Why do Bp. Schneider & Trad Inc. think Francis is infallibly the "pope despite legitimate concerns with whether or not he professes the Catholic faith"?: LifeSite - "[A]rgue that Francis is the pope despite legitimate concerns with whether or not he professes the Catholic faith..Schneider"
Is Francis really the pope? — The debate...
... Francis is the pope
The following articles and videos argue that Francis is the pope despite legitimate concerns with whether or not he professes the Catholic faith.
EXCLUSIVE: Bishop Schneider explains why he believes Francis must be the pope
Bishop Schneider responds to Archbishop Viganò on papal legitimacy
Bishop Schneider’s handbook for correcting errors in life of Church today
Bishop Schneider: Catholics are not called to blind obedience to the Pope
Bishop Schneider releases essay ‘on the question of the true Pope’
Bishop Schneider: Nobody has the power to judge Francis’ status as pope
Vatican II should be clarified, not rejected: Bishop Schneider
Archbishop Viganò, Pope Francis and ‘peaceful and universal acceptance’
Archbishop Viganò discusses the question of Pope Francis – a critique
Bishop Strickland: ‘I am not and have never been a sedevacantist’
The invalid resignation of Benedict XVI means Francis is not pope
The following articles argue that Francis is not pope because Benedict XVI’s resignation was either wholly, or at least partially, invalid, and thus Francis was unable to be elected pope.
What Benedict meant by ‘Pope Emeritus’: a response to Mr. O’Reilly
Doctor Edmund Mazza: Here’s why I believe the Bergoglian pontificate is invalid
Patrick Coffin: Pope Benedict left us clues that he did not validly resign
Archbishop Viganò: Bergoglio is an ‘anti-Pope,’ Benedict’s resignation was ‘certainly invalid’
Abp. Viganò: The Church needs an ‘official investigation’ of Benedict’s resignation
Italian priest could be excommunicated after claiming Francis is not the pope
Comments
As for those seeking to set the whole problem aside with the "we get the leaders we deserve" capitulation, that doesn't demonstrate that any man is or isn't a valid papal claimant. We could be chastised by divine providence by a Pope or by an antipope. All it proves is that is that everyone who sees Bergoglio as legitimately dressed in white does so because they have succumbed to the essential error of Amoris laetitia Chapter 8; namely, that there is no such thing as truth or falsehood, Revelation or its diabolical inversion; only practicalities, which are supposedly good enough for God. The Kasperites argue that people in invalid "second" marriages must be seen as spouses because to deal with reality would be too difficult for all involved. Once we start questioning whether people who appear to be married actually are married, we would be attacking and undermining the Sacrament of Matrimony itself, which is a visible institution. Who are we to say Christ was wrong, by questioning whether certain unions are valid or not? Bishop Schneider's "surer way" is merely the "logic" of Footnote 351 applied to its author instead.
And as for the supposedly super devout people confusing the "submission" required of a Catholic with the conception of that term in other religious contexts, maybe divine providence is allowing all this precisely in order to give us an opportunity to straighten our spines, sort through all the pro-Bergoglian whining, and stop deserving to be chastised by instead standing for the truth about who Bergoglio is (and isn't), contra mundum.