The Time Has Come
In one of the last conversations I had with Fr. Carota about this blog, I asked him, specifically, what do you want me to publish? He was too weak at that time to give me much of an answer (and it was rather unfair of me to ask that question at that time) but he did say “stay away from polemics.”
Looking back now, I do find that somewhat ironic because he was very good at doing that exact thing. Over the last two years in which I have been posting, I have tried to avoid doing just that. In general, you are always safe just sticking to what the Saints and Doctors of the church have said. This is the reason, I seldom will post anything “original” as there are very few things that need to be said that haven’t already been said and answered by our Holy Mother The Church.
With that caveat, the time has come that I do put up a post that is rather disquieting for me to do. The readership of this blog hasn’t slackened since Father passed. Through the analytics I am able to see what people are searching for an how they find these site and I am constantly amazed at the desire for people to still know the truth. That was one of the driving factors of Father Carota. He desired to lead souls to God and he tried to do just that through explaining the truth of our faith in this blog. He was quick to point out things that were contrary to God and didn’t shy away from posting them on this blog. The most notable one that quickly comes to my mind is his post of: Pope Francis Is Not Saving Souls, But Losing Them.
It seems his entire life was one of stepping on toes and he seemed to be comfortable doing that if he knew what he was saying was Truth. I don’t believe he would classify what he wrote as Polemics, but they were, most definitely, “hard hitting” and holding nothing back.
It is within this vein, I think the time has come to post something that could be considered Polemic, but in reality, it is not. The goal of this blog, as Father Carota envisioned, was to help save souls and This continues to be the primary objective.
With that in mind (the good of souls), I think the point has come to publicly comment on Jorge Bergoglio the man that most refer to as Pope Francis. I do not intend to get into a lengthy discourse concerning him, but to publicly put on record and state my opinion on this matter as I think the time has long since passed and I can no longer be silent on the matter.
In my estimation, for what it is worth, Jorge Bergoglio is an Anti-Pope and Pope Benedict is still the reigning pontiff. This is a position I have held for at least the last year but wanted to wait for a time to make it publicly. As time has passed, I have become even more convinced of this.
One of the main line of arguments that is used against those who believe Jorge Bergogio is an Anti-Pope are character attacks against the blogger or person who states the facts. I have yet to read a clear – concise – rebuttal of any of the bloggers who have raised this. In fact, it has been quite the opposite which is the usual for Modernists.
I am not going to outline, all of my reasons for my belief, but I will link to others that have done so you can read it for yourself.
I will provide you with four resources that you can view to see the rationale behind this belief.
The first I will point you to is an extremely long post on the RadTrad Thomist site by Fr. Kramer. You can read that one here. He goes into great length to show the invalid nature of the resignation of Pope Benedict (with excerpts from his actually address) but also the manifest heresy that come forth from the mouth of Jorge Bergoglio on a seemingly daily basis.
The next one is a shorter post, but the blog also points to the year long battle that it took to come to this conclusion and you can read that one here.
Louie Verrechio at the AKACatholic.com blog has also come out publicly in support of this position. You read his post here.
And finally, I would like to point out Ann Barnhardt. She was one of the original bloggers (if not the only one initially) to publicly put this forth and she has several blog posts that are worth reading.
- Vocem Alienorum: The Voice of Antipope Francis Bergoglio Is the Voice of A Stranger
- Cutting the Crap: 32 Questions and Blunt Answers About The Catholic Church and Antipope Bergoglio
- More Sound Reasoning on the Antipope Situation: Coercion and Lies
The above bloggers have put together enough on the topic for you to come to a conclusion. There are many more that I could site but they all use the same basic arguments. I couldn’t say anything else other than what they have already written, so it seems pointless to outline it all over again on this blog.
It still seems surreal to me to have to even make a post like the above. However, these are the times in which we live. Our Lord said you will know them by their fruit and I can tell you, the fruit is rotten and putrid.
Reading prophecy which has been approved of by our Holy Mother The Church, one gets the impression, that we are living in the times most of them were speaking about. The outlook, for the long term, is wonderful as we know that Mary’s Immaculate Heart will triumph and she shall crush the head of Satan. The outlook for the short term is nothing but the pathway to Golgotha. The mystical bride of Christ is heading to her crucifixion. Luke 18:18 “…But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?”
I will leave you with a few quotes which seem appropriate.
Saint Vicent Of Lerins once said:
“If one yields ground on any single point of Catholic doctrine, one will later have to yield later in another, and again in another, and so on until such surrenders come to be something normal and acceptable. And when one gets used to rejecting dogma bit by bit, the final result will be the repudiation of it altogether.”
And
“All novelty in faith is a sure mark of heresy.”
And
“True piety admits no other rule than that whatsoever things have been faithfully received from our fathers the same are to be faithfully consigned to our children; and that it is our duty, not to lead religion whither we would, but rather to follow religion whither it leads; and that it is the part of Christian modesty and gravity not to hand down our own beliefs or observances to those who come after us, but to preserve and keep what we have received from those who went before us.”
And
“I cannot sufficiently be astonished that such is the insanity of some men, such the impiety of their blinded understanding, such, finally, their lust after error, that they will not be content with the rule of faith delivered once and for all from antiquity, but must daily seek after something new, and even newer still, and are always longing to add something to religion, or to change it, or to subtract from it!”
And Finally…
“What, then, shall a Catholic Christian do … if some novel contagion attempt to infect no longer a small part of the Church alone but the whole Church alike? He shall then see to it that he cleave unto antiquity, which is now utterly incapable of being seduced by any craft or novelty.”
Antipope, in the Roman Catholic church, one who opposes the legitimately elected bishop of Rome, endeavours to secure the papal throne, and to some degree succeeds materially in the attempt. This abstract definition is necessarily broad and does not reckon with the complexity of individual cases. The elections of several antipopes are greatly obscured by incomplete or biased records, and at times even their contemporaries could not decide who was the true pope. It is impossible, therefore, to establish an absolutely definitive list of antipopes, but it is generally conceded that there were at least 37 from 217 to 1439. Felix V (1439–49) was the last. Historically, antipopes have arisen as a result of a variety of causes; the following are some examples from among the 37 antipopes.
| Hippolytus | (217/218–235) |
| Novatian | (251) |
| Felix (II) | (355–365) |
| Ursinus | (366–367) |
| Eulalius | (418–419) |
| Laurentius | (498, 501–c. 505/507) |
| Dioscorus | (530) |
| Theodore | (687) |
| Paschal | (687) |
| Constantine (II) | (767–768) |
| Philip | (768) |
| John | (844) |
| Anastasius | (855) |
| Christopher | (903–904) |
| Boniface VII | (974, 984–985) |
| John XVI (or XVII) | (997–998) |
| Gregory (VI) | (1012) |
| Benedict X | (1058–59) |
| Honorius (II) | (1061–64) |
| Clement (III) | (1080–1100) |
| Theodoric | (1100–01) |
| Albert (or Aleric) | (1101) |
| Sylvester (IV) | (1105–11) |
| Gregory (VIII) | (1118–21) |
| Celestine (II) | (1124) |
| Anacletus (II) | (1130–38) |
| Victor (IV) | (1138) |
| Victor (IV) | (1159–64) |
| Paschal (III) | (1164–68) |
| Calixtus (III) | (1168–78) |
| Innocent (III) | (1179–80) |
| Nicholas (V) | (1328–30) |
| Clement (VII) | (1378–94) |
| Benedict (XIII) | (1394–1417) |
| Alexander (V) | (1409–10) |
| John (XXIII) | (1410–15) |
| Clement (VIII) | (1423–29) |
| Felix (V) | (1439–49) |
1. Doctrinal disagreement. The spread of Monarchianism (a Trinitarian heresy) led a Roman priest, Hippolytus, to try to replace Pope Calixtus I in the 3rd century. Hippolytus was later reconciled to Pope Pontianus during the persecution of Maximinus and died a martyr’s death (235).
2. Deportation of the pope. The Arian emperor Constantius II exiled Pope Liberius for his orthodoxy (355) and imposed the archdeacon Felix on the Roman clergy as Pope Felix II. Eventually, Liberius was allowed to return, and Felix lived in retirement until his death.
3. Double elections arbitrated by the secular authority. In 418 the archdeacon Eulalius was elected by a faction partial to him, and he was supported by the imperial prefect and the Byzantine court. The rest of the clergy, however, chose the priest Boniface I, who was eventually given official recognition by the emperor.
4. Double elections and subsequent recourse to a third candidate. In the 7th century Paschal and Theodorewere rivals for the papacy, and both were unwilling to renounce their claims. Finally, a part of the community more inclined to moderation gained the papacy for Sergius I.
Somewhat similarly, in the 14th century the official residence of the papacy was moved to Avignon, Fr. This led to a schism (the Great Western Schism) beginning in 1378 that resulted in a papacy in Rome (regarded as canonical), a papacy in Avignon (regarded as antipapal), and eventually a third papacy established by the Council of Pisa (also regarded as antipapal). Unity was finally achieved by the election of Martin V on Nov. 11, 1417.
5. Change in the manner of choosing the pope. In 1059 a new procedure for electing popes, proclaimed by Pope Nicholas II, deprived the German emperors of the leading role that they had played in earlier papal elections and also limited the influence of the Roman nobility. This led to the election of the antipope Honorius II in opposition to the canonically elected Alexander II, who was eventually recognized by the emperor. See alsopapacy (table).
I hope that all of this helps you to understand the complexity of the present situation in the Church.
ABYSSUM
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
Even some of us “little people” , without advanced degrees, can now see and understand what is happening in the Church and the world. We can become the leaven of Christ when we participate in adult religious Ed at our churches. We can shout repent! We can stand up for Truth! Sometimes it’s the only inroad we have..maybe reaching one person at a time…then God can take our small contribution ( like the 5 barley loaves and 2 fish) and multiply it to Eternity!!
Praised be Jesus Christ!! Now and forever!
Bravo, Phil !!!
Yes, not every one of the faithful is called to put on the mantle of Jeremiah and walk through the streets Nineveh,USA shouting repent and reform, but those of us who have been blessed with the opportunity to obtain advanced degrees and who are better able to understand what is going on in the Church and the world have an obligation to stand up and shout “repent”, “reform your own life” and thus become the leaven on Christ which will help to save more and more of the Ninevehvites who are our neighbors.
I don’t know if Pope Francis is the or one of the anti-christs but I have to agree that the confusion he has wrought is resulting in the loss of souls, not saving them.
You get to a certain age as you know, Bishop Rene, where you feel at liberty like Jeremiah to call a spade a spade damn the torpedos. If I had the opportunity to meet the Pope, I would not grovel or kneel and kiss his ring which would be hýpocritical but say in so many words, “You’re the vicar of Christ, I pray for your ministry, but cut the crap! We know our shepherd’s voice, sensus fidelium, we follow the voice of Christ. The cardinals who sent the dubia which you ignored represent Paul. You are Peter. Be humble like Peter and listen to them. Straighten out this mess.”
Sent from Surface