Skip to main content


Showing posts from February 23, 2020

Is Bp. Schneider a "Flying Monkey" or another Type of Enabler?

Is Bishop Athanasius Schneider an enabler of Francis? If he is then what type of enabler might he be? The literature on narcissist enablers claims there are types of enablers: "Narcissism does not exist in a vacuum. It can't. Therefore, there are enablers... who support the narcissist... people the narcissist recruits to their side. These people are usually called 'flying monkeys,' but there are other types of enablers, too." "These are the people who might not agree with or defend the narcissist, but who enable the narcissist... who says things like, 'She's [he's] your mother [pope]'... 'How can you abandon your husband [pope]'... 'I give in to your sister [pope] to keep the peace.'" "... If one spouse hits the other, and the assaulted spouse does not leave the relationship or call the police, they've taught the batterer that this behavior is acceptable because there have been no consequences." (

Quarantine China?: Italy was the Second most Popular European Destination for the Chinese?

- Updated March 11, 2020 According to News Travel, in the "first half of 2019": "[T]he top... [Chinese] destination in Europe were Russia, Italy... " (, "Big Data: Chinese Tourism to Europe Keep Growing in H1 2019," August 30, 2019) If Italy is the epicenter of the Coronavirus in Western Europe and it appears to be a top Chinese tourist "destination" then why isn't the Italian and European media calling for a quarantine of China? Why, if what the media is saying is true about the Coronavirus, aren't they calling for a global travel ban on China like President Donald Trump and Australia have done or even a global "call for the world to advise all citizens to leave China " until the virus is under control? If the Democrats, the Alex Jones-like conservatives like Steve Skojec and the media are serious in their Coronavirus panic than a quarantine of China is absolutely needed. Why aren't they cal

Why is Bp. Schneider spreading the Doubtful Propaganda of a possible Leftist British Operative?

On LifeSiteNews, Bishop Athanasius Schneider apparently is spreading the doubtful propaganda of a possible leftist British operative Massimo Franco: "The former Pope Benedict XVI is no longer the pope... During a conversation with a journalist [Massimo Franco] from the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera , the former Pope Benedict XVI said: “The Pope is one, he is Francis.” These words of Benedict XVI were reported in the written edition of Corriere della Sera , June 28, 2019." The Italian Massimo Franco who interviewed Benedict XVI with "The Pope is one; [he] is Francis" quote appears to possibly be a leftist British operative of some type whose reporting is doubtful. LifeSiteNews apparently stated the Franco quotations of Benedict were debunked or at best doubtful propaganda: "It is unclear from this introductory article if these particular quotations were from the reporter or Benedict XVI himself." (LifeSiteNews, "Benedict XVI asserts F


Author John Salza, a former 32nd Degree Freemason, has written a good book "Why Catholics Cannot be Mason's." Hopefully, he know and promotes the following prayers and others like them. Fr. John Hampsch, C.M.F. PRAYERS OF RELEASE FOR FREEMASONS AND THEIR DESCENDANTS If you were once a Mason or are a descendant of a Mason, we recommend that you pray through the following prayer from your heart. Don’t be like the Masons who are given their obligations and oaths one line at a time and without prior knowledge of the requirements. Please read it through first so you know what is involved. It is best to pray this aloud with a Christian witness or counselor present. We suggest a brief pause following each paragraph to allow the Holy Spirit to show any additional issues which may require attention. “Father God, creator of heaven and earth, I come to you in the name of Jesus Christ your Son. I come as a sinner seeking forgiveness and cleansing from all sins committed aga

What if Francis has the Coronavirus & dies before Benedict?

Francis traditionalists and one apparent Sedevantist for some reason think that Pope Benedict XVI dying before Francis proves their Francis is definitely pope and all popes since Vatican II were manifest heretics arguments. But, now that the elderly Francis has been sick for two days possibly with Coronavirus which is mainly dangerous for the chronically ill or elderly, might it be a good time to ask: What if Francis dies before Benedict? There would only be one man in Rome wearing white calling himself pope. Moreover, all the fear sticken cardinals won't have a gun to their head from the Francis Vatican. They must be sick and tired of the current Vatican dictatorship. Francis's death would surely renew their courage to overthrow the Vatican swamp creatures. Even some of the swamp creatures out of the motive of revenge such as the Cardinal Angelo Sodano Old Guard might join the "40 to 70 [faithful] Cardinals" who according to Vatican expert Edward Pentin

Schneider's Opinion has next to Zero Merit when standing next to the Teaching of Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales

Turning the table on Bishop Athanasius Schneider's opinion that a heretical pope can't be deposed is easy. Schneider said: "[N]o... universal... or... Papal Magisterium... would support the theories of the deposition of a heretical pope," but the exact same thing can be said of the bishop's opinion: "[N]o... universal... or... Papal Magisterium... would support the theories of" not being able to depose "a heretical pope." Schneider's opinion has next to zero authority or merit when standing next to the teaching of Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales: [T]he Pope... when he is explicitly a heretic... falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church 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) Schneider, also, apparently is implying sit on you hands and do nothing when he says: "There is no historical case

Is Bishop Schneider a Pelagianist?

The very existence of a response from Bishop Athanasius Schneider confirms in a spectacular fashion what the Catholic Monitor has been saying lately that the Benedict-is-Pope movement and the Bishop Rene Gracida movement are growing! They can't ignore us forever. I would point out two basic things about Bishop Schneider's arguments in favor of Bergoglian validity: 1. The first section of the argument presumes what it sets out to prove--here is how we have to treat Bergoglio because that is how you have to treat a Pope.  But what if he isn't the Pope? 2. After arguing for Bergoglian validity on the basis of what has been excluded from the 1917 Code of Canon Law, Bishop Schneider goes on to argue that subjective affirmations of Benedict make Bergoglio the Pope, without any reference to UD Gregis or Canon Law at all.  Is Bishop Schneider  the Pelagian? He says others are Pelagians--in other words, we are using our own strength and trying to have our own way by saying

Schneider's Opinion vs. Cdl. Burke: 'If a Pope would Formally Profess Heresy he would Cease, by that act, to be the Pope. It's Automatic."

Bishop Athanasius Schneider's opinion is: "Even if — according to the opinion of the automatic loss of the papacy for heresy —  the judgment of the loss of the papal office is pronounced by the heretical pope upon himself, and he automatically falls from office without any judgment by the Church, such an opinion contains a contradiction and reveals a hint of crypto-conciliarism." [ ] Cardinal Raymond Burke in an 2016 interview with the Catholic World Report website in responding to questions said exactly the opposite: "CWR: Can the pope legitimately be declared in schism or heresy?" "Cardinal Burke: 'If a Pope would formally profess heresy he would cease, by that act, to be the Pope. It's automatic. And so, that could happen... '" "... CWR: Who is competent to declare him to be in heresy?" "Cardinal Burke: '

Doubtful Schneider vs. St. Bellarmine & Bp. Gracida: "A Doubtful Pope is no Pope"

Bishop Athanasius Schneider's opinion on " doubtful matters" : "[T]he Magisterium of the Church, since Popes Pius X and Benedict XV, has seemed to reject such an opinion, as the formulation of the spurious decree of Gratian was eliminated in the Code of Canon Law 1917. The canons that address the automatic loss of an ecclesiastical office for heresy in the 1917 Code of Canon Law (canon 188 §4) and in the 1983 Code of Canon Law (canon 194 §2) are not applicable to the pope, because the Church deliberately eliminated from the Code of Canon Law the following formulation taken from the previous Corpus Iuris Canonici : “unless the pope is caught deviating from the faith ( nisi deprehendatur a fide devius ).” By this act, the Church manifested her understanding, the mens ecclesiae , regarding this crucial issue. Even if one does not agree with this conclusion, the matter remains at least doubtful. In doubtful matters, however, one cannot proceed to concrete acts with f

Bp. Schneider vs. Pope Innocent III, Trent & the Ancient Fathers

Is Bishop Athanasius Schneider's opinion true or false? Here is the answer from a POPE to Schneider and all the Francis traditionalists who claim that a heretical pope can't be judged by the Church:  Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) in "Si Papa": "'Let no mortal being have the audacity to reprimand a Pope on account of faults, for he whose duty it is to judge all men cannot be judged by anybody, unless he should be called to the task of having deviated from the faith. (Si Papa)'" "Pope Innocent III: 'For me the faith is so necessary that, whereas for other sins my only judge is God, for the slightest sin in the matter of the faith I could be judged by the Church.' (propter solum peccatum quod in fide commititur possem ab Ecclesia judican)" (The Remnant, "Answering a Sedevacantist Critic," March 18, 2015) Moreover, the important theologian Dominique Bouix in, Tractatus de papa, ubi et de concilio oecumenico , vol.

Australia on Coronavirus: "Don't Panic," Don't become Totalitarian like China & have a "Travel Ban for China"

Today, The Epoch Times reported that Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison calmly told his country "Don't panic": "So you can go to the footy [Australian rule football games], you can go to the Chinese restaurant - in fact I encourage you to." (The Epoch Times, "Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison says 'Don't Panic' about Virus," February 27, 2020) The Epoch Times revealed in the article that the Australian Deputy chief medical officer Professor Paul Kelly said: "It may be a one-off wave that comes through and infects a certain percentage of the population, it won't be everybody I can absolutely guarantee that, or it won't come at all - all of those things are still possible, I think the latter one is less likely now." The article stated the Australian government refuses to use the virus as excuse to become totalitarian like Communist China: "'But if the virus starts to spread in Australia, 

Might Archbishop Lenga's Turkmenistan be the first Country to Convene an Imperfect Council to Declare Francis an Antipope?

- Updated March 6, 2020 Archbishop Jan Lenga was formerly the "Apostlic Administrator" of not only Kazakhstan, but of the tiny country of Turkmenistan. (Fatima, Russia and Pope John Paul II: How Mary Intervened to Deliver Russia," Page 202) Interestingly, the Catholic Monitor which has given some coverage to Archbishop Lenga's position that Francis is an antipope has begun noticing that the people of Turkmenistan are starting to read the online Monitor. Might Lenga's former territory of Turkmenistan be the first country to declare Francis an antipope in an imperfect council as St. Bernard of Clairvaux's imperfect council in France was the first to declared the supposed pope in Rome Anacletus an antipope? Is Lenga in schism as some may be stating for claiming Pope Benedict XVI's resignation was invalid thus Francis is an antipope? It must be remembered in history that St. Bernard claimed the supposed pope in Rome was an antipope as Lenga is doi

Are Siscoe & Hilary White wrong on Francis's "Universal Acceptance" according to Renowned Scholars De Silveira & Carroll?

Today, there was a disagreement between Latin language expert Br. Alexis Bugnolo and author Robert Siscoe on the validity of the Siscoe's presentation of the "principle of Universal Acceptance":         Slideshow Fred Martinez Hide To Fred Martinez Cc   Bcc   Slideshow   Alexis Bugnolo said... Let's use some logic. Universal acceptance is the effect of a legitimate election of a man to the papacy, not the cause of his being a legitimate pope. Therefore, if a man was elected in a conclave during the life time of a legitimate pope, who had not resigned according to the norm of law, he would be an illegitimate pope. Therefore, the principle of Universal Acceptance does not apply. Therefore, in all cases of legal doubt as to legitimacy for a man who claims to be pope, no appeal to universal acceptance can be made. But you make such an appeal. Therefore, please

Bp. Gracida demonstrated that Salza's statement on Francis's "Universal Acceptance" is False

On February 20 , John Salza claimed that Francis was "universally accepted" "In no case were any of these antipopes universally accepted by the entire episcopacy following their election, as in the case with Pope Francis." [ ] On March 23, 2019, Bishop Rene Gracida who would have to be part of such a "universal acceptance" demonstrated that Salza's statement is false: WHY DO INTELLIGENT MEN PURSUE THE APPLICATION OF AN OBSOLETE CONCEPT “UNIVERSAL ACCEPTANCE” TO THE PROBLEM OF THE INVALIDITY OF THE PAPACY OF FRANCIS THE MERCIFUL IN THIS DAY AND AGE OF INSTANT ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION AROUND THE WORLD I am in receipt of an email from Steve