Francis and the Papacy – 11 February 2024

The Truth, the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth

The Papacy and Francis

Events surrounding the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI are certainly disturbing. But, afterwards, the conclave that elected Francis Bergoglio with Pope Benedict XVI still living in the Vatican, was more than doubtful because of Masonic influence within the Conclave. It was like lightening striking at the heart of the Catholic Church — the Papacy.

Saint Peter’s Basilica in Rome

Add to this scenario the various private revelations from around the world indicating that Francis is not the Pope and never was the Pope.

See link on the Declaration of Pope Benedict XVI:

POPE BENEDICT XVI: “After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry.”

The above English translation is not well translated. The actual Latin text says: “aeque administrandum” which is better translated: “… no longer suitable for properly administering the Petrine Office.”

This is an important declaration because it means that Pope Benedict XVI only handed over the administration — not the Papacy itself.

POPE BENEDICT XVI: “For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant and a Conclave to elect the new Supreme Pontiff will have to be convoked by those whose competence it is.”

This continuation of his declaration states that it is his ministry that he is giving up — not the Papacy. The Keys of Saint Peter remained with Pope Benedict XVI.

The Keys of the Papacy

Non-Canonical Election of Pope Francis I

According to Canon 332 no. 2 the resignation of the Pope must be freely made, otherwise it is invalid. It is highly probable that influential Masonic authorities made a forced “suggestion” that he resign or certain undesirable consequences would follow. The photo above — one is taken in Argentina and shows a lightening strike destroyed the Keys of the Papacy on the statue of Saint Peter — perhaps a symbol of these Keys not being given by God to Francis but rather being retained by Pope Benedict XVI.

Francis and Pope Benedict XVI

Secondly, it is not permissible to have two Popes reigning at the same time. It is significant that the unique Papal ring of Pope Benedict XVI was never destroyed. Photos with his friends have been taken of Pope Benedict XVI wearing his Papal ring in public. He has also been photographed with his visitors in public wearing his white papal robes. This suggests that he knew he was still the Pope.

Thirdly, the Conclave has its own rules specified in the Apostolic Constitution Romano Pontifici Eligendo which regulate procedures and secrecy. There is probable cause that the election of Francis was set-up in advance — making the election invalid and a cause of division.

The one who will split the Catholic Church

It is amazing that Francis seems to indicate his words to the effect: “You will regret this …” The article below (link) refers to Francis: “It is not to be excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church.”

The Truthful Witness

In a Court of Law, a person who is a witness to the truth, standing before the Judge, with hand on the Bible, must openly profess: “I promise to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.” The truth of the matter is essential and the only way Justice can be served in Law Courts.

Black Crows attacking white Doves … symbolic

Francis has issued verbal pronouncements, written statements and papal documents dealing with so called “pastoral solutions”. Many of his statements are objectively heretical, and yet he pronounces them with no clarity and with such lack of precision that he invites controversy — but with plausible deniability. He should not believe nor say the things he says as it opens him up to charges of heresy and certainly scandal. It is not good. Perhaps the photo above symbolises this evil by the crows attacking the doves released by Francis.


Canon 751: “Heresy is the obstinate denial or doubt after baptism, of a truth which must be believed by divine and Catholic faith.” The punishment for heresy is excommunication when it is publicly known and witnessed. Dealing with controversial subjects like “same-sex unions”, his pastoral solutions have caused a storm of contention worldwide. Much of his problems come from his “off-the-cuff” style of giving verbal statements that are not clear to the News Media on board Airplanes, and in informal settings. His verbal comments have often lacked truthfulness because they have touched upon heresy and have not stated the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

In January 2024, Francis was interviewed in Italy on a popular TV Talk Show. He was asked by the Presenter — what did he imagine about Hell? His answer is terribly wrong — Francis replied: “What I am going to say is not a dogma of faith but my own personal view: I like to think of hell as empty; I hope it is.” This idea is heresy, because he seems to think that Hell is not eternal, by hoping that it is empty. See the following link with Fr. Mark Goring CC explaining what the Sacred Scriptures teach us about Hell:

In 1979 the CDF (under the Pontificate of Pope John Paul II) issued an important universal document about the “Last Things”. Ironically, it specifically addressed persons using imaginative ideas that do not agree with Sacred Scripture when explaining Heaven, Hell and Purgatory. It seems to anticipate the imagination of Francis!

Is Francis a truthful witness? The answer is “No”.

Are his controversial pastoral solutions within the radius of heresy? The answer is “Yes”.

Do his ideas about “same-sex couples” promote immorality and scandal? The answer is “Yes”.

I believe that the failure of Francis to precisely distinguish the meaning of “same-sex unions” and previous papal teaching on the subject — indicates that he promotes a “double truth” which joins opposites in the same context making them equal. The opposites are: Homosexual Activity vs Catholic Marriage. The Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith (CDF) declaration Fiducia Supplicans gives the example by turning the intrinsic and objective evil of a same-sex unions into a “marriage” — that is given credibility by a blessing from a Priest. By a bit of razzle-dazzle with words about the subjective tendency — ie “tendency” and “activity” are equated as “non-guilty” of grave sin. Yet, his pastoral solution completely ignores the concept of objective moral evil and the proper formation of conscience.

The CDF declaration overlooks the duty of the same-sex couple to seek the truth individually and obtain again the state of grace through the Sacrament of Confession. Finally, by combining his understanding of homosexual tendency and homosexual activity and encouraging same-sex couples to seek a blessing from a Priest makes his teaching heretical because blessing this union leads persons to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not. This is obstinate denial of the truth (which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith) about Christian marriage and human sexuality in the teaching of the Magisterium — particularly in Persona Humana (1975) and Familiariis Consortio of Pope John Paul II.

Furthermore, the CDF declaration is remarkable because of the omissions about the formation of a correct conscience. It is essential to Catholic Moral Teaching. It is never admitted nor explained in the CDF declaration. The effect of this ambiguity leads to confusion, acceptance of false counsel and scandal.

The Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth

Pope John Paul II has issued clear teaching on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons as far back as 1986. The Magisterium has had to proscribe the idea of “same-sex unions” (or homosexual activity) as objectively immoral. Francis should have upheld the whole truth (and nothing but the truth) about Marriage and family.

It is clear from the global news that many Cardinals, Bishops and Clergy believe that he has failed in this regard. In recent weeks, many are expressing openly their request that Francis correct his public statements and require the CDF to withdraw the document Fiducia Supplicans. Since his publication of Amoris Laetitia, a very controversial papal document, there has been a recognisable shift in the words and concepts. Let us look first at Amoris Laetitia issued by Francis.

See Link about Cardinals, Bishops, Priests and Laity requesting Francis to withdraw the CDF document:


The following links provide more than enough information about the serious errors of Francis:


This is the declaration that Francis requested from the CDF and which he relies upon. On the 18 December 2023, the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith (CDF) issued a declaration called Fiducia Supplicans. The purpose of this declaration was to give a theological reason for “Blessings”. In particular, the suggested blessing by a Priest of “same-sex” couples. This is the contentious issue. For most people it is seen as a ritual blessing equated with marriage. There has been a concerted push for this equation to be the norm. In some Countries, like Australia, this idea has engineered strong political interests to codify the concepts into the Civil Law of the land. So far it has failed, but not completely. However, in the Catholic Church, in such circumstances, avoiding scandal is impossible — thus the declaration of the CDF is an apologetic defence of the idiosyncrasy of Francis in upholding such a blessing. Some would say it is a “pastoral power play” to justify the cause. In reality, it is an attempt to engineer the words in such a way as to change the meaning of same-sex couples into same-sex marriage. The critical point revolves around the CDF declaration’s failure to maintain unity with previous declarations from Pope John Paul II and the CDF declarations during his pontificate. The priestly blessing of a “same-sex couple” is clearly forcing the issue — as if to begin a new controversial custom in the Church. In paragraph 31, the CDF declaration writes:

“… the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who — recognising themselves to be destitute and in need of his help — do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. These forms of blessing express a supplication that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit …” (Fiducia Supplicans, #31)

How can a relationship of objective serious sin (homosexual activity) be enriched, when it is not a true Christian value? The fact is — as a same-sex couple — the two persons stand before the Priest — requesting a blessing. It is obvious to the Priest that they are seeking legitimation; otherwise they would be individually seeking the Sacrament of Confession and counselling. Their relationship is not “true”; it is not “good” and it is not “humanly valid” because their relationship is an objective disorder. It is not from God. Therefore, this blessing makes no sense. A same-sex couple witnesses to a life choice made together (as a couple) that seriously deviates from the Gospel Truth. Yet, the declaration portrays the subjective elements of a homosexual “tendency” with the objective reality of immoral acts as compatible and OK enough to seek a blessing for the couple. This is a false teaching and a bad witness. It does not witness to the whole truth and nothing but the truth. These individuals are in need of re-evangelisation and the Sacrament of Confession to get out of their predicament. In 1986 a previous papal document during the Papacy of John Paul II gives the whole truth in the matter of a homosexual tendency:

“it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder … lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not.” (Pastoral Care for Homosexual Persons [PCHP], #3)

In summary, it is an illusion designed to mislead. Furthermore, if it were to become accepted practice — as time passes, it would be claimed (by progressives) to be an established custom and therefore an improper use of authority to stop the practice! Thus, the crack widens for more disordered inclinations to gain a foot-hold.

Subsequently, Francis has relied upon this declaration to settle the issue of those doubting Cardinals, Bishops, Clergy and laity who questioned the orthodoxy of his teaching. This proves his obstinate denial. Has it settled the issue? No, not at all.

I close with the following links which demonstrate only a few of the bizarre and controversial events of recent years.

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Bishop Malcolm Broussard

News Media Presentation in Australia:

The following important link demonstrates the opposition by Church Leaders to Francis calling him to withdraw the CDF Declaration:

Various Other scandalous “pastoral solutions” acted upon by Francis

1) Francis reimposes restrictions on the Traditional Latin Mass

2) Francis allows Holy Communion to non-Catholics and those in grave sin

3) Francis brings the pagan fertility goddess “Pachamama” into Saint Peter’s Basilica.

4) Public evidence that the Teaching of Francis is Heretical

5) Francis infers that Catholics should not breed like rabbits

6) Francis says the Ten Commandments are not rigid

7) Francis and his “shock and awe” mentality

8) Francis said the souls of sinners simply disappear

9) Francis says that God willed a plurality of religions

10) Francis comments about Artists … Blasphemous crucifix

11) Francis removes Bishop Strickland in Tyler Texas

12) Italian Catholic Priest excommunicated for calling Francis a Usurper

There are many more examples, but I cannot place them all here. The above are representative of the heresy and idiosyncrasy of Francis.

The End