IS STEVE SKOJIC A DOUBLE AGENT WHO KEEPS CATHOLICS CONFUSED BY HIS DEFENSE OF FRANCIS THE MERCIFUL

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

Thursday, September 05, 2019

Infallibility: Is 1P5 Skojec a “Double Agent” who keeps Catholics “Confused… a Whining Bunch of Scandalmong[ers] rather than United in any Useful Purpose”?

– Vatican I expert Fr. Chad Ripperger, PhD, in his book “Magister Authority” shows that almost all Francis apologists be they liberal, conservative or traditionalist are “proximate to heresy”:
“[T]reating ALL papal statements as if they are infallible… is proximate to heresy because it rejects the precise formulation of the conditions of infallibility as laid out in Vatican I… by essentially saying the pope is infallible regardless of conditions…”
“… Worse still, those who were to follow a pope who was in error in a non-infallible teaching which is taught contrary to something that is infallible is not, therefore, excused.”
(Magisterial Authority, Pages 5-14)
– Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) in “Si Papa”:

“‘Let no mortal being have the audacity to reprimand a Pope on account of faults, for he whose duty it is to judge all men cannot be judged by anybody, unless he should be called to the task of having deviated from the faith. (Si Papa)'”

“Pope Innocent III: ‘For me the faith is so necessary that, whereas for other sins my only judge is God, for the slightest sin in the matter of the faith I could be judged by the Church.’ (propter solum peccatum quod in fide commititur possem ab Ecclesia judican)”
(The Remnant, “Answering a Sedevacantist Critic,” March 18, 2015)

At times, I have found that the comments in the Catholic Monitor comment section are better than my post. This was true of the last post in which Jack wrote a deeply insightful comment that mirrored Fr. Rippinger’s above explanation of Vatican I and Pope Innocent III’s “in the matter of the faith I [and all popes and antipopes] could be judged by the Church” and he covered many other matters.

However, prior to getting to it, I want to thank all the loyal Catholic Monitor readers and commenters for their prayers especially Praypraypray and Therese who are prayer warriors and the vast majority of CM commenters for their wisdom.

Also, I want to say, unlike Jack, I am not inclined to think that One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec is a “double agent,” but it appears to me that he does keep Catholics “confused… a whining bunch of scandalmong[ers] rather than united in any useful purpose.” 

Here is the great comment by Jack:

“People who imagine that Vatican I’s definition of papal infallibility is circular, tautological, or otherwise redundant imagine that the dogma goes like this: “Solemn papal definitions are infallible, because the pope has the power of infallibility.” Which is like saying, ‘it’s right because the pope says it’s right.'”

“This would be to set up the pope as a kind of god, since only God is truly self-justifying like this, right simply because He is right, because He is Truth itself by His very essence.”

“I think in the wake of liberalism and its undermining of all authority, Catholics rallied to the pope and after Vatican I made this kind of mistake, at least implicitly, that the pope is right because he is right. But this is just another human error, setting up a man in God’s place, undermining authority in an even more subtle way.”

“The pope is not right because he says he’s right, and he’s not infallible simply because he has the power of infallibility (although he is and he does). Vatican I is very clear. The pope is infallible BECAUSE Christ gave the keys to Peter and his Successors, and HE guaranteed by HIS divine power that the pope would never err in his solemn teaching capacity. This is perhaps a subtle distinction, but it makes a profound difference. It means that our faith is not centred on the person of the pope, but centred on Christ just has it has always been.”

“So when we come across a pope who appears to be erring in doctrine, the first thing we should ask is whether he is really erring or not. And if he is erring, the next thing to ask is whether his papacy is legitimate or whether he’s an antipope. But for people with a worldly mindset who are too willing to accept the world’s opinions and maintain their public image, and who’s faith is more centred on the person of the pope than on the person of Christ, they would rather deny Vatican I and become heretics than accuse a possible antipope (despite there having been many, many antipopes in history) and fall temporarily out of favour.”

“To be honest at this point I would not be surprised if Skojec is a kind of double agent and 1p5 a false-opposition operation designed to keep potential critics of the regime confused and pigeonholed. Keep traditionalists as a whining bunch of scandalmongerers rather than united in any useful purpose.”
[http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2019/09/is-skojecs-infallible-opinion-that.html?m=1]

Lastly, here is my simple post that hopefully helped inspire Jack in his exceptional comment:

It appears that One Peter Five publisher Steve Skojec’s infallible opinion that the Francis papacy cannot be invalid under any circumstances is leading him towards heresy.

Yesterday on Twitter, Skojec said to @JoshuaPotryus and @MikeJon:

“The problem is that infallibility appears to be tautological at best and borders on superstition at worst.”

A example of a tautology is former Vice President Dan Quayle’s:

“If we do not succeed, we run the risk of failure.”

A possible Skojec tautology might go:

“If Francis is not a valid pope, we run the risk of Francis being a antipope” which may lead to this possible Skojec tautology:

“I believe Vatican I’s papal infallibly teaching “appears… [to border] on superstition,” so I accept as true that that infallible dogma “appears… [to border]” on being a unfounded belief.”

It appears that Skojec’s logic goes something like the following:

“Francis’s papal validity is a 100% infallible belief and if anyone doubts it they are a schismatic therefore Vatican I’s infallible teaching on papal infallibly “appears to be a tautological at best and borders on superstition at worst.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.              

Fred Martinez at 8:35 PMShare

About abyssum

I am a retired Roman Catholic Bishop, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to IS STEVE SKOJIC A DOUBLE AGENT WHO KEEPS CATHOLICS CONFUSED BY HIS DEFENSE OF FRANCIS THE MERCIFUL

  1. John Marren says:

    Here’s a reply I received from Ann regarding Archbishop Chaput’s statement about “Catholics and muslims worshiping the same God.”

    So Ann occasionally responds to inquiries. My understanding, according to an email I received from Steve Skojec is that Ann is living in Italy: a fugitive from the IRS.

    “Ann Barnhardt
    Mar 31, 2019, 7:42 PM

    to me

    Didn’t walk out of the Mass, but yes, after hearing him go out of his way to say that musloids “worship the same God we do” I never went to his 18:30 Sunday evening Mass at the Denver Cathedral again. It was no great loss – music was guitars and bongos. No joke.
    Always worked my travel schedule so that I could attend a Trad Mass from there forward.

    Fun fact: Chaput doesn’t write his own books. He just takes credit for them. They are ghosted by a woman in Denver.”

  2. dis posable says:

    @SheepDog:
    did you EVER (just once!) got a SOPHISM that was not surounded by truth?
    did you EVER see a fishing hook WITHOUT a NICE BAIT?
    so, you THINK that all the “good things” on HIS 1P5 site are there TO TEACH ???
    no !!! its the BAIT to make you BACK and BACK and BACK … with the REPETITION the LIES WILL KICK IN!

    HE IS A PAID AGENT. PERIOD.

  3. hellenback7 says:

    Is there a way to contact Anne Barnhardt? I just love that woman and feel she is a kindred soul.
    I hope someone here has her email as it doesn’t seem possible to comment on her site.

  4. Ann Malley says:

    @Sheepdog. Skojec has no respect. Chiefly for himself as he is often caught scolding others for that which he does. Sadly, this precludes an honest debate and requires a devolution into sophistry, smugness, avoidance, horn-tooting, and the ever-favorite elitist bullying.

  5. Kate R. says:

    If today had a title, it would be “Division”. I guess mankind can’t help it, we can’t help being what we are, and apparently this is to be human. To me this makes me think of what would happen if the grid went down (shudder), because we can’t get along and we’re not even talking about obtaining food or water. Back in the day people had conversation and a mutual exchange of ideas. Now communication is instant and we’ve all grown a very sharp edge. We’re changed, all of us.
    Unite the Clans is funny. I’m for it, because in a world where you can’t change things you give up and expose your throat or turn around and face the beast, determined to at least make it difficult before it eats you.
    Christ, have mercy on us, we are floundering and doing our best to survive in a walking dead situation, with no leader in sight and a tough to survive in world. Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

  6. hellenback7 says:

    @Sheepdog
    I think it is an entirely different thing for Skojek to refuse to engage with Bishop Gracida, than to not want to engage with any/all of us who might comment here on The Bishop’s site.
    And although I don’t personally use Twitter, I imagine if Steve does, that he’d be unlikely to engage everyone who “Tweets” a response.

  7. Aqua says:

    I have read both of these people for years, long before the reign of antipope.

    She is right.

    He is wrong.

    And over time, it shows. Her devotion to Jesus Christ and advancing His kingdom is emphatic.

  8. John Marren says:

    According to Anne Barnhardt, and acknowledged by Mr. Skojeck, he (Steve) has a paycheck that totals about $150,000 per annum…not to shabby.

    I asked Stevie baby to apologize to Anne for ridiculing her use of the term ARSH….here’s Stevie’s response:

    Hello Steve,

    This is my second request….do you draw around $150,000 annually?

    If I were the IRS inquiring into the reasonableness of your compensation I’d label this request as IDR #2 (Information Document Request).

    Look forward to hearing from you and receiving a link to the site where I can find your financials.

    Steve Skojec
    Thu, Aug 1, 11:11 PM

    to me

    Hi John,

    I don’t think I’ve looked at our most recent filing, because I let our accountant handle it, but that sounds about right. Of course, I have to pay for the health coverage for 8 people and self-employment taxes out of that, why do you ask?

    I hope this isn’t part of your quest to vindicate Ann Barnhardt, who is a tax fugitive from the IRS, which is why she lives in Italy. Just curious: have you made any inquiries into her status?

    Steve Skojec
    Publisher & Executive Director
    OnePeterFive.com

    Do you like 1P5? Want to support our work? Please consider making a tax-deductible contribution today!

    John J. Marren, Jr.
    Fri, Aug 2, 8:50 AM

    to ann, annelizabethbarnhardt, Steve

    Ah ha! So you do respond to some email inquiries.

    Received one of your recent posts and it reminded me of a few unanswered inquiries I made about your ridiculousness statement regarding the term ARSH.

    Whenever I hear/read the word quest Monty Python’s “Quest for the Holy Grail” movie comes to mind…and the 3 famous questions: What is your name? What is your quest? What is your favorite color?

    Vindicate? Nope. I was an LMSB (Large and Mid-size Business)Treasury Agent for 6 years doing domestic and international audits of domestic and multinational corporations so I’ve been in the “belly of the beast” and know there’s quite a bit of legitimate stuff to protest about. But it’s not necessary to have been “in the belly” to know that.

    In many ways the IRS is an extension of the Welfare system….many of the thousands of IRS employees make what you’re making and add absolutely no value – they are truly “on the dole.” It is criminal and if the American populace understood how perverse the IRS system really is we’d get a lot more IRS tax fugitive’s in an attempt to rein it in. IRS LMSB group managers received bonuses based upon the number of corporate cases closed by the agents in the managers group…so cases where issues existed were in many cases closed in order to meet deadlines for bonus qualification. A very mild example of what’s wrong with the “Service.”

    If your contribution base is supporting you at a $150,000 level which in today’s world is not a whole lot of $$$ but it is significant, it seems they deserve to see you recant your ridiculousness accusation especially in light of Ann’s charitable response:

    The second instance is at the Last Gospel, recited at the end of almost every Mass, all genuflect at the words, “Et Verbum caro factum est,” which is, “And the Word was made flesh.”
    And so, years and years ago, in fact, when I was sixteen years old and got my first checking account, I started always putting “A.D.” beside the date when I wrote checks, just as a little way of working a witness to the Incarnation into daily life. Later, when I launched Barnhardt.biz, I asked my website developer to write into the code that all timestamps would include “A.D.” THEN, several years ago, after visiting Rome on pilgrimage, the abbreviation ARSH was suggested to me as the “ultimate” date prefix. I was sold, because with me, it’s “go big or go home”. And there are no words adequate to declare the awesome loving miracle of God incarnating as Man so that we might be saved.
    The person above who referred to the ARSH date prefix as “ridiculous” is clearly suffering tremendously, like so many others, from the scandal of the Bergoglian Antipapacy, and desperately needs our prayers. I will leave it at that.

    Your readers should not have a tainted view of the term ARSH as a result of your accusation.

    Ann provided a great response to your accusation of ridiculousness….it seems an apology was/is in order.

    I sent you a few emails asking why you wouldn’t apologize for categorizing her use of the term ARSH as ridiculous….I was interested to learn if you still back up your accusation after reading Ann’s documentation. No joy.

    There’s enough vituperativeness, vitriol and gas lighting going on in Catholic circles and here was an occasion to make up for a bit of the “nastiness.” In a small but meaningful way.

    Interesting…didn’t know that Ann lives in Italy….maybe she shares an office with Mundabor? Or maybe Ann is Mundabor in disguise?

    Hmmmm….very interesting…..

    image.png

    Don’t bother to ask your accountant for any information – save your money – in many ways tax accountants, tax attorneys, and the IRS exist in a symbiotic relationship….they feed off one another and we the people pay for it.

    Thanks for responding.

    Q: Ann, is the “ARSH” prefix you use “ridiculous”? Did you just make it up?
    Q: Is the ARSH prefix you use on dates “ridiculous”? Did you just make it up? It was referred to as “ridiculous” recently, and I can’t figure out why.

    A: Great question! And a great point of departure to start thinking about the Great Feast of the Annunciation, coming up in less than two weeks (!!)
    The abbreviated date prefix ARSH stands for:
    Anno
    Reparatae
    Salutis
    Humanae
    This means, “in the Year of the Reparation of Human Salvation”.

    There are several forms of this wonderfully and beautifully Christian prefix to dates. The most common, which we are all familiar with, is “A.D.”, which of course stands for “Anno Domini”, which means, “the Year of The Lord”. BUT, there are actually FIVE more forms which one sees in books and inscriptions (most commonly funerary monuments and plaques):
    A.S. = Anno Salutae = “The Year of Salvation”
    A.N.S. = Anno Nostrae Salutis = “The Year of Our Salvation”
    A.S.H. = Anno Salutis Humanae = “The Year of Human Salvation”
    A.R.S. = Anno Reparatae Salutis = “The Year of Salvation Accomplished/Reparated”
    And finally, the most florid and most glorious:
    A.R.S.H. = Anno Reparatae Salutis Humanae = “The Year of the Reparation of Human Salvation”

    This “moment zero” from which all dates are counted is, of course, the Annunciation, when Our Blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Triune Godhead, became incarnate in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary at her words, “Fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum,” that is, “Be it done to me according to thy word.” This is why up until not too terribly long ago in Christendom, March 25, NOT January 1, marked the beginning of a new year, and was when the date rolled over. Hence, March 24, ARSH 1514 was followed the next day by March 25, ARSH 1515.

    This event is so massively incomprehensible in its infinite love for mankind that we bend the knee TWICE at Mass when it is mentioned: the first instance is when the Creed is recited. All should kneel at the words, “Et incarnátus est de Spíritu Sancto ex María Vírgine: Et homo factus est,” that is in English, “And became incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary: and was made man.”
    The second instance is at the Last Gospel, recited at the end of almost every Mass, all genuflect at the words, “Et Verbum caro factum est,” which is, “And the Word was made flesh.”
    And so, years and years ago, in fact, when I was sixteen years old and got my first checking account, I started always putting “A.D.” beside the date when I wrote checks, just as a little way of working a witness to the Incarnation into daily life. Later, when I launched Barnhardt.biz, I asked my website developer to write into the code that all timestamps would include “A.D.” THEN, several years ago, after visiting Rome on pilgrimage, the abbreviation ARSH was suggested to me as the “ultimate” date prefix. I was sold, because with me, it’s “go big or go home”. And there are no words adequate to declare the awesome loving miracle of God incarnating as Man so that we might be saved.
    The person above who referred to the ARSH date prefix as “ridiculous” is clearly suffering tremendously, like so many others, from the scandal of the Bergoglian Antipapacy, and desperately needs our prayers. I will leave it at that.
    Here are some pics of ARSH used in various places:

    An inscription from Naples, Italy. Not ridiculous.From a Hungarian text. Not ridiculous.From a French text, in fact explaining Latin abbreviations. Not ridiculous.This entry was posted in Uncategorized on March 12, ARSH 2019 by Ann Barnhardt.
    And furthermore I consider that islam must be destroyed.

    [Message clipped] View entire message

    Steve Skojec
    Fri, Aug 2, 10:48 AM

    to me

    “If your contribution base is supporting you at a $150,000 level which in today’s world is not a whole lot of $$$ but it is significant, it seems they deserve to see you recant your ridiculousness accusation”

    When supporting a large family and an elderly parent in a metro area it’s a lot less significant than I ever thought it would be. My bank account almost went negative again yesterday, and I haven’t been on anything that looks like a vacation in years.

    But your statement is a non-sequitur. My audience supporting me at a level that allows me to do this full time doesn’t entitle them to a forced apology from me.

    What my audience does deserve from me is to offer them truthful, candid assessments of things. Whatever her explanation for its origins, in my opinion its use is ridiculous, pretentious, and forced. It’s just another signature piece of rhetoric Ann deploys — like the destroy Islam tagline — that comes across to me as an “I take myself way too seriously and you should too” attention grab.

    So no, I’m not going to apologize for calling it ridiculous — in a comment, no less, not an article. Because if I apologized, I’d be lying. I find it silly and distracting, and saying anything other than that wouldn’t be true.

    And Ann knows that I know she doesn’t need you white knighting for her. You may not know it, but I used to consider her a friend, in the days before she went on her crusade against the validity of our chastisement of a pope and I couldn’t join her. She has never failed to prove that she can look out for herself.

    I personally think the best thing for Ann, for me, for most of us would be not to stare at the abyss within the Church all day, because it is most certainly staring back, and it hasn’t been good for any of us.

    I’ve been trying to do it less, myself, and it’s helped. Maybe you should try a little less of it, too.

    Publisher & Executive Director
    OnePeterFive.com

    Do you like 1P5? Want to support our work? Please consider making a tax-deductible contribution today!

    [Message clipped] View entire message

    So true!Agreed!Indeed!

  9. Sheepdog says:

    Yes he is. Steve Skojec has no respect for a good and honest debate with either Bishop Gracida or I. It’s a shame what he does because he sometimes has really good material on his site.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s