Posted on 09/04/2017 10:04:16 AM PDT by BlessedBeGod
...it has emerged that Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the former Catholic archbishop of Westminster who died last week, intervened in the last Conclave to ensure his friend was elected Pope Francis.
In the days before the 2013 vote, Murphy-O’Connor co-hosted a reception at the British embassy in Rome to lobby support for Cardinal Bergoglio, the then progressive archbishop of Buenos Aires.
According to a new book, Murphy-O’Connor invited cardinals from the Commonwealth but deliberately left off the invitation list two powerful but conservative clerics -- Cardinal Ouellet from Canada, who had been a frontrunner, and Cardinal Pell from Australia.
The plan, which succeeded, was to persuade the cardinals of the need for a liberal pope without interference from the senior conservatives.
The book by Catherine Pepinster, the former editor of The Tablet, details how embassy officials left the room to allow Murphy-O’Connor time to persuade the cardinals of the importance of voting for Bergoglio.
Murphy-O’Connor had been dismayed when Pope Benedict XVI was elected at the previous conclave and was determined to avoid another conservative Pope.
"...he ensured his friend was elected -- Pope Francis -- a pope who has made a huge impact on the Catholic Church and the world. There have been kingmakers in history; Cormac Murphy-O’Connor turned out to be a popemaker.”
In 2013, Murphy-O’Connor was too old to vote under Vatican rules, but he travelled to Rome, like many other elderly non-voting cardinals, to participate in talks, called congregations, before the conclave.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
How I wish this (and the other) would invalidate Francis's election as pope.
Plus I believe I read there is reason to think Obongo had his tentacles in this too.
Upi cannot mention other religions on a Caucus thread. Notifying moderator.
Upi = You
Sorry
Well even a saint makes mistakes.
Whatever happens to him will be his own fault.
Cuz God don't cotton to any pope messing with His laws.
This conspiracy was hardly needed as Bergoglio finished second behind Benedict and he or another liberal would be a definite in the next election.
No, this is about the election that Francis won.
Claim it's another conspiracy?
I don't understand. Godfried Danneels gave an interview where he bragged about fixing the election. So, it's straight from the mouth of one of the perps. It's not "a claim."
If you want to call this author's info "a claim," since the article doesn't say where she got the info, I guess you could. But in toto the whole thing is hardly "a claim."
Given the facts of Bergoglio’s very strong finish behind Benedict what I am saying is there was no need for some orchestrated campaign to elect him when Benedict abdicated. The future after Benedict was clearly a liberal one. If someone wants to investigate a conspiracy then find the real cause of Benedict’s abdication.
He couldn’t possibly be lying, right?
Of course there wasn’t a need for an orchestrated campaign. The reality is most cardinals were more than willing to vote for Bergoglio.
Yes, Bergoglio being voted second to none but the winner Benedict, meant (looking back in hind sight) that our Lord showed us the gathering storm and divided House, but by His grace Benedict was our brief reprieve, who was able to point us to the target in danger— the victim of the Left. The Mass.
Therefore, we got Summorum Pontificum. That seems to be the main accomplishment God desired of Benedict.
Then, oddly, came Bergoglio.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.