5 Dubia Questions for 1P5 Bp. Schneider, 9 Rebuttals to Trad Inc Arguments & The Where One Peter Five Is Francis Creed
There are rumors that Francis traditionalist Eric Sammons' One Peter Five (1P5) and Francis liberal Mike Lewis' Where Peter Is are going to merge and become:
Where One Peter Five Is
In 2020, these rumors began when One Peter Five's Sammons and Lewis joined hands in their common communion in their Francis is definitely pope maligning campaign against Frank Walker's Canon 212 which is calling for a cardinal and bishop investigation into the validity or invalidity of Francis's pontificate due to irregularities in his conclave and the apparent canonical irregularities in the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI:
|Mike Lewis||22hWhere One Peter Five Is.|
I have no idea what it means, but it has to be in the top 5 most wild C212 headlines of all time.
I’ve been living rent-free in Frank’s head for months now, which is why I blocked him a while back.
I've been there for a while myself, there's a new and exciting headline from him 3-4 times a week. Apparently I am a pawn of the UN and George Soros or something.
Moreover, it is rumored that One Peter Five's Sammons will join hands with Where Peter Is' Lewis and recite their common Francis Creed when the new Where One Peter Five Is finally emerges:
The Where One Peter Five Is Francis Creed
"I believe in Francis and that it is infallible dogma that he is pope no matter what evidence shows that he violated the Pope John Paul II constitution that governed the validity or invalidity of the 2013 conclave. He suffered under Bishop Rene Gracida who classified the evidence that the constitution was violated and called the cardinals to investigate. He descended into the Vatican gay lobby. He ascended to the papal throne where he sits surrounded by the gay lobby cardinals from where he shall judge the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Ten Commandments and all the infallible Catholic teachings."
"I believe in Amoris Laetitia, the Communion of adulterers, Francis's representation of globalist teachings which embodies the Soros gospel of unlimited mass immigration, climate change, a one-world government and the goddess Mother Earth everlasting."
I wrote this ecumenical creed with the hope that it will help all the Francis traditionalists and the Francis liberals to unite in their common communion with Francis.
After all, isn't it true that the leftist Lewis Catholics have joined hands with their Francis traditionalist brothers in using the Sammons talking points of "schismatic" and "sedevacantist" against all Catholics who present evidence that the 2013 conclave Pope John Paul constitution was violated including Bishop Gracida and even Cardinal Raymond Burke for daring to imply that the Francis conclave could be invalid and that Francis's Communion for adulterers could be heretical.
While it is well known that Sammons and all the Francis traditionalists feel uncomfortable with the Soros gospel part of the Francis Creed, they must endure this temporary discomfort.
They must remember that they do agree with the Francis liberals in the part of the creed that says it is a infallible dogma that Francis is a valid pope no matter what the evidence shows and moreover they must stay in communion with him even when by his "authentic Magisterium" authority he teaches Communion for adulterers without committing obstinate heresy.
They must never forget that they are in union with the Francis liberals in believing that he cannot be corrected nor can he as Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales proclaimed be "deprived... of his Apostlic See" for being "explicitly a heretic":
"The Pope... when he is explicitly a heretic... the Church must either deprive him or as some say declare him deprived of his Apostlic See." - The Catholic Monitor [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2023/03/might-francis-catholics-be-dissident.html]
The Catholic Monitor asks all Catholics to confront these men on social media, in email and in person. Also share these questions with all who claim to find their arguments to be convincing.
The five questions are:
To make it really easy for Bishop Schneider and the publisher of One Peter Five it has been formatted so that they only have 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
The Catholic Monitor's rebuttal of their arguments are in these and many other articles:
- Why did Taylor Marshall Chicken Out in Questioning Bp. Schneider on the Bellarmine teaching on Heretical Popes Ceasing to be Pope?
- Is Bp. Schneider a “Flying Monkey” or another Type of Enabler?
- Why is Bp. Schneider spreading the Doubtful Propaganda of a possible Leftist British Operative?
- Schneider’s Opinion has next to Zero Merit when standing next to the Teaching of Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales
- Is Bishop Schneider a Pelagianist?
- 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.”
- Doubtful Schneider vs. St. Bellarmine & Bp. Gracida: “A Doubtful Pope is no Pope”
- Bp. Schneider vs. Pope Innocent III, Trent & the Ancient Fathers
9. Why doesn't Taylor Marshall know about Antipope Anacletus II & his Pseudocardinals? Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia.