Featured Image
Pope Francis honored Cardinal Godfried Danneels (2nd from left) by letting him stand alongside the pope on the balcony on the night of his election on March 13, 2013.

(LifeSiteNews) — His biggest supporters push the narrative of a humble cardinal and Church “surprised” by the election of Pope Francis. However, this narrative runs counter to the reality described in Henry Sire’s book The Dictator Pope of a Cardinal Bergoglio who “plotted like mad” after Pope Benedict XVI announced his resignation. Even accounts friendly to Bergoglio, such as Gerard O’Connell’s, portray a cardinal, still in Buenos Aires, taking an active interest in events in Rome following Benedict’s resignation.  

Based on these and other sources, the narrative that Cardinal Bergoglio was a passive, or even an unwitting, beneficiary of the St. Gallen mafia’s initiatives on his behalf is impossible to accept. Rather, there is reason to believe he took a very significant and active role in his own election campaign. To consider this possibility, let us consider some of the “Unsolved Mysteries of the 2013 Conclave.” 

Cardinal Bergoglio arrived in Rome on February 27, 2013, the day before the effective date of Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation (February 28), in the run up to the pre-conclave meetings which began on March 4. On the evening of his arrival, the Cardinal did not dine with old friends in the College of Cardinals, perhaps to discuss the conclave, as might be expected. Instead, he dined with four Italian journalists, all close friends and Bergoglian partisans. Two of them were very influential vaticanisti, Andrea Tornielli and Gianni Valente, just the sort of men who could update the Cardinal on all the latest news and rumors in Rome, published and unpublished, about the coming conclave.  

On the morning of March 2, 2013, Tornielli, without mentioning he had dined with Bergoglio just a couple of evenings before, published in Vatican Insider a glowing profile on Bergoglio. Quoting an anonymous cardinal, the article’s opening line famously read: “Four years of Bergoglio would be enough to change things.” For cardinal-electors attentively reading the latest on the upcoming conclave as they gathered in Rome, the article undoubtedly had the practical effect of boosting Cardinal Bergoglio’s papal prospects.  

Was it just a stroke of luck for Bergoglio that his good friend Tornielli penned this article, or was there more to it? To consider that question, let us fast forward five years to when Cardinal Bergoglio was now Pope Francis. In August 2018, Archbishop Viganò released his famous Testimony which stunned the Catholic world with its accusations and evidence that top prelates in the Church, including Francis, looked the other way with regard to the allegations against then-Cardinal McCarrick.  

— Article continues below Petition —
SIGN: Show Pope Francis the Latin Mass will survive any suppression
  Show Petition Text
36800 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 40000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

LifeSiteNews will hand-deliver this petition to the Holy See, recording the moment traditional Catholics from around the world stood up for the Traditional Latin Mass.

Pope Francis has issued a new decree, "Traditiones Custodes," severely restricting the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM).

Please SIGN and SHARE this petition with other Catholics, and ask the Pope to reconsider this new and divisive Motu Proprio.

Pope Francis' decree clamps down hard on the TLM. In it, he effectively does away with Pope Benedict's protection of it, handing bishops in every diocese the right to suppress it, while demanding new priests get permission from their bishop and the Vatican to offer the Mass of the Ages. 

As Catholics who value Tradition and know the place of the Magisterium in safeguarding the Deposit of Faith, it is time to speak up and have our voices heard

Francis has decried rigidity and intolerance for years, but now is showing intolerance and rigidity himself by forcing his very narrow understanding of liturgy on one of the true sources of good fruit in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church.

Our Lord said that "a bad tree cannot bear good fruit", and yet we see more and more souls drawn to Christ through the TLM, with marriages dedicated to God and open to many children, and vocations also abounding in traditional seminaries, orders and priestly societies.

Indeed, the Traditional Latin Mass has been a source of unity for the Catholic Church for more than 1500 years, producing great saints, repentant sinners, and souls won for Christ across the world. *Read below how Benedict XVI decried attacks against the TLM and its adherents.

To attempt to restrict the Traditional Latin Mass, as a new generation are rediscovering the treasures of God's Church, will inevitably cause further division and hurt among the faithful, risking the loss of some souls who will regretfully turn away

Souls are now at stake with this Motu Proprio, as some will drift away from the Deposit of Faith in disillusionment, while others that are far from God will never be touched by the profound beauty and reverence found in the Traditional Latin Mass. 

Please SIGN and SHARE this petition to Pope Francis, urging him to reconsider his decision, not least for the good of souls and the glory of God, and making sure as many cardinals support the TLM as possible. 

Click "Show Petition Text" on the right to read the letter to Pope Francis.

Finally, please pray, fast and do penance for the salvation of souls, including that of our shepherds, during this turbulent time in Church history.


'BREAKING: Pope Francis abrogates Pope Benedict’s universal permission for Old Mass' - www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-abrogates-pope-benedicts-universal-permission-for-old-mass

'ANALYSIS: Pope restricts ‘divisive’ Traditional Latin Mass, says 52-yr-old Novus Ordo is ‘unique expression’ of Church’s liturgy' - www.lifesitenews.com/news/analysis-pope-restricts-divisive-traditional-latin-mass-says-52-yr-old-novus-ordo-is-unique-expression-of-churchs-liturgy

* Pope Benedict XVI (Spirit of the Liturgy, 2000):

"For fostering a true consciousness in liturgical matters, it is also important that the proscription against the form of liturgy in valid use up to 1970 [the older Latin Mass] should be lifted. Anyone who nowadays advocates the continuing existence of this liturgy or takes part in it is treated like a leper; all tolerance ends here. There has never been anything like this in history; in doing this we are despising and proscribing the Church’s whole past. How can one trust her at present if things are that way?"

**Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com

  Hide Petition Text

Speaking to reporters in an airplane press conference, Pope Francis refused to comment on Viganò’s accusations, choosing instead to respond quite obscurely:  

I will not say a single word about this. I believe the statement speaks for itself. And you have the journalistic capacity to draw your own conclusions. It’s an act of faith. When some time passes and you have drawn your conclusions, I may speak. But I would like your professional maturity to do the work for you. It will be good for you. That’s good.”  

Pope Francis bizarrely insisted that it should be journalists who “do the work” of assessing the accusations against him, rather than he who should respond to their questions. A little over two months later, the Pope’s seeming “act of faith” in the journalistic profession was rewarded when a newly published book attempted to shift any blame for McCarrick away from Francis and onto others, while at the same time attacking Viganò’s personal credibility. But was it simply that the Pope’s “act of faith” paid off, or was it something other than faith?  

Well, it turns out that book was authored by Francis’s journalist-friends, Tornielli and Valente, with whom he had dined upon his arrival in Rome for the conclave. In December 2018, one month after the publication of this defense of Francis, Tornielli was appointed editorial director of the Dicastery of Communication at the Vatican by Pope Francis.  

Given the fact pattern, one could be excused for surmising Pope Francis had a direct hand in the genesis of Tornielli’s and Valente’s book. The unsolved mystery here is: did Pope Francis have a hand as well in the genesis of Tornielli’s “four years of Bergoglio” article of March 2, 2013? As a side note, as many as three different cardinals and a layman have been cited by as many as three different journalists and McCarrick as having spoken the line that ‘four/five years of Bergoglio would be enough to change things.’ The one thing common to them all is that each was a close friend of Cardinal Bergoglio. So, was Bergoglio the original source of this talking point, crafted to put cardinal-electors at ease about his advanced age at the time?  

The next unsolved mysteries involve ex-Cardinal McCarrick. McCarrick was very influential among his fellow American cardinals, and particularly so among third world cardinals whose support, as ‘pope-maker’ Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor told Gerard O’Connell, was key to Bergoglio’s election. Per McCarrick’s account from October 2013, the ex-cardinal was visited just before the pre-conclave meetings at the North American College in Rome by an “influential Italian gentleman,” on or about March 2 or 3. This unnamed visitor asked McCarrick to “talk up Bergoglio” in the meetings before the conclave.  

Citing this meeting, Archbishop Vigano’s Testimony accused Francis of rewarding McCarrick for actively supporting his election. Yet, while the McCarrick Report investigators attempted to rebut Vigano’s accusations against Pope Francis, curiously, their report excluded any mention of the meeting above which formed the implicit premise of the accusation, i.e., that the “influential Italian gentleman” was an emissary sent by Cardinal Bergoglio.  

Not only did the report not attempt to address whether McCarrick had in fact “talked up Bergoglio,” it downplayed his role in the pre-conclave meetings (McCarrick Report, p. 391). However, our own research demonstrated McCarrick was observed to have been quite active in “touting the praises” of Bergoglio to all who would listen. Separately, we were informed by a prelate who encountered McCarrick in Rome immediately following the election of Francis:  

“His (McCarrick’s) very first words to me, before he said anything else – indicating that he had been part of a group working on this – were, “We did it.”  The words left me surprised and pondering. Since I was not involved in any campaign, it seemed to me that McCarrick had been.”  

The identity of the “influential Italian gentleman” is an unsolved mystery. However, there are intriguing clues as to his possible identity. One man we have researched is Andrea Riccardi, the founder of the community of San Egidio. The reporting of Sandro Magister indicates Riccardi had previously engaged in papal campaigning, and he is a long time, self-professed “convinced Bergoglian” known to have been close to Cardinal Bergoglio and McCarrick. Why didn’t the McCarrick Report investigators interview Pope Francis or McCarrick about the “influential Italian gentleman”?  

The case of Cardinal Scola is another unsolved mystery of the conclave. Scola, a close friend of Benedict XVI, was considered a leading papabile in 2013 – a thought that likely gave Benedict XVI comfort when he decided to resign. However, early in the morning of the day the conclave was to begin, Italian anti-mafia police raided businesses associated with Roberto Formigoni, a close friend of Cardinal Scola. The international press reports, surely seen by the cardinal-electors, highlighted Scola’s links to Formigoni, and to Communione e Liberazione (controversial for some on the left). The press claimed the raids would negatively impact Scola’s chances in the conclave. Italian prosecutors are notoriously political, and the timing of the raids is undoubtedly questionable. The unsolved mystery is whether the timing of the raids was an unfortunate coincidence for Scola, or willfully coordinated by forces interested in tipping the scales of the conclave in favor of Bergoglio. 

We have reviewed some of the unsolved mysteries and questions surrounding the 2013 conclave. Whether or not the events and activities above ultimately have an innocent explanation or not, there is at least one question that is not an unsolved mystery. Cui bono? Who directly benefited most from each? The answer to that question is clear: Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio. 

Steven O’Reilly is the author of Book I of the Pia Fidelis trilogy, The Two Kingdoms. A former intelligence officer, his research into the 2013 conclave may be found in the Conclave Chronicles at RomaLocutaEst. He can be contacted at [email protected]  or [email protected] (Follow Steven on Twitter: @S_OReilly_USA or GETTR: @StevenOReilly).