“In fact, between the first two lines that were made illegible in the photo, at the bottom of the first page of the letter, and the valediction and signature of Benedict XVI on the second half of the second page, there is a space too big to be occupied only by the last part of the paragraph omitted in the [Vatican] press release.”

In other words, there is more on the second page than the censored paragraph wherein Benedict states “I don’t feel like writing a short and dense theological passage on them” and that he hadn’t read them and had no intention of reading them because, in essence, he has other things to do. The photograph of the letter bears this out: 

Beyond this speculation, however, an “unimpeachable” source had informed Magister that there was other censored language on the second page in which Benedict had indicated a refusal to endorse the books because of the dubious theology of certain German contributors.

Confronted with the mounting evidence of its fraud, the Vatican has finally disgorged the entire letter, including the additional text on the second page. The two blurred lines at the bottom of the first page and the second page in full actually read as follows [translation provided by Edward Pentin]:

End of page 1:

However, I don’t feel like writing a short and dense theological passage on them because throughout my life it has always been clear that I would write and ….

Page 2:

express myself only on books I had read really well. Unfortunately, if only for physical reasons, I am unable to read the eleven volumes in the near future, especially as other commitments await me that I have already made.

Only as an aside, I would like to note my surprise at the fact that among the authors is also Professor Hünermann, who during my pontificate had distinguished himself by leading anti-papal initiatives. He played a major part in the release of the “Kölner Erklärung”, which, in relation to the encyclical “Veritatis splendour”, virulently attacked the magisterial authority of the Pope, especially on questions of moral theology. Also the “Europaische Theologengesellschaft”, which he founded, was initially conceived by him as an organization in opposition to the papal magisterium. Later, the ecclesial sentiment of many theologians prevented this orientation, allowing that organization to become a normal instrument of encounter among theologians.

I am sure you will understand my refusal [il mio diniego] and I offer you cordial greetings.

So, the Vatican censored the entire underlined and bolded paragraph because Benedict had sharply criticized Hünermann for having launched on attack on the teaching of John Paul II in Veritatis splendor, wherein John Paul affirms, in accord with all of Tradition, that adultery and other intrinsic evils forbidden by the negative precepts of the divine and natural law can never be permitted under any circumstances, no matter how “complex.” But Hünermann’s attack on that teaching is precisely a hallmark of “the theology of Pope Francis,” as seen in Amoris Laetitia and its disastrous implementation with his approval, fraudulently denominated “authentic Magisterium.”

Moreover, the pile of books trick also hid the word “refusal” in the letter’s closing line so that no one would know that Benedict had positively refused to endorse the eleven volumes of “the theology of Pope Francis.”

Now forced to admit to its fraud, the Vatican has issued a statement that only aggravates the offense, claiming that its deliberate act of concealment “was motivated by confidentiality and not by any intention to censor.” Please! If the letter was “confidential” then the Vatican has violated its commitment of confidentiality by quoting parts of it that serve its fake news narrative while hiding the other “confidential” parts.

The Vatican has thus falsely presented as a public endorsement of “the theology of Pope Francis” a letter that Benedict intended to be private wherein he refuses to give any such endorsement. The Bergoglian dictatorship has no shame.

A word to the wise: It is a risky business indeed to make definitive declarations about the mind or motives of Benedict, the reasons for his abdication, the situation in which he now finds himself, or the intention behind letters and other statements attributed to him by assorted Bergoglian mafiosi.

Update, March 18, 6:58 p.m.: Vatican/Vigano deliberately published a doctored version of Benedict's letter even though the envelope was marked “personal" and “confidential")

"The dishonesty reaches the point of presenting as a celebratory letter written on the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the pontificate of Francis (therefore destined for the public) a personal letter of refusal of a proposal (thus perhaps to be interpreted in the opposite way).  I repeat, a personal letter (“personal,” “confidential,” was also written on the envelope that accompanied the letter) that as such should have remained private.  Its publication is a clear violation of privacy, a theft."

[La disonestà arriva al punto di presentare come lettera celebrativa scritta in occasione del quinto anniversario del pontificato di Francesco (quindi destinata al pubblico) una lettera personale di rifiuto di una proposta (quindi casomai da interpretare in modo opposto). Ripeto, una lettera personale (“personale”, “riservato” c’è anche scritto sulla busta che accompagna la lettera) che come tale doveva restare privata. La sua pubblicazione è una chiara violazione della privacy, un furto.]

-Riccardo Cascioli in Bussola Quotidiana http://lanuovabq.it/it/se-le-fake-news-nascono-in-vaticano

Translation by Chris Ferrara