“In fact, they argue that to deny that Francis is the true Pope is a sin against the Faith.”

In fact, they argue that if you believe that the pope is a different man than the man they believe is pope, then you are in SCHISM. I rather think it is a species of the leftist tactic wherein everyone who disagrees with me is literally Hitler.

I post here a condensed version of a letter, from an anonymous priest, to Bishop Gracida:

Original HERE

Dear Bishop,

I wish to comment on your Open Letter to the Cardinals of the Church :

The above Open Letter is absolutely brilliant!  …

Most people have a very strong position that Francis is Pope due to the fact that an Infallible Dogmatic Fact arises when a Cardinal is validly elected as a Successor of Peter. The book by John Salza and Robert Siscoe, True or False Pope?, has been hailed as a powerful source for that position, given their treatment on Universal and Peaceful Acceptance of a Pope. However, I have challenged that position precisely because there is apostasy within the Church…

I have argued with Mr. Siscoe, advancing quotes in support of my position from the renowned theologian Canonist Canon Herve, that given the Apostasy WITHIN the Church today, (which was foretold by Our Lady at Fatima and indeed is part of the Third Secret of Fatima per Cardinal Ciappi, Papal Theologian to Pope John Paul II, when he said that “The apostasy in the Church begins at the top”), there CAN BE NO TRUE UNANIMITY, I.E., UNIVERSAL ACCEPTANCE…

Furthermore, St. Pius X states in his Encyclical on Modernism:  “And now with Our eyes fixed upon the whole system, no one will be surprised that We should define it to the synthesis of all heresies.  Undoubtedly, were anyone to attempt the task of collecting together all the errors that have been broached against the faith and to concentrate into one the sap and substance of them all, he could not succeed in doing so better than the Modernists have done.  Nay, they have gone further than this, for, as We have already intimated, their system means the DESTRUCTION NOT OF THE CATHOLIC RELIGION ALONE, BUT OF ALL RELIGION.”

Since that Encyclical how many modernists have entered the Church, are today running the Church and are bereft of “ALL RELIGION”?  I don’t know how Mr. Siscoe and Mr. Salza can argue that there is truly a “Consensus fidelium” and thus that we have the assurance that Francis is the true Pope.  In fact, they argue that to deny that Francis is the true Pope is a sin against the Faith.  And this is why I personally believe that Benedict, whose renunciation actually indicates that he intended to maintain the Petrine Office, is the true Pope and remains the true Pope until he dies. (edit: or until he VALIDLY resigns)

– A Catholic Priest

July 20, 2019

And then there is the combox:

10 thoughts on ““In fact, they argue that to deny that Francis is the true Pope is a sin against the Faith.”

  1. St. Thomas Cajetan, O.P. (1469-1534)
    Theologian and Cardinal

    He points out that the famous axiom “Ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia” (Where the Pope is, there is alsothe Church) holds true only when the Pope acts and behaves as the Pope,because Peter “is subject to the duties of the Office” otherwise,”neither is the Church in him, nor is he in the Church.”

      1. Mark—St. Vincent followed the Antipope Benedict XIII (Pedro Cardinal de Luna) for a time—as the pope Urban VI was like Bergoglio a psychopath, and whose election was questionable—but came ‘round to defend the true pope when Cardinal de Luna’s intransigence would not be constrained. Particularly Benedict had agreed to stand down and recognize the result of the Council of Constance. He reneged however. Thus losing him his countryman Vincent’s support.

        Unlike Bergoglio, and like almost all other Antipopes, at least Benedict XIII was Catholic.

  2. In order for any of us Catholics to recognize the apostate Bergoglio as Pope, first of all he would have to be a Catholic. Bergoglio could never become Pope because from Argentina Bergoglio no longer professed the Catholic faith and for this fact he was disqualified because he was already an apostate. And the Magisterium of the Church teaches that the elevation to the papacy of a heretic, a woman or a child is invalid and void. https://gloria.tv/video/KzqopZSWk4Jj1kbhJEWUipz8F

    1. Since the emergence of the AntiChurch is now an undeniable reality, those who defend Berg as pope will have to answer the question of who is the earthly head of the AntiChurch.

      And when they have answered that question honestly for themselves, then they will be prepared to look again at Benedict’s continues presence, and finally understand.

  3. To have a Consensus fidelium you need to have a fidelium, and they need to consensus. Given the state of most of the “believers” in the Church these days, I’d say there are but a mere handful of “fidelium” left, and they hardly “consensus” that Bergoglio is Pope.

Comments are closed.