Skip to main content

5 Dubia Questions for Pope Benedict XVI & not for the Benedict Bot

June 6, 2019 was the day that the Catholic Monitor posted 5 Dubia questions for One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec to answer and like Francis he has refused to answer.

Skojec was banned from posting in the Monitor comment section until he allowed a free forum for debate on those Dubia questions on the One Peter Five website comment section.

As far as we can see, there is still no freedom to debate at that website, but a priest and others banned there as well as a Italian Latin language expert and supporters of Skojec (one of the 1P5 publisher supporters is a blogger) carried on a debate for two days in the Catholic Monitor.
[http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2019/06/5-dubia-questions-for-steve-skojec.html]

It was beautiful to see honest debate.

 In the debate, Jonathan D'Souza posted a "Dubia for Benedict." Please go to the post link above to read it.

I loved the idea so here are the Catholic Monitor's 5 Dubia questions for Pope Benedict XVI.

But, before we get to the dubia questions, I want to say that I totally agree with D'Souza that Benedict has to "come out to our faces in the public and answer in a press conference once and for all... and [be] drilled by lawyers and reporters in more detail, allow[ing] no room for escape."

Moreover, as he said "we don't want any more bogus press releases from the Vatican" which some are calling Francis' Benedict Bot.

Francis and the Vatican as he said "can't be trusted" as proven by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, Lettergate, the Chinese Vatican betrayal deal, the Bergoglio Argentine sex-abuse cover-ups dating to when he was a archbishop to the present Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta case and I could keep going, but you get the idea.

Finally, here are the 5 Dubia questions for Benedict:

1. Viganò and the evidence has proven that Francis covered-up for ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick's sex abuse. Do you demand with Viganò that Francis resign? Answer: yes or no.

2. In reference to the possibility of Francis resigning, Cardinal Walter Kasper and canon law expert Nicholas Cafardi said "a political faction" attempting "a forced resignation would be invalid."

It is known that three Cardinals made a "300 page dossier" of Vatican sexual homosexual deviancy that was paired with financial irregularities tied to Vatileaks orchestrated by the allied financially corrupt Vatican Old Guard diplomats and the Vatican sexually corrupt Gay Lobby that led to your resignation.

Do you admit that the aforementioned "political factions" orchestrated and caused or forced your resignation? Answer: yes or no.

3. Bishop René Gracida has convincingly demonstrated that there is valid evidence that Pope John Paul II's conclave constitution "Universi Dominici Gregis" which "prescribe[d]... [the] method for the election of his successor(s)" was violated and must be investigated by Cardinals.

Do you admit that the Cardinals need to investigate the conclave? Answer: yes or no.

4. Respected Catholic scholar Dr. Peter Kwasniewski in reviewing the Antonio Socci book "The Secret of Benedict XVI: Is he still Pope?" said: "Socci['s]... careful analysis... above all, the interpretation [of] canon lawyers... argue that the resignation lacks several conditions for validity."

Do you admit that you need to do a new resignation which is unarguably and incontrovertibly valid? Answer: yes or no.

5. Your long time friend and colleague Cardinal Walter Brandmuller said "Whoever thinks that persistent adultery and reception of Holy Communion are compatible is a heretic and promotes schism."

Since Francis endorses "that persistent adultery and reception of Holy Communion are compatible" with his Argentine letter and since his Vatican calls the letter "authentic magisterium," do you admit that Francis is "a heretic and promotes schism"? Answer: yes or no.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Mass and the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of the Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of the Mary.






Comments

These points are well made; thank you for making them.

But of course it won't happen, because what is going on is far greater than almost any Catholic observer has yet had the courage to admit and fathom: Benedict has surrendered the apparatus of the Vatican and papacy into the hands of the greatest Evil that has ever assaulted the Church, trusting that intercessory prayer, silence, and humility are the only weapons that can defeat it. This approach baffles political observers but it is in fact the only way that evil of such magnitude can be defeated.

The solution has to come from God now: not another conclave, not a pope who will excommunicate all the Modernists, not some sort of restoration of any past moment of Catholic glory. The hour is far too late for any of that now. This is the final battle foretold to Lucia at Fatima. Benedict is the last pope of the old era and also the first pope of the new, but, as he said to Peter Seewald in 2016, the new era isn't really here yet. Keep praying and it will all happen, not without great suffering for the Church and the world.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us, and long live Pope Benedict XVI!!
Justina said…
No, it is not "in fact the only way that evil of such magnitude can be defeated." Ora et labora
Unknown said…
I will answer on behalf of Benedict (Don't ask me how it's complicated). Yes or No answer's wont exactly cut it so here it goes...

1. No, At least not from the Papacy since he never held the office.

2. Yes.

3. Yes, but it won't matter now.

4. No, I need not do anything further, except wait and pray.

5. Yes.
Fred Martinez said…
You sound like you are a follower of the French 1700 Century heresy of Quietism.

Popular posts from this blog

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

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...