Antonio Socci: Benedict XVI’s Resignation May Have Been Invalid

Resignationism hitting the mainstream…

Italian Journalist Antonio Socci:
Ratzinger Resignation “May Not Be Valid”

Author and Journalist Antonio Socci

One year after Benedict XVI’s historic announcement of his impending resignation from the “papacy”, well-respected Italian journalist and author Antonio Socci reflects on what led Fr. Joseph Ratzinger to give up his claim to the papal office on February 28, 2013.

Writing for the Italian daily Libero on Feb. 12, 2014, Socci says that details about the resignation have emerged that may render it invalid under church law. (Both Novus Ordo and traditional Catholic canon law state that, among other possible reasons, resignation obtained through fear unjustly inflicted is invalid; see Novus Ordo Canon 188; Catholic Canon 185.) The details he describes are most interesting and by no means mere fantastic hypotheses.

Based on various known facts, Socci pieces together a fairly credible thesis that Benedict XVI’s resignation was brought about by undue pressure from a group of cardinals opposed to him. He mentions the fact that as early as 2011, sources inside the Vatican already knew of and told him about an eventual Ratzinger resignation, which Socci himself wrote about at that time, though his story did not receive much attention then.

The Italian journalist mentions a document in which a group of anonymous Novus Ordo cardinals break the 2005 conclave’s oath of secrecy and reveal details of Ratzinger’s election in an attempt to “delegitimize” him. Socci adds that in the 2010 book Attacco a Ratzinger [“Attack on Ratzinger”], the authors Andrea Tornielli and Paolo Rodari speak of a high-ranking “cardinal” who, after Ratzinger’s election, predicted the new “papacy” not to last more than two or three years, making a derogatory gesture to underscore his comment.

Another curious episode transpired in late 2011, when, says Socci, “Cardinal” Paolo Romeo stated confidently to a number of people that Benedict XVI would only have another 12 months to live. Interestingly enough, this dovetails with a report published by the German alternative news magazine Compact in July 2012, which spoke of a plot to assassinate Ratzinger.

Hindsight is 20/20, as the saying goes. With the events that have transpired since, Socci asks whether it could really have been coincidence that Benedict’s early departure was foreseen with such certitude. At the same time, he notes that it is “not permissible to doubt [Benedict’s own] words”, according to which his resignation was being effected “with full freedom.”

Against this background, Socci proceeds to list a number of items he believes could be taken as indicators of a Benedict trying to tell the world that he is still in fact the Pope: He still resides in the Vatican, he still dresses in white, and he wants to be called “Benedict XVI” still. His coat of arms, too, is still the papal one (not the one prior to his election, without the keys of St. Peter on it).

The following list has a link to Socci’s Feb. 12, 2014 article, as well as an English translation. Furthermore, it includes two other related articles by the same author:

• “Forse Non E Canonicamente Valida la Rinuncia di Papa Benedetto” (Libero / Feb. 12, 2014)
• “Latest from Socci: The Papal Games” (via The Remnant)
• “Chi Ha Spinto Papa Benedetto a Mollare (e Perche)” (Libero / Feb. 9, 2014)
• “Ratzinger, chi e Perche lo ha Costretto a Dimettersi” (Libero / Feb. 8, 2014)

Socci calls the problem of the validity of Ratzinger’s resignation “enormous.” And indeed, so it would be, if he had ever actually been a valid Pope to begin with.

The day Benedict XVI announced his resignation, Feb. 11, 2013, we predicted that eventually people would begin to doubt its validity or at least speculate concerning it:

This should get conservative Novus Ordo conspiracies started: Who forced him to step down? Resignation by force, you see, is invalid. #pope

— Novus Ordo Watch (@NovusOrdoWatch) February 11, 2013

The fact that Benedict’s successor, Jorge Bergoglio, has even more obviously abandoned the Catholic Faith than any of the other Conciliar “Popes” and therefore cannot truly be the Vicar of Christ, is also helping to give credence to the idea that Benedict’s resignation was invalid and he is therefore still “Pope.” This position, first made popular by the Rev. Paul Kramer, we have termed “Resignationism”. With Antonio Socci’s public support, it is probably here to stay now.

We expect, in fact, that as Francis continues to advance the Modernist apostasy at full throttle, we will see more and more people reject his claim to the papacy. But we pray that as people realize that Bergoglio is but an impostor, they will come to understand that so was Ratzinger, and all of the Vatican’s papal claimants since John XXIII first made his apperance on the balcony of St. Peter’s in 1958.

For those who may not be aware, Antonio Socci is a mainstream Novus Ordo journalist and media personality in Italy. In the mid-2000s, he set out to write a book to debunk the so-called  “Fatimists”, those who are convinced that the text the Vatican released in June 2000 as the Third Secret of Fatima is not in fact the true Third Secret, albeit related to it. As Socci investigated this claim, he gradually came to realize that the “crazy conspiracy loonies” were actually right and that the Vatican was still suppressing the true Third Secret. Socci published his findings in his page-turner The Fourth Secret of Fatima (2007), which caused a stir in Rome and made “Cardinal” Bertone appear on national television in an attempt to refute the evidence Socci had presented. In the process, Bertone unwittingly made things worse and ended up confirming Socci’s thesis that the world is still waiting for the true Third Secret which Our Lady of Fatima had ordered to be revealed no later than 1960. This, in turn, is documented in the 2008 book The Secret Still Hidden by Christopher Ferrara.

Image source: youtube.com (screenshot) / amazon.it
License: fair use / fair use