are likely to be the so-called "una cum", namely the traditionalist-conservatives who pretend to be antagonistic to Bergoglio and are coagulating into a single bloc to impose compulsively the blasphemous mantra of the heretical pope (and by doing so legitimize and maintain Bergoglio) in order to keep, with a whitewashed facade of orthodoxy, the status quo and their privileges. However, their mission is about to end up badly. Viganò, censor, ostracizer, and absolute enemy of the impeded See, has just had himself reconsecrated bishop by the schismatic Williamson, (he has never denied it) and this makes him heretical and schismatic himself, HERE. Even the small fish are about to end up badly: Don Ariel Levi of Gualdo, a serial insulter of Don Minutella and Cionci, has just been convicted of defamation HERE. As you recall, one of Pope Benedict's last messages was, "If you do not believe, the answer is in the book of Jeremiah or Isaiah." HERE
It is shocking to read in Isaiah 29 the phrase "Woe to Ariel!"
There are, however, truly Catholic people who are waking up and beginning to roar. In Teramo, after Sulmona, more posters have popped up (authorized by the municipality) stating "Bergoglio is not the pope," and such initiatives are flourishing everywhere. After all, as St. Augustine said, "Truth is like a lion: just release it and it will defend itself."
Subscribe to Pope Head Post
Papal history and deep topography.