I am once again reposting a new article at the request of the journalist Andrea Cionci with his supplied translation.
(A quick note, I have several new articles of my own coming this week as well).
_________________
Nothing that is part of the Church's tradition is by chance. Even in the oldest and seemingly anachronistic rituals there is always a reason that that is still valid nowadays.
Similarly, nothing that the Antipope Francis does to demolish Church tradition is random: there is always a motivation, either of a spiritual order, in the sense of overthrowing doctrine or devotion in a gnostic sense, or of a practical-strategic order. We have seen how in the latest book written with his vaticanist Javier Martinez Brocal, (already an active contributor to the naive propaganda such as the story of the record store) Bergoglio attacks the Italian cardinals and Bishop Gaenswein trying to discredit them in the eyes of public opinion.
These people know everything about the impeded See, and one word from them is enough to break the bank.
Bergoglio's operation, however, turned out to be a boomerang, since even mainstream news outlets did not like the bullying of the mild-mannered Msgr. GAENSWEIN, the former secretary of Pope Benedict XVI who, of course, cannot respond in kind to his superior. Likewise, they did not like this revelation of the dynamics of the 2005 conclave since, even admitting the Pope as "legibus solutus," the cardinals are certainly bound by secrecy and cannot answer to Francis.
Then there is the barrage of generalist TV channels that continue to push, compulsively, either the legitimist narrative or a ridiculous and posturing "two popes" debate, according to which either only Francis was pope or both popes were popes. The third solution, i.e., that the pope was only Benedict and that he was impeded, is surgically avoided or mocked as "conspiracy."But one of the most interesting things has escaped the analysis of insiders. Here is what Bergoglio writes in El Sucesor: "I arranged to be watched over and buried with dignity, as for any other Christian, and not with a body exposed on pillows for days. In my opinion, the current ritual was too loaded. Let there be only one wake and WITH THE POPE ALREADY IN THE COFFIN, as for everybody. I have talked to the master of ceremonies and we have eliminated this and many other things. I am revising the ritual so that popes are buried like any other child of the Church."
No one has asked why such a measure was taken, but the answer is definitely predictable and goes far beyond Our Lord's easy pauperistic-demagogic justifications.
Why is it that the dead Pope has always been exposed to the devotion of the Catholic believers even if, at times, this exposure has been unpleasant and embarrassing because of the natural processes of decomposition of the body?
The goal of this operation has always been for maximum clarity and transparency, to let everyone see that "vere papa mortuus est," that is, that the legitimate Pope was really dead and had not been kidnapped, imprisoned, escaped or who knows what else. Precisely because the Petrine munus can be granted by God to a new Pope only if the previous one is regularly abdicatory or IS DEAD. (In fact we know that Bergoglio is not the Pope because he was elected when Benedict was not abdicatory but impeded.)
Clergy and faithful Catholics could thus note the death of the Pontiff, and in this way there would be no doubt about the legitimacy of the coming conclave. With Bergoglio's measure, at least in his intentions, this clarity and transparency will no longer be there.
Considering also that photos of the deceased pope before public display in no way can be disseminated, the Catholic believers will have NO CERTAINTY that Francis has REALLY passed "to another life."
And so, who will be able to guarantee, among the public, that Jorge Mario Bergoglio's body is really in that coffin and that he is really deceased? Or, in the case of true death, who will be able to guarantee that his body will really be buried in St. Maria Maggiore, where, too, it is possible to see his beloved icon of the Salus Publica Populi Romani? The tombs of popes cannot be opened except in very rare cases. We have already seen how this ancient Marian icon, originally called Regina coeli, was resemantized by the Gnostic Jesuits in the 1800s under the name of the ancient goddess Salus, depicted, according to typical Great Mother iconography, as a woman feeding a serpent. But what if there was a change in plans, perhaps the result of a negotiation with some opposing cardinals, even in this last will?
But what is objective is that although the preparation of the Pope’s body takes place with the intervention of several appointees, objectively the display of a closed coffin to the public offers the possibility of simulations and deception. Conspiracy? Not at all. From a man who for eight years managed to pass himself off as the real Pope, and who may never even have been validly a cleric since, as Don Fernando Cornet's book - never disproved by the Church - "Habemus antipapam?" well explains, his diaconate certificate could never be found, simulating his own death would be child's play.
The possibilities for yet another simulation are many: an escape, bargained or not with opposing factions, or burial in another place than St. Maria Maggiore, or who knows what other kind of coup de théâtre. After all, this is nothing new: you have all seen the ambiguities and suspicions generated by the very hasty funeral of Bin Laden, thrown into the sea without photos of the corpse, and you are all witnessing these strange maneuvers involving British royalty. Sick kings, duchesses mysteriously sent on vacation, princesses disappearing etc. Does this seem ok to you? No hypothesis should be discarded: the deception we have lived through these ten years is so surreal that nothing can surprise us anymore.
And, again, objectively the body of the pope, or the antipope, locked in a coffin will not allow those who believe to verify the actual death of the Pope.