The Skojec-Martinez "No Mas" Debate on Francis's "Universal Acceptance & Does "the Opus Dei Archives Man" 1P5 Sammons think that "Tagle, or Zuppi, or Maradiaga" will be a "Next Great Pope"?
Canon 212 reported that One Peter Five publisher Eric Sammons, the Opus Dei Archives man, apparently may have said to Steve Bannon that the next "John XXIV" who will probably be "Tagle, or Zuppi, or Maradiaga" could possibly be "that next great pope":
On December 15, in the Tosatti website, in the post "La Sede Impedita, Benedetto XVI, Bertone e Gänswein. Le Dimissioni" (which was translated by From Rome), he seemed to be a bit hard on the Francis Trads like Sammons calling him and them "traditionalist-sedevacantists" because I assume they make a lot of noise, but don't act to solve the problems in the Church (See: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/bishop-gracida-one-can-say-that-mass.html):
Now, the fact is that if we go to the next conclave with 80 non-cardinals appointed by the antipope, another antipope will be elected. Thus, if we continue to pay attention, on the one hand, to the mainstream that has sold out in block to Bergoglianism, and, on the other hand, to the traditionalist-sedevacantists who do not want to understand nor even discuss the investigation of Plan B and legitimize Bergoglio with canonical follies and, in addition, throw mud on the hated Ratzinger, then before resolving the matter we will have to endure another round of jousting with an antipope Tagle, or Zuppi, or Maradiaga, who will have the name John XXIV...
... The upper levels of the clergy, even if they have understood this, have been totally immobilized due to the possible retaliation of the antipope. The only ones who are able to do anything are journalists, but 98% of these are completely sold out to Bergoglianism, and the remaining 2% is held hostage by the anti-Ratzingerian traditionalists, and both categories together prevent there being any debate on this matter. [https://www.fromrome.info/2021/12/16/tosatti-airs-cioncis-impeded-see/]
Moreover, it seems that the present publisher of the One Peter Five website, Sammons, and the former 1P5 publisher, Steve Skojec, have a lot in common. Both are obsessed with the notion of the "universal acceptance" of Francis as a means of legitimatizing him:
The publisher of The Catholic Monitor, Fred Martinez, would be happy to debate Sammons on "universal acceptance" as he debated Skojec in 2019 in the comment section and the CM post "https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/06/monitor-be-man-admit-that-your-theory.html" and then he also had a last round post with Skojec which was called "5 Dubia Questions for 1P5's Steve Skojec" (https://www.thefredmartinezreport.com/2021/12/5-dubia-questions-for-1p5s-steve-skojec.html) in which the former 1P5 publisher ended the debate by running away in a "No Mas" Roberto Duran-like moment:
Here are five really short and easy to answer dubia questions which
hopefully aren't too complicated for Steve Skojec, publisher of the One
Peter Five website, to answer.
To make it really easy for the publisher of One Peter Five it has been formatted so that he only has to answer: yes or no.
1. Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales said "The Pope... when he is explicitly a heretic... the Church must either deprive him or as some say declare him deprived of his Apostolic See." Was St. Francis de Sales a Sedevacantist or a Benevacantist? Answer: yes or no.
2. "Universal Acceptance" theologian John of St. Thomas said "This man in particular lawfully elected and accepted by the Church is the supreme pontiff." Was John of St. Thomas for saying "the supreme pontiff" must be BOTH "lawfully elected and accepted by the Church" a Sedevacantist or a Benevacantist? Answer: yes or no.
3. Do you think that a "supreme pontiff" if "universally accepted" is still Pope if, to quote papal validity expert Arnaldo Xavier de Silveira on "dubious election[s]", that he is "a woman... a child... a demented person... a heretic... a apostate... [which] would [thus] be invalid[ed] by divine law"? Answer: yes or no.
4. Renowned Catholic historian Warren Carroll agreed with Bishop René Gracida on the determining factor for discerning a valid conclave for a valid papal election besides divine law. Carroll pronounced:
"But each Pope, having unlimited sovereign power as head of the Church, can prescribe any method for the election of his successor(s) that he chooses... A papal claimant not following these methods is also an Antipope."
Are renowned historian Carroll and Bishop Gracida for saying this Sedevacantists or Benevacantists? Answer: yes or no.
5. Is Bishop Gracida really only a pawn of the legendary and notorious "Sedevacantist and Benevacantist" mastermind Ann Barnhardt for convincingly demonstrating 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? Answer: yes or no.
Please feel free to answer these dubia questions in any manner you decide, Mr. Skojec, except for the following ways:
1. Do not answer the dubia questions by posting a comment in the Catholic Monitor comment section because you are banned until you allow a free forum for debate on these dubia questions on the One Peter Five comment section.
If you attempt to post on the Catholic Monitor comment section before you allow a free forum at your website your post will be deleted.
2. Do not answer the dubia questions by emailing the publisher of the Catholic Monitor until you allow a free forum for debate on these dubia questions on the One Peter Five comment section.
If you attempt to email me before allowing a free forum at your website your email will be deleted and unread. [https://www.thefredmartinezreport.com/2021/12/5-dubia-questions-for-1p5s-steve-skojec.html]
Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis's Amoris Laetitia.