Skip to main content

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

Justina said…
Once again, Bishop Schneider peddles his self-serving tautology: we must all recognize Bergoglio as Pope because Bergoglio is the Pope. How do we know Bergoglio is the Pope? Because (the more His Excellency elaborates on this, the clearer his own convictions become) there is no such thing as right or wrong. "To heal in the root" doesn't mean, for Bishop Schneider, what the Church has always meant; it now means to repeal the law of non-contradiction. Bishop Schneider invokes cases in Church history when rival claims to the papacy were resolved this way, without noting that either claimant could have been Pope. An apostate cannot. You cannot hold that Bergoglio's occupancy of the Chair of Peter can be "healed in the root" any more than you could hold this about a "marriage" between two men or two women.

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.
3:08 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...
6 comments
Read more

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...
Post a Comment
Read more

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...
3 comments
Read more