Augustyn z Hippony
Bergolio has splited to Benedict XVI face.
Caroline03
" the plan of ecclesiastical Freemasonry: to force the pope to resign to impose a false pope who, exploiting the obedience of the clergy and the faithful, it will lead the Church to the great apostasy prophesied by St. Paul. What Malachi Martin did not know is that Benedict XVI had been prepared for some time and did not resign validly, remaining pope: a master’s game ”.

I find these words confu…More
" the plan of ecclesiastical Freemasonry: to force the pope to resign to impose a false pope who, exploiting the obedience of the clergy and the faithful, it will lead the Church to the great apostasy prophesied by St. Paul. What Malachi Martin did not know is that Benedict XVI had been prepared for some time and did not resign validly, remaining pope: a master’s game ”.

I find these words confusing to be honest. Didn't Benedict XVI enable the "Antipope" to take control, due to the fact that he did not resign validly? If he HAD resigned validly, Bergoglio would not have been an "Antipope" at all. That would have foiled the Masonic plot to a greater degree. His actions of resigning invalidly ensured an Anti Pope was invalidly elected instead of a TRUE one who would have been under the influence of the Holy Spirit as Church Teaching states.
Caroline03
This whole scenario is very similar to something discussed in Traditionalist circles. Something known as"The Siri Thesis." It is known that at the time of the 1958 Conclave, the white smoke poured out of the Chimney for a prolonged period a day or two before John XXIII emerged onto the Balcony as Pope. It was discussed widely that another Pope had been elected, PRIOR to John XXIII.

Certain speci…More
This whole scenario is very similar to something discussed in Traditionalist circles. Something known as"The Siri Thesis." It is known that at the time of the 1958 Conclave, the white smoke poured out of the Chimney for a prolonged period a day or two before John XXIII emerged onto the Balcony as Pope. It was discussed widely that another Pope had been elected, PRIOR to John XXIII.

Certain special forces, state that Cardinal Siri (Pope Pius XII's favourite to succeed him) was elected Pope and accepted the Papacy, and chose the name, Gregory XVII. Violent altercations may have subsequently occured, and threats from certain quarters of Communist reprisals if he didn't step down. So, (it is supposed) Siri resigned but it is an invalid resignation according to Canon Law, if a resignation is made under duress. So he (allegedly according to the Siri Thesis) would have remained Pope until his death in 1989. During the period of Popes John XXIII to John Paul II (Just like Pope Benedict) Siri professed obediance to them and did not call himself Pope ever.

When Siri died around 1989 - if he was still Pope - ie if the Siri thesis is Factual, then the next elected true Pope to succeed him (Canonically legitimate) would be Pope Benedict. I believe there is probably some truth in the Siri Thesis, as the same scenario raised it's head again after the death of Card. Siri. As soon as a valid Pope had been elected he was (Yet again) forced to invalidly resign, so a new Antipope could be elected in his place and the demolition of the Church be continued as it had been before Pope Benedict's election. If I were a Priest I would go and get myself re-ordained by the oldest pre Vatican II Bishop/Cardinal, or possibly the SSPX just to be on the safe side - too many queries about which Popes were/are valid. As it is, the repercussions of Siri's forced resignation were horrible enough. Now they have had another attempt to invalidate the conclave, when it was clear that the Holy Ghost was back in control and assisting Pope Benedict. Pope Benedict was mending the past offences that Our Lord had been subjected to for many years. Is the Siri Thesis Factual? If there is room for doubt we should do more to find out whether it is or not to save SOULS being led astray those who shouldn't be in the high places but are!

Search for "How Satan falsified the 1958 Conclave" by Ken Brown it's about half way down on the below link. His theory was written before the election of Jorge Bergoglio. The similarities between what he says may have happened in 1958, and what occurred (again?) in 2013 are frighteningly similar to be honest.

strobertbellarmine.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=563&start=360

"Rome will lose the Faith and become the Seat of the Antichrist, the Church will be in eclipse."

Our Lady of La Salette 1846

fordham.edu/mod/1846sallette.asp
Caroline03
Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich....

"I had another vision of the great tribulation. It seems to me that a concession was demanded from the clergy which could not be granted. I saw many older Priests, especially one, who wept bitterly. A few younger ones were also weeping. But others, and the lukewarm among them, readily did what was demanded. It was as if people were splitting into two camps."

More
Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich....

"I had another vision of the great tribulation. It seems to me that a concession was demanded from the clergy which could not be granted. I saw many older Priests, especially one, who wept bitterly. A few younger ones were also weeping. But others, and the lukewarm among them, readily did what was demanded. It was as if people were splitting into two camps."

"I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church. They were building a great, strange, and extravagant Church. Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be united and have equal rights: Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description. Such was to be the new Church … But God had other designs. "

archive.orgthewildvoice.org/end-time-prophecies/
V.R.S.
Ah. Late Malachi Martin. AKA M. Serafian. AKA F. E. Carthus. Mr. Sanchez, you'd better start to read The Pilgrim (available e.g. at archive.org) and end another great delusion.