Bugnolo is “absolutely certain” there will be a new pope within next 30 days?

January 3, 2023 (Steven O’Reilly) – Following the death of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI on Saturday, December 31, 2022, Roma Locuta Est marked his passing by taking a look at Benedict’s beautiful reflection in his last audience as pope (see HERE).  Today, we take a look at the unfolding tragicomedy which is Benepapism.

In mid-December, Roma Locuta Est took a look at Br. Bugnolo’s publication of an article titled “RULES, REGULATIONS AND PROCEEDURES FOR THE ELECTION OF POPE BENEDICT XVI’S SUCCESSOR.”[1]  For analysis of Bugnolo’s article, please read my commentary in Pope Bugnolo I?. Writing just a couple short weeks prior to the death of Benedict XVI, Bugnolo asserted that if the College of Cardinals, which he declared ipso facto excommunicated (see  The Tome of Alexis Bugnolo), would have no more than 21 days after Benedict’s passing to convene a conclave to elect his “successor” before the election must occur by a method he calls “Apostolic Tradition.”

Given Bugnolo already considers the College of Cardinals to have lost the right to participate in the election of Benedict’s successor due to their “schism,” it is not altogether clear why it was even necessary for Bugnolo to even bother us with his discussion of conclave regulations. Following Bugunolo’s “logic,” he could have gone straight past “go” to a papal election by Apostolic Tradition.  Briefly, by election by Apostolic Tradition, Bugnolo is describing something of a peoples’ conclave of the faithful in Rome. Bugnolo tells us that the faithful of Rome, of any rank including the laity, get to participate in this conclave. In his ‘motu proprio’, Bugnolo declares “This number of the Faithful, all of whom are electors, includes all the Catholics who declare that Pope Benedict XVI was the true pope.” I will not go again into all I covered in my article, Pope Bugnolo I?.  The key point here is that Bugnolo outlined, for him, a supposed canonical and theological basis to convoke a Benepapist conclave whereby the faithful of Rome, including laity, elect a Benepapist-believing pope.[2]

Though I had some fun with Bugnolo’s recent articles (see Pope Bugnolo I? and The Tome of Alexis Bugnolo), it wasn’t clear that his conclave rules article was anything more than only his theoretical outline and suggestion regarding how to approach the election of Benedict’s “successor.” However, Bugnolo’s most recent article titled WITHIN A MONTH, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WILL HAVE A NEW ROMAN PONTIFF appears to clear up any misconception on this point, at least in terms of Bugnolo’s thinking [NB: this Bugnolo bold decretal deserves a Latin title, Infra Mensem].  In this more recent tome, after retreading some of his prior (faulty) analysis about the College of Cardinals needing to convene a conclave by day 21 following Benedict’s death, Bugnolo says – emphasis added: “So any failure to convene, would set up the situation I have already written about here.”  As is clear from Bugnolo’s link, the “situation” he means is the aforementioned default to a peoples’ conclave.

But, does Bugnolo really think such a “conclave” will be attempted? It appears that Bugnolo, at least, thinks so.  Bugnolo immediately says thereafter(emphasis added):

“Thus, it is absolutely certain that within the next 30 days will (sic) be will have a new legitimate Roman Pontiff, for even if Bergoglio would be elected again, his first pontificate was never legitimate, and he was never a Pope.”[3]

So, as you see, Bugnolo states it is “absolutely certain” there will be a new pope within 30 days. That doesn’t leave any wiggle room for Bugnolo. His words clearly state there will be a new pope one way or the other. Given there is no way the College of Cardinals is convening by day 21; Bugnolo’s statement certainly implies rather clearly he and others(?) are definitely moving ahead with what he outlined in his ‘motu proprio’ Regulas Ordinationes.   How else could he be “absolutely certain”?

While it is a rather bold assertion Bugnolo is making, I’ve seen no indication that any other leading Benepapist backs his plan as of yet. In my article, Pope Bugnolo I?, we noted Bugnolo’s statement that he knows at least two Benepapist clergymen in Rome, and that they would be enough to lawfully convoke the peoples’ conclave he describes. Whether Bugnolo’s “conclave” will be anything more than these two clergymen, himself, and the barrista at the cappucino bar around the corner from his flat is not known. It will be interesting to see if other leading Benepapists, e.g., Don Minutella, Andrea Cionci, Estefania Acosta, Patrick Coffin, throw their support behind such an endeavor.

Who knows. Stay tuned.  Undoubtedly, there may be further installments of this tragicomedy as we witness the continued death spiral of Benepapism into a new form of sedevacantism and schism.

Final Thoughts

As I said in my last article on this topic. Bugnolo’s Regulas Ordinationes, describes a situation in which 0.0000000001% of worldwide Catholics, i.e., those who are Benepapists, have not only presumptuously arrogated to themselves — via Br. Bugnolo and his ilk — the right to declare who is or is not popewho can or cannot vote in a papal election, but also, who is and who is not Catholic.  Catholics should not listen to them.  Not one of them.

For those Catholic following the topic of Benepapism, or who have been tempted by it; Roma Locuta Est has various resources which debunk the false and spurious claims of the Benepapists (see Summa Contra the BiP Theory (Why Benedict XVI is NOT the pope), and The Case against those who claim “Benedict is (still) pope”).  Also, my book which rebuts Benepapism was recently published (see Valid?  The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI).

Clearly, Catholics following current events know these are indeed confusing times in the world, and in the Church. Whatever the ultimate answer to or explanation of this confusion over the last nine to ten years may be, it will not be Benepapism. Catholics should not follow the arch-Benepapists into schism, heresy, and sedevantism.  Catholics should wait for the judgment of the Church on all disputed questions. Reject the false and spurious claims of the leaders of the Benepapist movement.

Steven O’Reilly is a graduate of the University of Dallas and the Georgia Institute of Technology. A former intelligence officer, he and his wife, Margaret, live near Atlanta. He has written apologetic articles, and is author of Book I of the Pia Fidelis trilogy, The Two Kingdoms; and of Valid? The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI(Follow on twitter at @fidelispia for updates). He asks for your prayers for his intentions.  He can be contacted at StevenOReilly@AOL.com  or StevenOReilly@ProtonMail.com (or follow on Twitter: @S_OReilly_USA or on GETTR, TruthSocial, or Gab: @StevenOReilly).


[1] In my commentary on these “rules and regulations” (see Pope Bugnolo I?) I noted the audacious pretentiousness of the whole thing. Accordingly, in a tongue-in-cheek nod to the evident pomposity of it all, it seemed Bugnolo’s document on the “rules and regulations” needed a papal sounding, Latin title. Thus, we called it Regulas Ordinationes.

[2] Who would consecrate this new pope-elect a bishop, in the event he is not one, is not clear.

[3] The Italian version does not have the error which appears in Bugnolo’s original English.  The Italian translation can be read: “So, it is absolutely certain that within the next 30 days there will be a new legitimate Roman Pontiff, because even if Bergoglio were re-elected, his first pontificate would never have been legitimate, and he has never been Pope.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s