from the website of Marco Tosatti: english translation
Dear Tosatti, I am an Anglican prelate converted to the Catholic faith. When I read something in the newspaper headlines that refers to our Church and Pontiff, I hurry to read the content immediately, before reading other important news. Why? Because what, in my opinion, explains almost everything that has happened in the world for ten years is linked to the history in the same period of our dear Church which I also joined (Pope was Saint John Paul II), in the footsteps of Saint John Henry Newman ( in 1845. But what have I ever done!) .
Never more than in these last ten years have we felt (at least I am a new convert) the lack of a Moral Authority, an authority of the Catholic Church that speaks to the world about the Truth, inviting it to pursue it. And yet we had a very strong and very clear “warning” thanks to the courageous Cardinals who proposed DUBIA I and II. (the first, 2017, without an answer, the second, 2023, with “disturbing” answer). DUBED, ignored, even mocked and despised. Intolerable! But what have I ever done?
In a recent interview, Pope Francis (I apologize, I don’t remember who he gave it to) explains that it was he who appointed Card. Ratzinger in the 2005 Conclave). Exhilarating! and above all not true. I was an involuntary and indirect witness to it.
In 2005 a group of Eminent Cardinals wanted to support Bergoglio’s nomination. It was the great Jesuit cardinal Carlo M. Martini who dissuaded them and instead proposed the card. Ratzinger. The reasons, in short, that were confided to me, were that the former Archbishop of Milan would have considered this appointment a disaster for the Jesuits (it even seems that he had said something like: <if they elect him Pope, we Jesuits will, in fact, come , “suppressed” as in 1773, this time not for 40 years, but at least for 200 years…>).
Who the current Pontiff was and what he had done in his previous roles in Argentina is well known, with testimonies. Who wanted it and why, it is difficult to prove and testify, but in the very days of his appointment to the Papal Throne, therefore well before he began to govern the Church, it was explained from many quarters what his task would be. 100% done. There was even a book published by a French intellectual who joked about the consequences of the choice. Benedict had to renounce so that Francis could be Pope. Francis had to be Pope because Benedict would never have allowed the Church to support the choices of destruction of Christian Civilization that were subsequently made.
Perhaps many Catholics still have not understood that what needed to be destroyed (beyond faith, of course) is Christian Civilization. Well, I really fear that many of you Catholics haven’t understood this yet, you look at the finger but you don’t understand what it indicates.
I would also like to make a critical observation on the behavior of some prelates who are preparing for the (supposed) change of pontificate, expressing negative assessments of the pontificate, all of a sudden and with suspicious delay. “Maramaldesque” assessments, dear Tosatti, and not at all acceptable. I explain the expression “maramaldesca”, which means “vile”. On his arrival in Italy in 1527, Charles V, Catholic emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, eager to punish Pope Clement VII (Giulio de Medici for having joined the Cognac League (pro-French and anti-Habsburg), had hired the Landsknecht (Protestant) mercenaries who they carried out the famous “sack of Rome” and brought the plague throughout Italy. During the siege of Florence in 1530 the famous Maramaldo (Neapolitan mercenary) attacked the commander Francesco Ferrucci, already wounded and half dead on the ground, skewering him (“vile! you kill a dead man”, Ferrucci told him). Here, dear Tosatti, until yesterday everyone (except for a very few) were sock lickers and allowed everything that appeared to happen. Now they are all courageously critical, with interviews and even with books (not credible ) referring to the previous Pope, post-mortem, of course.
It is curious that apart from the famous Cardinals of the DUBIA and a few others, only in this moment of progressive weakening of Francis, some “neo-courageous” ones, suffering from the “Maramaldesque” contagion, are slowly beginning to emerge. This is not exemplary and leaves us fearing even worse times ahead.. Thank you for this hospitality.
His Hugo AGW
Ecclesiastical Freemasonry 