Flashback: Catholic Monitor's Demands to the Remnant Editor Matt if he wants us to "Stand Together" with him
Could the Remnant editor Michael Matt's "Francis is definitely pope" bias, that Francis is pope because that's an infallible dogma of the Francis Creed, finally be starting to crack?
[Click here to read the Francis Creed: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/01/are-1p5-and-where-peter-is-going-to.html?m=1]
I know from someone who knows the inner workings of Matt's editorship of the Remnant because she has written for him that he "has not allowed phrases like 'questionably legal'" before in his newspaper or website that appeared in the article "APOSTASY AND OLD LACE: Do We Have an Uncle Benny Brewster in the Attic?":
- "... Nearly seven years after his resignation from the Papacy, (questionably legal, but certainly effective) the good bishop has found himself to be in fine fiddle, enough to coauthor a new book with Robert Cardinal Sarah on priestly celibacy."
In fact, Matt in his latest YouTube video "DONALD TRUMP: Vatican Public Enemy No. 1" appears to be claiming he and the other "Francis is definitely pope" traditionalists may be willing to call a ceasefire and stop their attacks, misrepresentations and blacklisting of the BiP[Benedict is Pope] movement and the Bishop Rene Gracida movement. He said:
"I may have it wrong. You may have it wrong. But what is important, right now, is that we do not dogmatize opinion on some of this... Don't panic. Stay close. Keep praying. Stay together. We can do that. We can all stand together. Do our part without anathematizing. Let's give it a try."
("DONALD TRUMP: Vatican Public Enemy No. 1": https://youtu.be/WBUHhQrct_M, 24:22-24:31 and 26:51-27:02])
Sadly, I am tempted to think Matt is using the "Good cop/bad cop" routine:
"The 'bad cop' takes an aggressive, negative stance towards the subject, making blatant accusations, derogatory comments, threats, and in general creating antipathy between the subject and themself. This sets the stage for the "good cop" to act sympathetically, appearing supportive and understanding, and in general showing sympathy for the subject. The good cop will also defend the subject from the bad cop. The subject may feel they can cooperate with the good cop either out of trust or out of fear of the bad cop. They may then seek protection by and trust the good cop and provide the information the interrogators are seeking. "
"This technique also has its disadvantages in that it can be easily identified and the 'bad cop' may alienate the subject." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_cop/bad_cop]
I want to trust that Mr. Matt is being sincere, but as "President Ronald Reagan on several occasions in the context of nuclear disarmament discussions with the Soviet Union" said "trust, but verify."
Unfortunately, too many of Matt's traditionalist collaborators and even he by playing the bad cop too many times have lost our trust with such things as misrepresenting, attacking and blacklisting members of the BiP movement and the Bishop Gracida movement.
Matt's long time collaborator, for example, Chris Ferrara used misrepresentation:
"Furthermore, the only time I have ever spoken face-to-face with Ann Barnhardt, at least that I can remember, was at Lake Garda, and the entire conversation involved my objection to her claim that the “data set” shows Bergoglio is not the Pope. We have no competence to assemble “data sets” and declare that the Chair of Peter is vacant."
He said that the Barnhardt position was "to declare the Chair of Peter is vacant." The BIP position is the exact opposite of "declar[ing] that the Chair of Peter is vacant."
Next, Matt has at no time condemned or at least distanced himself from the despicable and loathsome Alinsky tactics of One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec. Canon law expert Br. Alexis Bugnolo explains the tactic and gives an example of which there are numerous (which, also, include attacks on Bishop Gracida):
"Here is an example of that, in regard to Ann Barnhardt."