Brick by Brick: 200,000 Facebook shares in two days for Church Militant article on the Bergoglian Antipapacy

And so it came to pass that Church Militant publishes commentary from Antonio Socci, unabridged and unedited, wherein Socci reintroduces the proof set of the Bergoglian Antipapacy, and they offer it without adding any commentary of their own. HERE
It is unironically ironic that just as the English language subtitle of Socci’s book was changed, against his wishes, from “Why (Benedict) is Still Pope,” to “Is (Benedict) Still Pope?” HERE that the editors at Church Militant chose to subtitle their article, “Antonio Socci on the Pan-Amazon Synod and the Francis Pontificate,” because I can assure you that the term “Francis Pontificate” appears nowhere in Socci’s piece.
Socci knows there is no such thing as a “Francis Pontificate.”
As of this writing, the Church Militant article, published 9 July, has been shared on facebook 198,000 times, and retweeted 24,000 times.
I share a snippet here:

Papa Ratzinger in these years has a dramatic task. On the one hand he must ward off all of the Bergoglian pulls which would carry the Church outside the bounds of Catholic doctrine (and his very presence is a deterrent which “admonishes” the Argentine). On the other hand, he must encourage those Catholics who are bewildered by the present disaster (including bishops and cardinals) and he must invite them to defend the faith of the Church while avoiding the production of irreparable ruptures
The signals he gives are always discreet, but clear and comforting. Not only by means of powerful interventions like the document he issued last April, but also by recalling that he – that is, the pope – is there and Catholics should not feel that they are orphans. The latest (truly beautiful) book which Ratzinger has published, “Per Amore,” does not carry on its cover the title “Pope Emeritus” but the firm signature “Benedetto PP XVI.” These initials “PP” stand for “Pastor Pastorum” (or Pater Patrum), which is the title and prerogative of the reigning pontiff. 
This is the umpteenth little sign of the dramatic situation of the Apostolic See, which cannot (yet) be clarified, but which confirms what Benedict XVI said in his final audience on February 27, 2013: “The “always” is also a “for ever” – there can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this.”  

But wait, there’s more!

The thought of Benedict XVI is best expressed above all by the words of his right-hand man, Archbishop Georg Gaenswein, who said at an historic conference at the Gregorian University

Before and after his resignation, Benedict understood and understands his task as participation in such a “Petrine ministry.” He has left the papal throne and yet, with the step made on February 11, 2013, he has not at all abandoned this ministry. Instead, he has complemented the personal office with a collegial and synodal dimension, as a quasi-shared ministry. … This is why Benedict XVI has not given up either his name, or the white cassock. This is why the correct name by which to address him even today is “Your Holiness”; … He has not abandoned the office of Peter — something which would be entirely impossible for him to do following his irrevocable acceptance of the office in April 2005.

Gaenswein spoke of a “pontificate of exception.”  There are those who believe that by a mysterious design of Divine Providence, the Church is being subjected to a very harsh trial, its own Good Friday, but that the presence of Benedict guarantees that She will not be shipwrecked. Certainly Benedict is central in the Church today. And one day everything will become clearer. 

But wait, there’s still more! From their heavily moderated combox, a remarkable number of people, whom Church Militant would have called schismatics just ten minutes ago, have had their comments approved! Alas, my comment was not among them.
I leave you with the small sample below.

Antonio Socci is a famous Italian journalist and author who had been seriously questioning the validity of Pope Benedict’s resignation since at least very early 2014. In September of 2014, Socci released his book, Non È Francesco (not available in English), where he explained his belief that neither Benedict’s renunciation of, nor Bergoglio’s ascendancy to, the Petrine Office was valid. Numerously written articles on this very topic on his own personal blog as well.
Now we have the latest publication of his new book, The Secret of Benedict XVI: Why He Is Still Pope (recently available in English), and thankfully Church Militant is giving Antonio Socci HIS well-earned moment by even allowing this article to be published. Can’t we just be grateful for that by appreciating the enormous gift of his work, without having the need to steal the limelight?

Cmon, CM. Swallow your pride and give Ann her well earned moment. It’s about truth after all, right? She’s done the work. You talk about how you were years ahead in pointing out the truth of the Lavender Mafia. Ann’s been way ahead in examining what’s wrong with the current papacy. Take a deep breath and let us acknowledge her work here.



Socci: “The latest (truly beautiful) book which Ratzinger has published, ‘Per Amore,’ does not carry on its cover the title ‘Pope Emeritus’ but the firm signature ‘Benedetto PP XVI.’ These initials ‘PP’ stand for ‘Pastor Pastorum’ (or Pater Patrum), which is the title and prerogative of the reigning pontiff.”
Socci: “But only the reigning pontiff can give the Apostolic blessing (directly or by delegating others). If Benedict was no longer pope, doing so would be committing an abuse.”
Another winner.
Socci: “Moreover, many other signs should make one stop and reflect. Not only his dress, his name, his title, his coat of arms. Bergoglio himself calls him ‘Holiness’ (because he is officially called ‘His Holiness Benedict XVI.’).”
Sing it, Socci.
Socci: “For the last six years — in Bergoglian circles — they have wanted to obtain from Benedict XVI a declaration in which he says that he no longer has anything to do with the papacy, and that he is only a bishop. But Benedict does not say these words.”
That’s not nothing. Really, these are incredible facts. But if Benedict is still the reigning pontiff, as his title implies, then how was the Chair of Peter ever really vacant for Cdl. Bergoglio to be elected?
Camille, to answer your question: there can only be one pope at a time. The pope is one. He is Benedict.
    Camille, I encourage you to read Socci’s full book, The Secret of Benedict XVI. He carefully notes numerous facts like the ones you have highlighted here and concludes that something far greater than we realize is taking place, but the media ignore it and most faithful Catholics just seem bewildered by it.
    No conspiracy theories here, just brilliant investigative journalism coupled to a prayerful reflection on what has taken place in the world since the election of Obama and the universal ascendance of the Global Left in 2008. Bergoglio of course is aligned with the Global Left.
    The power of intercessory prayer is paramount in this whole story. Benedict’s presence in the Church is deeply connected to the message of Fatima.
    In the end the Immaculate Heart will triumph. In the meantime, we need to pray intensely and be attentive to the signs of the times.


10 thoughts on “Brick by Brick: 200,000 Facebook shares in two days for Church Militant article on the Bergoglian Antipapacy”

  1. Come on CM/Michael Voris, Steve Skojec, Taylor Marshall, Remnant/Michael Matt……the truth is so satisfying. Swallow your pride and start praying and sacrificing for His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI!
    Virgin of Revelation, pray for us!

      1. I’d bet on Voris too, mostly because I know he consecrated his apostolate to Our Lady of Fatima while in Portugal some years ago, and I can’t imagine how Our Lady would let something like that go to waste.

  2. Well done, Cam and Charmaine! Thank you for reposting their accepted comments, Mark. Brick by brick is promising.

  3. If Trad Inc wont acknowledge the Pope, then what is Trad in their primary agenda? Also, who is paying them or constraining them to be Anti Trad while raising money posing as Trads? Are their confessors Catholics or part of the Lavender Mafia? Do they really want to go down in history as agents or servants of Team Bergoglio, by being controlled opposition agents? Hard questions merited by their own public silence.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.