The Catholic Monitor has some of the best readers and commenters. I learns so much from them and enjoyed this debate on "Bergoglio being an anti-pope... [and] pressur[ing] the Cardinals":
https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2022/04/francis-is-in-schism-from-all-valid.html

You're funny anonymous. The whole world is going to hell and the Church
(the magisterium) has done nothing to stop the decay these past 60+
years, most especially within the Church Herself.
As the Church goes, so does the world. It's not rocket science and Fred has said nothing that isn't true or difficult to see.
As the Church goes, so does the world. It's not rocket science and Fred has said nothing that isn't true or difficult to see.

It is doctrine that God hives enough grace to avoid sin, both mortal and
venial. Read it in Denzinger’s Sources of Dogma during Lent.

First anon:
Surely you understand the distinction between legal truth and ontological truth? Even canon law cannot contravene divine law? God has no need for anyone to declare something for it to be actually true.
Surely you understand the distinction between legal truth and ontological truth? Even canon law cannot contravene divine law? God has no need for anyone to declare something for it to be actually true.

@Debbie: You are funny too. Fred has good points, but what you fail to see is that Freddy, Ann Barnhardt, Patrick Coffin etc do not speak for the Catholic church, they have no authority at all in the church to declare anything such as Benedict is still Pope. Their personal opinions are just that opinions to share. You are all going to fall into sedevacantism once Benedict is gone. I don't like modernism in the church just like you don't, but there's only so much one can do that is not part of the hierarchy of the church.
The Church is a legal institution, the papacy is a legal office, jurisdiction is a legal power, heresy is a legal crime, and to lose a legal office requires a legal judgment by the requisite legal authority.
It's an over reaction to the crisis which has had the ironic effect of him leaving the Church which is how the devil has orchestrated the crisis.
The devil's key strategy is to lead souls out of the Roman Catholic Church and into the false church of tradition. There is no such thing as schism in this false church. Mission and ordinary jurisdiction are unnecessary. Even subjection to the Pope is unnecessary. It is a brilliant plan of Satan himself. These souls will be damned, or EENS is a meaningless dogma.

Correction to last post: "It's an over reaction to the crisis which has
had the ironic effect of him leaving the Church which is how the devil
has orchestrated the crisis."
I meant to say them instead of him, meaning Barnhardt and all the beneplenists.
I meant to say them instead of him, meaning Barnhardt and all the beneplenists.

It's never, ever wrong to point out the emperor has no clothes. I feel
sorry for those who are in "second" marriages and are receiving
sacrilegious Communions because they believe Francis is Pope....he
affirms them in their sins, just as Satan does. Beneplentism on the
other hand could help those who are receiving sacrilegious Communions
by forcing them to look at the arguments, see what the Church truly
teaches about such unions, admit their error and repent. Insisting
Francis is Pope (note, not being certain is NOT the same as insisting)
is straight up indifference and we all know what Our Lord thinks about
indifference.

Can no one think that 2+2=4 unless the math teacher says so? That is
analogous to the situation. Whether someone has the authority to morally
bind others to their ideas is irrelevant. I do understand when someone
asks Taylor Marshall if he thinks Francis is an antipope nobody is
asking for his legally authoritative judgement, because he has no
authority.
Is it schismatic to be open to what the teacher will say but still in the meanwhile think 2+2 looks a lot like 4, spiritually speaking?
Is it schismatic to be open to what the teacher will say but still in the meanwhile think 2+2 looks a lot like 4, spiritually speaking?

@Debbie you make fair points, but here's the issue...neither you nor Ann
Barnhardt, Freddy and the others can prove that he's not the Pope. His
conclave never had a legal challenge...so your argument falls apart
right there. I don't like him saying that Lutherans are apart of the
mystical body of Christ, I don't like him saying that good atheists go
to heaven, etc. Francis is most likely going to be declared an Anti-Pope
in 60-100 years if a traditional Pope is ever back on the Chair.
As Catholics, you and I (and the other Beneplenists) are not part of the formal hierarchy of the church. None of us have the authority to declare anything, so as part of the universal acceptance of Francis's conclave from the church you are then obligated as a Catholic to accept that he had a valid conclave that had been legal. He is to be accepted as the Pope then in that case because he's not been called out by any Cardinals to have a formal dubia against him. The dubia that the SSPX and others presented had been a very fair dubia, but it had no support from any Cardinals. Cardinal Burke has not once called for Francis to be declared a heretic, nor any of the so called traditional Cardinals out there.
Until that happens, you cannot declare Benedict to be the Pope, it is clear as day that his intention had been to resign the Papacy. In his Declaratio he says there's going to be sedevacante and a conclave is going to elect the next Pope. He cannot be the Pope anymore, as he isn't even naming Cardinals or doing anything from an administrative sort of function that a Pope has to do. He's retired and he did not even lead the consecration to Russia. Until Francis is declared by the church to be a heretic, your group/position has no leg to stand on.
As Catholics, you and I (and the other Beneplenists) are not part of the formal hierarchy of the church. None of us have the authority to declare anything, so as part of the universal acceptance of Francis's conclave from the church you are then obligated as a Catholic to accept that he had a valid conclave that had been legal. He is to be accepted as the Pope then in that case because he's not been called out by any Cardinals to have a formal dubia against him. The dubia that the SSPX and others presented had been a very fair dubia, but it had no support from any Cardinals. Cardinal Burke has not once called for Francis to be declared a heretic, nor any of the so called traditional Cardinals out there.
Until that happens, you cannot declare Benedict to be the Pope, it is clear as day that his intention had been to resign the Papacy. In his Declaratio he says there's going to be sedevacante and a conclave is going to elect the next Pope. He cannot be the Pope anymore, as he isn't even naming Cardinals or doing anything from an administrative sort of function that a Pope has to do. He's retired and he did not even lead the consecration to Russia. Until Francis is declared by the church to be a heretic, your group/position has no leg to stand on.

Anonymous "Francis is most likely going to be declared an Anti-Pope in
60-100 years if a traditional Pope is ever back on the Chair.'
Indeed. And so that means that right now, today in reality he is "most likely'an anti-pope.
Great! Then we agree. ☺️
The "formal hierarchy" (except Ab. Lefebvre) has done nothing to stop the rot (modernism) within the Church and Her institutions these past 60+ years and now we should sit on our hands and wait for the same said hierarchy to declare what is glaringly obvious? Obviously I, nor Ann nor Freddy can declare with any authority that Bergoglio is an anti-pope, but we certainly can voice our opinions....and then maybe, just maybe if enough people speak out the "conservative" cardinals will be emboldened to actually do something.
Indeed. And so that means that right now, today in reality he is "most likely'an anti-pope.
Great! Then we agree. ☺️
The "formal hierarchy" (except Ab. Lefebvre) has done nothing to stop the rot (modernism) within the Church and Her institutions these past 60+ years and now we should sit on our hands and wait for the same said hierarchy to declare what is glaringly obvious? Obviously I, nor Ann nor Freddy can declare with any authority that Bergoglio is an anti-pope, but we certainly can voice our opinions....and then maybe, just maybe if enough people speak out the "conservative" cardinals will be emboldened to actually do something.

@Debbie
I'm not a fan of modernism...but I don't say that Francis is a definite Anti-Pope or formal heretic because he has not been declared by the church as one yet. Francis only backpedals if he's pressured to in some cases.
I don't think that Benedict is Pope at all anymore, and I don't say it lightly. Could it be a better alternative? No, because he's not even governing the church in any capacity. So to me it makes no sense to support Benedict is Pope because it's not like he's returning into St.Peter's and sitting on the chair and declaring his return as Roman Pontiff. He's done. He's retired. Pressure the Cardinals to act, Bishops ,etc.
I'm not a fan of modernism...but I don't say that Francis is a definite Anti-Pope or formal heretic because he has not been declared by the church as one yet. Francis only backpedals if he's pressured to in some cases.
I don't think that Benedict is Pope at all anymore, and I don't say it lightly. Could it be a better alternative? No, because he's not even governing the church in any capacity. So to me it makes no sense to support Benedict is Pope because it's not like he's returning into St.Peter's and sitting on the chair and declaring his return as Roman Pontiff. He's done. He's retired. Pressure the Cardinals to act, Bishops ,etc.

"Pressure the Cardinals to act, Bishops ,etc."
Yes! Once again we agree!
So raising our voices that point to the invalid resignation, and therefore Bergoglio being an anti-pope, is doing exactly what you suggest.....pressure the Cardinals etc.
Yes! Once again we agree!
So raising our voices that point to the invalid resignation, and therefore Bergoglio being an anti-pope, is doing exactly what you suggest.....pressure the Cardinals etc.

And even if what you say is correct....that Benedict won't return and is
done....declaring his resignation invalid and he is still the pope (and
most importantly that Bergoglio is not nor ever was) would help with
the next conclave. If this isn't resolved before Benedict's and/or
Bergoglio's death, the next (fake) conclave could be even worse than the
(fake) 2013 one.
You sound like the sedevacantists, even use their arguments (that have been refuted by Mr. John Salza on trueorfalsepope.com).