Skip to main content

Why the Skojec-Martinez Debate Happened? & Might Dr. Kwasniewski & other Francis Trads be in a "Culture of Fear" that makes them have to think it's an Infallible Dogma that Francis can't be an Antipope?

SteveShot1 - OnePeterFive

 Reflections of Pope John Paul II: Humanae Vitae Ep 5 Second Week Review -  YouTube

 

14K subscribers
A very old photo of Fred Martinez on the AFC Television Show

It appears that some people may think I've been unfriendly to Francis Traditionalists such as Steve Skojec (and Eric Sammons). Both of whom are in my prayers. I hope they pray for me. I don't know Sammons, but I knew Skojec through a friendly email correspondences.

That friendly exchange of emails ended in 2019 shortly after I wrote the post "How many Dr. Kwasniewskis does it take to Change a Light Bulb?":

How many Dr. Kwasniewskis does it take to change a light bulb?

Two: One to change the light bulb and one to change it back.

How many thought polices does it take to screw a light bulb?

None: There never was any light bulb.

In the serious side, please pray for Dr. Peter Kwasniewski. I consider him to be a man of great learning and courage especially for signing the Open Letter.

One can only imagine the culture of fear that surrounds him which caused him to change a short Amazon review at least three times on Antonio Socci's book which just presents evidence that Pope Francis may be a Antipope.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church and for Dr. Kwasniewski.
[https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/05/how-many-dr-kwasnieskis-does-it-take-to.html]

At the time I was working full-time and posting as best I could for The Catholic Monitor (which may happen again in 2022 because a source of income for the last two years has recently disappeared which allowed me to devote a full-time effort to my website, writing, study and research during that time). 

Anyway, after I posted the above piece, I soon received a series of emails from the then publisher of One Peter Five (1P5), Skojec, who was apparently unhappy with it. We got into a discussion on my website that is now called the Skojec-Martinez Debate.

In The Catholic Monitor comment section, during the debate, the former 1P5 publisher said "I invited you to publish the whole [email] correspondence we had TODAY. This is one of the most convoluted and excessively discursive things I've seen from you, Fred." [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/06/monitor-be-man-admit-that-your-theory.html] 

This invitation is brought up because I want to post the email conversation I had with him by his permission and to see if others find that he seemed to be a bit sensitive about my bringing up the seeming "culture of fear that surround[ed]" Dr. Kwasniewski.  

Here's the exchange:  

Steve Skojec (steve@onepeterfive.com): I'm not calling him a liar. I'm saying he recognized he wasn't sufficiently clear. He told me from the outset he wasn't 100% convinced, even though he thought Socci made a persuasive case. He realized after I asked him about it that he hadn't been as clear as he meant to be. But now everyone in Benevacantism land is accusing him of dishonesty driven by fear. Peter doesn't just work with me, he's a friend. I don't take kindly to these attacks on my friends. 

Universal Acceptance is a long-established understanding of the Church that enjoys a consensus of theologians. It's not "my theory". And it's certainly not a fraud. 

You mistake the fact that your arguments don't merit as much attention as you want them to have for fear. I have no fear of an investigation, I have no fear that your theory will ever be proven correct. You're on the wrong side of history, and I have faith that this will be proven in time. 

As for daring me, what are you, a child? How about instead of making dares, you find a way to write a succinct, point-by-point iteration of your thesis, along with documentary evidence. Make an attempt to prove your case in less than a thousand words. Use bullet points or numbers. Give your critics an opportunity to respond to something less meandering than post after post of conjecture, or two-hour long rants from Ann, etc. Can you actually make the case? If you did, I'd consider a refutation. I'm not going to do the work of tidying up a bunch of sloppy thinking to offer a rebuttal that you'll only dismiss out of pure confirmation bias. Let's deal in facts instead. 

Can any of you actually make an elevator pitch for your thesis that is compelling? I highly doubt it.
Steve Skojec
Publisher & Executive Director

Do you like 1P5? Want to support our work? Please consider making a tax-deductible contribution today!


On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 7:52 PM Fred Martinez wrote:

You are the one calling him a liar.

You need to be a man.

You need to come out about it and admit that your theory about "universal acceptance" is a fraud or counter what we have thrown in your face.

Be a man about it and don't run away hiding from everything Bishop Gracida and I presented to you. I dare you to do a piece countering us point by point on IP5.

PS- It appears you didn't get the sarcasm in the reply I send you on your email to me on Dr. Kwasniewski.

Sent from my MetroPCS 4G LTE Android device

On Jun 2, 2019 7:17 PM, Steve Skojec <steve@onepeterfive.com> wrote:
You should just come right out and call him a liar. At least be a man about it.

Steve Skojec
Publisher & Executive Director
OnePeterFive.com

On Sun, Jun 2, 2019, 5:33 PM Fred Martinez wrote:

Steve,

I agree. Dr. Kwasniewskis expressed himself very clearly in his revision from "who have proved in detail" to "who argue" and from "persuaded me otherwise" to "gave me much to think about."

Best,

Fred

Sent from my MetroPCS 4G LTE Android device

On Jun 1, 2019 7:03 AM, Steve Skojec <steve@onepeterfive.com> wrote:

 

Culture of fear, eh? 

Has it occurred to you, Fred, that perhaps Dr. Kwasniewski is simply concerned about expressing his mind clearly? As someone who publishes him on a regular basis, I can tell you he makes iterative revisions to many of his pieces, sometimes even after they're published. He's a very particular thinker, and wants to get things right. 

On a topic this important, I think that's an admirable trait.

Steve Skojec
Publisher & Executive Director


I could be wrong, but this exchange still makes me think that it is possible that Dr. Kwasniewski and other Francis Traditionalists may be in a "culture of fear" that makes them have to think it's an infallible dogma that Francis can't be an antipope.

One more thing, I want to say in some ways I admire Steve Skojec because unlike most of the other Francis Trads he was willing to argue about his ideas whereas almost all the rest run away to their high Catholic media towers without giving a fight. I also thought he came up with some funny lines such as calling me a "rambler" at one point because of my sometimes "excessively discursive" posts. I loved it. At the time, I remember singing my new theme song "Rambling Fred" to the tune of the 1960s hit song "Rambling Rose."

Lastly, Skojec forced me to put my argument in an "elevator pitch" when he said "Can any of you actually make an elevator pitch for your thesis that is compelling?" I'll end with my "elevator pitch" to him:

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 .
[5 Dubia Questions for 1P5's Steve Skojec - The Catholic Monitor]

Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis's Amoris Laetitia.

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.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants 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."
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

- "If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

- "Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

- If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the"Roman Rite Communities" like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & "Eminent Canonists and Theologians" by "Resist[ing]" him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html 

 -  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" [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

- 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": http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html

- Tucker Carlson's Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written" according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1
 
- A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1
 
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?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: "Anitfa 'Agent Provocateurs'":
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1

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.

 

Comments

Debbie said…
After watching a few short clips of that sickening porn stage show at St. Sabina's in Chicago on Christmas Eve....there is absolutely no way Bergoglio is or ever was Pope. If, IF he wanted us to believe he was the true pope he would have done something or at least said something against it and Cardinal Cupich. Someone should have beat the snot out of that priest right then and there.
samuelj said…
didn't Benedict say Francis is pope?
Fred Martinez said…


Is the Journalist who did the Benedict XVI Interview a Leftist British Operative?
March 04, 2021

One Peter Five's Steve Skojec said "It’s a new interview from an old pope who had promised silence, but has offered anything but. In a new conversation with Corriere Della Serra‘s Massimo Franco, we get yet another glimpse into the mind and life of Joseph Ratzinger [Pope Benedict XVI]." [https://onepeterfive.com/in-a-new-interview-former-pope-benedict-reiterates-that-there-is-only-one-pope/?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork]

The "glimpse into the mind... Joseph Ratzinger" by a "journalist" who may be a leftist British operative brings the world an all new person compared to the formerly pro-life Catholic Benedict who suddenly has changed his anti-abortion mind as he is closing in on death and now thinks killing unborn babies isn't a big deal. The new Ratzinger strangely sounds very much like a clone of Francis and all his inner circle. [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/03/if-benedict-really-supports-pro-abort.html]

Most people seem to have forgotten that we went through a similar "interview' scenario in 2019 with the Italian "journalist" Franco in 2019.

In 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 who is ambiguous.

LifeSiteNews stated the Franco quotations of Benedict were at best ambiguous:

"It is unclear from this introductory article if these particular quotations were from the reporter or Benedict XVI himself."
(LifeSiteNews, "Benedict XVI asserts Francis is pope in new interview," June 29, 2019)

According to Wikipedia in 2019, Franco "is [a] member of the [British establishment] International Institute for Strategic Studies" which according to "Transparify... gave it it's lowest rating [for a think tank], 'deceptive' on funding transparency."

Wikipedia, also, said Franco "was a Vatican commentator at The [leftist pro-UK British] Guardian" until "2011." Moreover, Wikipedia said according to "Journalist Glenn Greenwald [The Guardian wrote fake news about]... Julian Assange... 'This article is about how those [Guardian's] false claims -fabrications, really - causing... thousands... (if not millions) to consume false news.'"

Journalist Antonio Socci says "Britain... [had] a strong political interest... to have Jorge Mario Bergoglio elected pope."
(The Secret of Benedict XVI, page 47-48)
[https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/06/is-journalist-of-benedict-xvi-pope-is.html]

You have to admit that "journalist' Franco did a better job in his recent "interview" because this time he didn't forget to be unambiguous in his quotations in his second Benedict "interview."
Anonymous said…
I think Bergoglio is not the pope.

I think Bergoglio was the pope for the first few years after his election in 2013.

But since then he has been a pertinacious heretic and so has lost the chair.

Bergoglio is not the pope now. He is an evil homo activist.

This is my analysis.

Popular posts from this blog

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

Does Francis's "Right-hand Man" Parra have a "Sexual Predation against Seminarians, Adultery, and even a Deadly Sex Game...[that] 'might even be a Scandal Surpassing that of McCarrick'"?

  Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra with Francis Today, the Call Me Jorge website asked "What could be so important that Francis interrupted his weekly adulation [Audience] session?": Pope gets a phone call during the Audience. Haven’t seen this before. Then he quickly leaves and says he will be back. pic.twitter.com/npCuPzdnxP — The Catholic Traveler (@MountainButorac) August 11, 2021 It was Abp. Mons. Edgar Robinson Peña Parra, Substitute for the Secretariat of State, who was involved in the recent scandal of mismanagement during the acquisition of a € 300 million building in London. Still no word on what the phone call was about . [http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2021/08/what-could-be-so-important-that-francis.html] Who is Archbishop Edgar Robinson Peña Parra ? Parra according to the Catholic Herald is Francis's "right-hand man"[https://catholicherald.co.uk/roman-curia-the-popes-new-right-hand-man/] In 2019, Life Site News reported that Parra alleged

Might it be Good for all of us & for Francis to Read about the "Gruesome Death of Arius"?

  I have read the letters of your piety , in which you have requested me to make known to you the events of my times relating to myself, and to give an account of that most impious heresy of the Arians , in consequence of which I have endured these sufferings, and also of the manner of the death of Arius . With two out of your three demands I have readily undertaken to comply, and have sent to your Godliness what I wrote to the Monks; from which you will be able to learn my own history as well as that of the heresy . But with respect to the other matter, I mean the death, I debated with myself for a long time, fearing lest any one should suppose that I was exulting in the death of that man. But yet, since a disputation which has taken place among you concerning the heresy , has issued in this question, whether Arius died after previously communicating with the Church ; I therefore was necessarily desirous of giving an account of his death, as thinking that the question woul