Skip to main content

Was St. Bernard a "De Facto Schismatic" in not attending Anacletus II Masses since the Majority of Cardinals claimed he was the "True Pope" according to Taylor Marshall?

Dr. Taylor Marshall in his book "Infiltration" on page 239 wrote:

"Catholics are obliged to attend only those Masses that commemorate the true pope... Any Mass that does not commemorate the true pope... is de facto schismatic."

However, St. Bernard of Clairvaux did not attend only those Masses that commemorat[ed] the true pope [according to the majority of the cardinals of the time]... [Moreover,] [a]ny Mass that does not commemorate the true pope [according to the majority of cardinals of the time]... is de facto schismatic" apparently according to the reasoning of Marshall and that appears to be a problem for him.

Does this mean that Doctor of the Church St. Bernard was "de facto" a "schismatic" according to Dr. Marshall?

Since it appears to be a 100% belief beyond doubt of Marshall, similar to his Twitter collaborator One Peter Five's Steve Skojec, that Francis's papacy is valid beyond question and if anyone doubts it they are therefore schismatics then does this mean Cardinal Raymond Burke is a "schismatic" because he said the Francis conclave could be invalid?

Cardinal Burke told Patrick Coffin there are "grounds... for calling into question the [Francis] election."
(Patrick Coffin show, "Dubia Cardinal Goes on Record - Raymond Cardinal Burke," 19:55 to 21:46)

Moreover, when Cardinal Gerhard Muller implied that the Francis papacy could be invalid, Marshall said:

"[Cardinal Muller said] [n]o pope alone if he spoke ex cathedra could make possible the ordination of women... You have only two options at that point. One, it's true. That is Divine Revelation that God revealed. I can't see how that works. Or second, the pope ain't the pope, Sedevacantist."
(YouTube, TnT, " What about Married Deacons, Minor Orders, and So-called Women Ordination?" 18:15 to 19:02)

It appears that for Marshall since it seems for him it is 100% infallible dogma that Francis is the "true pope" if Francis proclaimed ex cathedra that the ordination of women was "Divine Revelation" then Marshall would believe the heresy of ordination of women.

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








Comments

Debbie said…
In his infamous Twitter earlier this year, Dr. Marshall said it was our duty to know which pope was being commemorated at Mass. I replied we couldn't hear it, so, no problem. He said that was weasely. So then I asked if he ever asked or thought about who was being commemorated before 2013. Then he blocked me.

I've never thought to ask anyone, but what happens when there is a true sedevacate? Who is commemorated? Didn't Benedict "resign" almost a month before Bergoglio's election?
Charmaine said…
Interesting that in an August 5th Facebook post from Fr. Dave Nix, he posted a picture of himself and Dr. Taylor Marshall with the caption:

"Dr. Taylor Marshall served my low Mass at my brother-in-law's mountain home. Then we had a long evening of eating and drinking with three great families, including his own."
(https://www.facebook.com/nixdave/posts/10158664574461978)

Now, Fr. Dave Nix believes that Benedict is still the true Pope, and has stated that this is something he and Taylor Marshall disagree on frequently, in charity. So, in seeing that Dr. Marshall served for Fr. Nix's Mass, and also recalling this tweet on February 14 by Dr. Marshall(https://twitter.com/TaylorRMarshall/status/1096240539979169792),
I thought to ask the following question:

"If Fr. Nix believes Benedict is still the true Pope, and assuming he commemorates Benedict, not Francis, in the Eucharistic Canon, does this mean that Dr. Marshall committed a "grave sin of schism" by serving at such a Mass? (question being asked per the tweet that Dr. Marshall put out on Feb. 14) I'm genuinely curious. Thank you."

Fr. Nix deleted my comment and unfriended me within minutes for asking this.
Debbie said…
So disappointing about Fr. Nix. I love his podcasts.....but I've felt something is off about him. Too cozy with Dr. Marshall.
Charmaine said…
Yes, sadly it appears Fr. Nix may be compromising his true conviction for the sake of popularity (or at least not be willing to strongly commit to it more publicly). He's a regular guest on the TnT show, and has 5K Facebook friends that he accrued ever since his homeless plight from last year made the headlines. My question was more than valid, given the (limited) admission of his own stance on Benedict being the true Pope, along with Dr. Marshall's past tweet. But if there's any humor to be had, perhaps finding a "B16 Mass" might not be as difficult as Dr. Marshall snidely remarked it would be. ;)
Fr. VF said…
Taylor Marshall has never apologized for his vicious tweet that said that people who doubt that Bergoglio is pope commit the mortal sin of schism if they attend a Mass at which Bergoglio is mentioned in the Canon. Then he added, gleefully, "Good luck finding a Mass at which Benedict is commemorated." As if to say: "Nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah! You're trapped in mortal sin and can't escape!"

Sorry to read that Fr. Nix is just another Mark Shea when it comes to the "block" button.
Aqua said…
My level of spiritual concern over Taylor's schism opinions is 0..00

I literally could not care any less.

I do not doubt there is ontological schism. And he has chosen his side very clearly and publicly.
Fr. VF said…
"Sedevacantism" is merely the judgment that the See is vacant at a time when the majority of people think the See is occupied.

The election of a pope is an administrative act, not a dogma, not an exercise of the Magisterium. Thus, holding a minority opinion about an election is not heresy. People--especially the Mottramists--are throwing around the terms "heresy" and "schism" with promiscuous abandon.

Popular posts from this blog

"Exorcist Fr. Ripperger is asking everyone to say this Prayer until the Election is Resolved"

A good friend of the Catholic Monitor got this from a group message. She said "exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger is asking everyone to say this prayer until the election is resolved": Prayer of Command In His Name and by the power of His Cross and Blood, I ask Jesus to bind any evil spirits, forces and powers of the earth, air, fire, or water, of the netherworld and the satanic forces of nature.  By the power of the Holy Spirit and by His authority, I ask Jesus Christ to break any curses, hexes, or spells and send them back to where they came from, if it be His Holy Will.  I beseech Thee Lord Jesus to protect us by pouring Thy Precious Blood on us (my family, etc.), which Thou hast shed for us and I ask Thee to command that any departing spirits leave quietly, without disturbance, and go straight to Thy Cross to dispose of as Thou sees fit.  I ask Thee to bind any demonic interaction, interplay, or communications.  I place N. (Person, place or thing) under the protectio

If Kamala Harris' Father is part White & part Jamaican African and her Mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black?

  Is Joe Biden's running mate really Black? If Kamala Harris' father is part white and part Jamaican African and her mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black? Reason.com tries to figure it out: Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's pick to be the Democratic Party's vice-presidential nominee, is the daughter of an Indian immigrant mother and a Jamaican immigrant father. Her father, as I understand it, has ancestors of both European and African origin. [Welcome new Volokh readers. FYI, I've been working on a book on the American Law of Race, with this forthcoming article the first relevant output. My own opinion is that Ms. Harris should be deemed American, period, but there is no such box on government forms, and if you decline to state your race, someone will decide for you… First things first. There is no multiracial or mixed-race category in American law in any jurisdiction. Nor is there an Indian category. So Harris cannot be legally Indian, nor can she b

Bishops of Colorado gave an apparent Vaxx "Exemption" Letter & Stated: "Vaccination is Not Morally Obligatory and so Must Be Voluntary"

Today, the bishops of Colorado gave an apparent Vaxx " exemption" letter (21_8_Vaccine_Exemption_CCC_Fin...docx(20KB)) and stated that "Vaccination is Not Morally Obligatory and so Must Be Voluntary":  COLORADO CATHOLIC CONFERENCE 1535 Logan Street | Denver, CO 80203-1913 303-894-8808 | cocatholicconference.org   [Date]   To Whom It May Concern, [Name] is a baptized Catholic seeking a religious exemption from an immunization requirement. This letter explains how the Catholic Church’s teachings may lead individual Catholics, including [name], to decline certain vaccines. The Catholic Church teaches that a person may be required to refuse a medical intervention, including a vaccination, if his or her conscience comes to this judgment. While the Catholic Church does not prohibit the use of most vaccines, and generally encourages them to safeguard personal and public health, the following authoritative Church teachings demonstrate the principled religious