Skip to main content

Flashback: Is "Skojec... a kind of Double Agent and 1P5 a False-Opposition Operation" who keeps Catholics "Confused... rather than United in any Useful Purpose"?

  Updated June 19, 2020
Double Agent Celery - South Australia Public Library Services - OverDrive
- Vatican I expert Fr. Chad Ripperger, PhD, in his book "Magister Authority" shows that almost all Francis apologists be they liberal, conservative or traditionalist are "proximate to heresy":

"[T]reating ALL papal statements as if they are infallible... is proximate to heresy because it rejects the precise formulation of the conditions of infallibility as laid out in Vatican I... by essentially saying the pope is infallible regardless of conditions..."

"... Worse still, those who were to follow a pope who was in error in a non-infallible teaching which is taught contrary to something that is infallible is not, therefore, excused."
(Magisterial Authority, Pages 5-14)

At times, I have found that the comments in the Catholic Monitor comment section are better than my post. This was true of the last post in which Jack wrote a deeply insightful comment that mirrored Fr. Rippinger's above explanation of Vatican I and Pope Innocent III's "in the matter of the faith I [and all popes and antipopes] could be judged by the Church" and he covered many other matters.

However, prior to getting to it, I want to thank all the loyal Catholic Monitor readers and commenters for their prayers especially Praypraypray and Therese who are prayer warriors and the vast majority of CM commenters for their wisdom.

Also, I want to say, unlike Jack, I am not inclined to think that One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec is a "double agent," but it appears to me that he does keep Catholics "confused... a whining bunch of scandalmong[ers] rather than united in any useful purpose."

Here is the great comment by Jack:

"People who imagine that Vatican I's definition of papal infallibility is circular, tautological, or otherwise redundant imagine that the dogma goes like this: "Solemn papal definitions are infallible, because the pope has the power of infallibility." Which is like saying, 'it's right because the pope says it's right.'"

"This would be to set up the pope as a kind of god, since only God is truly self-justifying like this, right simply because He is right, because He is Truth itself by His very essence."

"I think in the wake of liberalism and its undermining of all authority, Catholics rallied to the pope and after Vatican I made this kind of mistake, at least implicitly, that the pope is right because he is right. But this is just another human error, setting up a man in God's place, undermining authority in an even more subtle way."

"The pope is not right because he says he's right, and he's not infallible simply because he has the power of infallibility (although he is and he does). Vatican I is very clear. The pope is infallible BECAUSE Christ gave the keys to Peter and his Successors, and HE guaranteed by HIS divine power that the pope would never err in his solemn teaching capacity. This is perhaps a subtle distinction, but it makes a profound difference. It means that our faith is not centred on the person of the pope, but centred on Christ just has it has always been."

"So when we come across a pope who appears to be erring in doctrine, the first thing we should ask is whether he is really erring or not. And if he is erring, the next thing to ask is whether his papacy is legitimate or whether he's an antipope. But for people with a worldly mindset who are too willing to accept the world's opinions and maintain their public image, and who's faith is more centred on the person of the pope than on the person of Christ, they would rather deny Vatican I and become heretics than accuse a possible antipope (despite there having been many, many antipopes in history) and fall temporarily out of favour."

"To be honest at this point I would not be surprised if Skojec is a kind of double agent and 1p5 a false-opposition operation designed to keep potential critics of the regime confused and pigeonholed. Keep traditionalists as a whining bunch of scandalmongerers rather than united in any useful purpose."

Lastly, here is my simple post that hopefully helped inspire Jack in his exceptional comment:

It appears that One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec's infallible opinion that the Francis papacy cannot be invalid under any circumstances is leading him towards heresy.

Yesterday on Twitter, Skojec said to @JoshuaPotryus and @MikeJon:

"The problem is that infallibility appears to be tautological at best and borders on superstition at worst."

A example of a tautology is former Vice President Dan Quayle's:

"If we do not succeed, we run the risk of failure."

A possible Skojec tautology might go:

"If Francis is not a valid pope, we run the risk of Francis being a antipope" which may lead to this possible Skojec tautology:

"I believe Vatican I's papal infallibly teaching "appears... [to border] on superstition," so I accept as true that that infallible dogma "appears... [to border]" on being a unfounded belief."

It appears that Skojec's logic goes something like the following:

"Francis's papal validity is a 100% infallible belief and if anyone doubts it they are a schismatic therefore Vatican I's infallible teaching on papal infallibly "appears to be a tautological at best and borders on superstition at worst."

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He want you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost - Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

- Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

"[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See."
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said "the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church."

- "If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?":

- "Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?":

 -  LifeSiteNews, "Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers," December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows "sexually active adulterous couples facing 'complex circumstances' to 'access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'"

-  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

"The AAS statement... establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense."

- On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

"Francis' heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents."

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes:  

- Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: "212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted...Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden" []

- Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times "Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003":

- Tucker Carlson's Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written" according to Rush:
- A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: "Anitfa 'Agent Provocateurs'":

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God's Will and to do it.
Pray an Our Father now for America.
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.


Therese said…
Jack's comment is a great one and deserves wide distribution. Every Catholic ought to read it; this alone could save us a lot of trouble.

I'd like to put in a good word for M. Matt's call for 'uniting the clans'; he's received a healthy amount of criticism for this idea. The one thing he's NOT calling for is dialogue, thanks be to God. Rather he seems to be observing a common wartime phenomenon: when faced by an enemy, many people tend to separate the wheat from the chaff fairly quickly--they ditch their cherished ideology in favor of what is real. I won't say the result is pretty or even lasting (the example of the partisans at the end of WWII comes to mind). But it can happen, and given the ugliness of what's upon us, I do believe it will.
Fred Martinez said…
Dear Therese,

Thank you for your prayers, wisdom and your charitable presence at the Catholic Monitor.
Praypraypray said…
Thank you very much for the Catholic Monitor. I’ve enjoyed reading many, many articles.
It struck me when you noted that the commentators comments are, at times, better than your posts. It takes a grounded, humble man to write that.
I pray for all of the people who are still trying to figure out Francis. It seems that a lot of people are poorly catechized and so they are fearful and don’t know what to think, say, or do. I pray that God exposes the truth and helps everyone to clearly see it and follow through from there.
Many years ago, before I had the chance to pro-life sidewalk counsel, I used to think that if I just told people the truth and explained the facts, they would all of a sudden realize it and turn against abortion and walk away from the abortion mill. When I started actually sidewalk counseling, I realized that it is very much a spiritual battle waged against mankind by the devil and his minions bent on the destruction of the body and soul.
When I explained that “fetus” means little one and it is a human baby with human DNA and not just a blob of cells or the woman’s body, since the child has separate DNA, many of those who are fearful or angry and bent on abortion, still go through with the killing of the babies. Often, I repeat the old saying, “No man is so blind as he who refuses to see.”
I try to figure out Why they refuse to see... Some refuse to see, because they are caught up in a lot of terrible evil, such as the people working at or for the abortion mills. Other people are very selfish and seem to be only concerned with their own happiness. However, it seems that a great deal of those going for abortion are frightened or fearful. They are so blinded by fear, that they refuse to see. They want to keep their eyes closed or put their heads in the sand, because they themselves, with what knowledge they have, cannot compute. They’re so scared that they walk right past any true help on their hurried way to get the deed done. The evil one and his minions are behind that fear and the push for them to do evil. Of course, after they do the evil acts, the evil one is right there to accuse them of the acts. He’d be pleased to cause them to commit suicide over their guilt.
I tell the post-abortive women that the devil is the accuser, but Jesus is our advocate. I tell
them that we are not against them, but we are against abortion and we are there for them and praying for them. We tell they should talk/pray to God and make their peace with Him.
One of my dear friends is post-abortive and she comes out to sidewalk counsel other women so they don’t do what she did and do not go through what she has gone through and still goes through, as she thinks about her baby daily. She’s a courageous Christian woman who inspires so many people and helps to save many lives and families.
I pray that God lifts the veil for people to truly see and believe the truth and think, talk, and act accordingly. It seems that we are in a terrible spiritual battle concerning Francis and the Vatican. Another old notation that often comes to mind was from a prophecy, that, “...even the elect will be fooled.” I pray that people wake up to the truth and that God helps them to think, say, and do the right thing, even if it’s the hardest choice. Of course, we know that verse, “The Truth will set you free.”
Aqua said…
PrayPrayPray: you have seen evil up close and can testify to the power of demons to bind a soul to their will. They truly are what we are up against. Not lack of knowledge. But evil. Demons in battle array. This is what Pope St. Leo XIII saw in his vision that caused him to faint - what had been loosed from hell into the world.

And against that, against demons loosed in the world for a time, wisdom and knowledge and facts and dogma will not prevail. The only solution is contained in your chosen name. Pray. Pray. Pray. The victory belongs to God. And we should, while acting as we can, call on His name.

By the way, thank you for your defense of the unborn children. May God bless your work, and produce many more penitents like your friend.
Fr. VF said…
Not a single statement of Bergoglio's is infallible, because he carefully refrains from making a statement with the FORM required for infallibility. When it comes to the content of his various pronouncements, they are, some of them, heretical. That is, they contradict the church's teaching. But he contradicts himself on occasion, and in general, speaks with great indirection and ambiguity, carefully choosing words that are not Terms of Art in theology, such as "inadmissible." And he spreads his heresies through his stooges, most of the time. Thus, he can weasel out of the charge of "contradicting" the Church's teaching.

The whole subject of infallibility is a diversion. Discussing it is a waste of time because Bergoglio carefully avoids any statement that could be described as a formal, solemn definition of anything.
Fred Martinez said…

It is good to have you back. I was a bit worried about you because we hadn't heard from you in so long. As always thank you for your kindness and wisdom. Please continue to pray for the Catholic Monitor and me. I will pray for you and your baby saving work.
Aqua said…
Fr. VF: What you describe is true and is the nature of devious Jesuits.

The Dubia, however, cannot be any more clear: Precise formulations of Dogma. By definition, not answering them, as Pope, when formally asked, is to admit their opposite. And that is heresy.

Asked. Answered. Case closed as far as I’m concerned. No Jesuitical wiggle room there.
Therese said…
"Not a single statement of Bergoglio's is infallible, because he carefully refrains from making a statement with the FORM required for infallibility." Father, I have noticed it too. This wickedness is deliberate--he's not merely ignorant, as some have claimed.

Thank you, Mr. Martinez. I comment almost nowhere else.
Fred Martinez said…
Fr. VF,

You're right about Francis, but all the apparently ignorant liberal, conservative, and traditionalist Francis apologists are pushing the "proximate to heresy" lie that everything a pope or possibly invalid papacy says is "infallible" including outright heresy and mortal sin putting in danger their eternal salvation and all who listen to them.
Neofito said…
@Fr VF: you are WRONG...
Infallibility its not about some "FORM" (like a "fill-in-the-blanks form and this form will become infallible")

and its neither about the KIND of "communication" or "document" ("so, the Papal Bulls could not be infallible because this kind of communication its not used to")

God does does not act this way
TheFlyingTigers said…
Neofito, YOU are wrong. And you're VERY wrong at that. Papal infallibility refers only to a very specific situation—when the pope is making a solemn decree ex cathedra (or “from the seat”) on a matter of faith or morals. In general, a pope who wants to make an infallible statement will make sure that everyone knows what’s going on. He might punctuate his decree, for example, with the warning that anyone who denies it will have fallen away from the Catholic faith.

Only one pope—and only one papal decree—has ever invoked this kind of infallibility since it was first defined. In 1950, Pius XII declared the Assumption of Mary as a dogma of the church. The language, i.e. the 'form' of the decree made his invocation of infallibility very clear: “We pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma …“

So for you to say "God does not act this way, either you're God (and I doubt that), you're a Protestant, or you're just a troll with time on your hands.

Popular posts from this blog

Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Francis teaches HERESY," now, the question is will he do a Skojec & a Schneider Cop Out

    Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation: "[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic , he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him , or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See." (The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306) Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Pope Francis teaches HERESY: Pope Pius XII condemned the heresy of Francis": Pope Francis on Feb 2 2022, taught, "that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature...who have denied the faith, who are apostates." Pope Pius XII taught the exact opposite when he wrote of those: "who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or b

Wernz-Vidal: "One cannot consider as Schismatics those who Refuse to Obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person Suspect or, because of Widespread Rumors, Doubtfully Elected"

    Pope Francis is tottering on the precipice of Hell. None of this means he isn't the pope, and such talk among the laity is scandalous in its own right. Not a single cardinal in that 2013 conclave has come out and said the election was rigged and Bergoglio isn't the pope, that he is in fact an anti-pope . If he is, a future pope can declare that, when Jorge Bergoglio will no longer be a pope. But if the very men gathered in conclave haven't made that public accusation,  anyone who is suggesting that better take into account that they too will have to give an account of themselves to Almighty God when they die . Such talk adds to the scandal of the "little ones," the simple, even potential converts, who, when they hear big-mouth Catholics on social media saying he's not really the pope, draw back from approaching the Church. Do any of us desire to stand in front Our Blessed Lord as the Supreme Judge and explain why, in our desire for more c

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk