"Sedevacantist" - Is the Remnant's Matt using the Marxist tactic of "strategically changing the meanings of words" against Viganò & St. Bernard?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider maintains that any irregularities that may have occurred in the 2013 Conclave have in any case been healed in radice by the fact that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has been recognized as pope by the Cardinal Electors, by the Episcopate, and by the majority of the faithful. Practically speaking. The argument is that, regardless of the events that may have led to the election of a pope – with or without external meddling in it – the Church, practically speaking, places a time limit beyond which it is not possible to challenge an election if the person elected is accepted by the Christian people. But this thesis is called into question by historical precedent.
In 1378, after the election of Pope Urban VI, the majority of Cardinals, Prelates and the people recognized Clement VII as pope, even though he was in reality an antipope. Thirteen out of sixteen cardinals questioned the validity of the election of Pope Urban due to the threat of violence from the Roman people against the Sacred College, and even Urban’s few supporters immediately retracted their election, summoning a new Conclave at Fondi which elected the antipope Clement VII. Even Saint Vincent Ferrer was convinced that Clement was the real pope, while Saint Catherine of Siena sided with Urban. If universal consensus were an indefectibly valid argument for a pope’s legitimacy, Clement would have had the right to be considered the true pope, rather than Urban. Antipope Clement was defeated by Urban VI’s army in the battle of Marino in 1379 and transferred his See to Avignon, leading to the Western Schism, which lasted thirty-nine years. Thus we see that the universal acceptance argument does not withstand the test of history. - Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò [https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/archbishop-vigano-catholics-must-seriously-consider-the-possibility-that-francis-isnt-the-pope/?utm_source=featured_news&utm_campaign=usa]
Michael J. Matt
Over the past two years, tens of millions of Americans have awakened to the fact that the “Dialectical Left,” which includes Communism, achieves its agendas most effectively by strategically changing the meanings of words. This is a tactic that is very effective until it is recognized, at which point it rapidly becomes counterproductive because it is so obviously manipulative and so easily resisted by demanding clear definitions. [https://newdiscourses.com/2022/09/three-terms-communists-redefined-to-subvert-society]
"I thought it was getting into Sedevancantism." - Michael Matt [Censoring Viganò? Michael Matt responds, https://twitter.com/Michael_J_Matt/status/1708926355528699925]
The Remnant editor Michael Matt appears to not be allowing free debate and argument on the validity of the papacy of Francis and says his reason for this is the "Sedevacantism" in the video of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.
Does it look like Matt is possibly following Eric Sammons in using the “Dialectical Left” Marxist tactic of "strategically changing the meanings of words" in a way that is just a "silly error" which is an unintentional "blatant lie"?Author Msgr. Leon Cristiani wrote:
"King Louis convoked a Council at Etampes, to consider the question of the double pontifical election... Bernard was received at Etampes as God's envoy."
(St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Pages 70-71)