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:
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:
You want to know the future of our church – read these already proven (by Francis) prophecies. Many are prosecuted for a true word coming form the Lord!
Regardless of who is Pope, we should live in such a way that is indicative of our beliefs and in accord with a thoroughly educated conscience, according to the perennial teachings of The Church.
With all the necessary information at our literal fingertip, there is little excuse for invincible ignorance these days
Either way, Christ is not sleeping while the Barque of Peter is tossed by evil forces.
He is in fact steering His Church towards it’s final port, after a 2000 year journey.
We need to remember, especially at times like this, that St. Joan of Arc was mischaracterized by the leading Church authorities of England in her day and burned to death as an unrepentant, excommunicated heretic.
I fear much of the German hierarchy (along with others in powerful positions of authority) can only wish they had such power against those who don’t go along with their scheming. And, at this unprecedented time in Church history, the Pope seems to be on the side that would falsely condemned St. Joan for political purposes.
“Pray, hope & don’t worry”
(St. Pio of Pietrelcina aka Padre Pio).
The universal acceptance that the naked emperor wears sumptuous clothes, or that the earth is flat, or that a tyrant is the caring father of a nation, doesn’t change the reality of the deception.
I think that a universal acceptance is different from an unanimous and freely formed opinion; the first is passive, while the second is closer to an active decision after consideration. Perhaps “Santo Subito” is an example of an universal sentiment and opinion, understood through only two words by every Catholic, while the concept of universal acceptance to try to validate what our catholic hearts (sensus fidei) reject must be painfully and extensively explained to support a thesis that is at odds with what we are witnessing.