Would you rather go to Hell than have Ann Barnhardt be right?

Bergoglio is not pope, and he never was pope. He’s not even Catholic. Do not be scandalized by him. Do not lose your faith. Do not follow anyone who causes you to doubt your faith.

God is in charge, God is in control, God has this. Do you really think that God, all powerful creator of the universe, is pinned down and about to tap out to a bunch of scheming sodomites?

I am writing this post because people are being scandalized by something else, and souls are at stake. Do not EVER doubt that God knows the way out of this. The chessboard is set exactly as He knew it would be set since before He created time.

Yesterday, Steve Skojec published a big piece at 1P5 on doubting the faith. Today he’s promoting it on twitter. I can’t tweet him back, as he blocked me long ago. Here is a sample from the article:

“What do we do when time and again, we are confronted with the unthinkable? What happens when the pope himself — THE POPE HIMSELF (sic) — says contraception is OK, or approves Holy Communion for people living in adultery, or changes the Catechismin a way that reverses the Church’s infallible bi-millenial teaching on the moral liceity of the death penalty (in a way that opens the door to reversing everything else), or signs an interfaith document that undermines the exclusivity of salvation through the Church? What do we think when we hear again and again through one of the pope’s most trusted confidants that he thinks hell doesn’t actually exist, and that the souls of the unrighteous are merely annihilated? What about when he says the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 wasn’t really a miracle – wasn’t “magic” – but just some act of sharing? What about when he says of the Blessed Mother that she wanted to accuse God of lying to her? Or that Jesus actually “became sin“? What of a hundred or a thousand other troubling things?”


We should probably start by asking, can a true pope can do any of these things? Can someone even be Catholic, let alone pope, if he believes these things? If not, is there any chance he’s not really pope? Did anything strange or unusual happen around or just before the time of his “election?” Is there any evidence that maybe he’s not the pope? Evidence that Benedict’s abdication may have been invalid? Should we dig deeper and see what we can find, or should we dismiss this completely and conclude God sucks, and so does His Church of lies?

A third option? A hidden but rational explanation?

Folks, the Catholic Church, the One True Faith, is not a “defective product.” We are called to fight. Act, and God will act. Do not be tempted to run.

37 thoughts on “Would you rather go to Hell than have Ann Barnhardt be right?”

  1. He is so lost, and he wants to drag as many souls down with him as he can. Diabolical, demonic, and narcissistic. Masks are being removed and true selves are coming out…seeing this everywhere.
    And your headline is absolutely right Mark..he would rather burn in hell for eternity than to admit that Barnhardt was right. sad.

  2. We are going to win. Just because we have a defective Pope detracts nothing from our faith which is based on the teaching of Christ and have been up until Bergoglio made a mess. We should not lose heart. God is totally with us. This is just a test of our faith. As they say, “this too will pass”.

    And we should thank God right now that Archbishop Vigano has come on the scene to keep us in the truth and help us understand what is happening in the world and the Church.

  3. At some point during his faithless twitter rant did he ask for money? Good cigars ain’t cheap.

    When Christ hung there on the Cross, apparently defeated, many thought similar thoughts: “Look at him hanging there. Messiah my eye. I can’t believe I bought into the whole thing…”

    The Church is triune, like God Himself. How about the Church Triumphant? Is that in disarray? Church Suffering? Have they also abandoned hope? Of course not. As they suffer the pains of being purged from all attachment to sin, they have as their one cool drink: hope.

    The hand wringing and despair is distasteful, at best, to behold. The victory is at hand, in His time, and it’s going to be quite something to see.

    Skojec and those like him can think about it until the cows come home. If you’re irrevocably stuck on “Bergoglio is Pope,” there’s absolutely no way to reconcile that with the Truth of the Church, the way she has always understood herself and necessarily presented herself to the world (up until the 60’s that is). No way. (“What if Vatican I was, well, wrong?”)

    In that way the anti-papacy shines a bright light on the erroneous nature of the council. A Bergoglian papacy proves the council, and it’s “spirit,” right all along. There is no primacy of the Catholic Church. The “triumpahiism” of the Church was in error and therefore correctly derided by the council modernists. Her immutable nature was wrong all along, as Bergoglio the “pope” is clearly displaying. Error was in charge all the way until the mid sixties. Finally we have an accurate understanding of the Church as our “Pope” makes abundantly clear in his every word and deed. Thank you Vatican II.

    Bergoglio is the perfect Pope for the conciliar church. Of the Catholic Church? Well you have to actually be Catholic first.

    The defenders of the council as super dogma and the “no way Bergoglio isn’t Pope” folks are in the same box they’ve always been in but now the contradictions are too glaring to be ignored anymore.

    Abp Vigano is right. Miss B and now many others along with her are right. There’s your solution Steve ol’ bean. It’s right in front of you.

  4. The one true faith does not depend upon current circumstances and the faithfulness or faithlessness of the living. It simply is.

    Primordial Christians of year 1 had Christ Himself. Christians of year 2,020 have a straight line back to Christ and the very, very large and impressive Deposit Of Faith; constancy, consistency. It has all been worked out, for those with eyes to see. Jorge B can’t do anything about it. Follow Jorge into the ditch, rather than the long, clear, objective, straight line of all our forefathers that leads to Life ……. that’s on you.

  5. Barnhardt mops the floor with Skojec traffic-wise, and encourages her donors to either scale back or cut-off their donations to her in the Covid situation. Skojec continues to grift and guilt people into… what? Encouraging schism to the Eastern Orthodox on Twitter? Who tops-off his 20k grift every month? How can he possibly pay a mortgage on a Scottsdale McMansion on less than 200k visits per month… with a combox??? Who is topping him off at 20k every month? Why does schism to the Eastern Orthodox merit a thumbs-up and a pat on the head, but the Barnhardt-Mazza thesis is as verboten as the mention of Soros on FoxNews???

    1. Rumor has it that Stevie Skojec gets his funding from sources other than individual contributors….probably the same folks who funded John Courtney Murray.

      John Courtney Murray: Time/Life and the American Proposition : how the CIA’s Doctrinal Warfare Program
      Changed the Catholic Church
      Book by David A. Wemhoff
      John Courtney Murray, Time/Life, and The American Proposition is the short title of a book by David
      Wemhoff. This book presents the collaboration between three major pillars of American society in spreading
      around the globe the ideology that formed that society.

      The American Proposition – Studying and reporting on …

    2. He is my neighbor? What church does he go to? I would like to have a very polite talk with him in the spirit of true charity.

  6. Oh alright…if you put it that way I’d have to go with the accept Barnhardt is right option. Besides, many times her posts make my heart “soar like the hawk.” Don’t think there’s much hawk like soaring going on in Ghenna so I’ll take the Barnhardt option.

  7. An awful lot of people–e.g., every American bishop except René Gracida–have answered your question with a resounding YES.

  8. Barnhardt is a world-historical figure because of her exposure of the rottenness of the fiat money system, and even more because of Bergoglio. She may bring Bergoglio down yet.

    But she should not be mistaken for a theologian. She holds, for instance, that experiencing same-sex attraction is a mortal sin.

    1. Ann Barnhardt’s greatest weakness is an inability to distinguish between “ordinary” and “heroic” virtue.

      And if that’s the worst you can say about somebody that says something in and of itself.

      As Vox Day says, stand behind your extremists.

    2. To her credit, she makes no claim that she is a theologian, or a holy person. Neither irreverence nor sanctimony from her; she’s just doing her duty as she sees it. Her’s is an example that inspires me to try to do likewise. The Lord provides the strength to do our duties if we ask for it.

    3. I’ve been turning this over for a while, and IDK where else to put it, but here goes.

      Ann is PARTIALLY wrong about sodomy.

      Let’s compare f*ggotry to cancer. Like cancer, you have multiple stages, corresponding with the relative severity of the disease. All sodomy is cancer, but some cancers are worse then others.

      TYPE I. The Victim
      Type I f*ggots did not choose to have SSA. Or if they did, it was by not actively choosing NOT to be SSA. There are a vanishingly few f*ggots who are genuinely that way because of an imbalance of hormones or something. Just like some people are born manic-depresive, or sociopaths, or autistic, some very few f*ggots are born this way.

      Most are not.


      Ann has talked about “vampirism” in relationship to sodomy… and it’s true. The vast majority of Type I f*ggots are those who were preyed upon by older f*ggots to try to convert them into one of their own, mostly as children or teens. Sadly, this strategy works all too frequently.

      The great temptation facing these people suffering from Type I f*ggotry is to try to rationalize and normalize their experience. Both the experience that caused them to contract f*ggotry to begin with, their SSA, and their “lifestyle”. This is not to say their sin is harmless – merely that the temptation to rationalize and come to accept their f*ggotry is an express elevator to Hell.

      Type I f*ggotry is where we get people like Milo Yiannopolis – those f*ggots who are not, or at least not yet, lost to natural rather than supernatural intervention. All the other stages of f*ggotry are worse.

      TYPE II. The Flesh

      “About sex especially men are born unbalanced; we might almost say men are born mad. They scarcely reach sanity till they reach sanctity. … Men seek stranger sins or more startling obscenities as stimulants to their jaded sense. … They try to stab their nerves to life, if it were with the knives of the priests of Baal.” – GK Chesterton

      All men have the ability to become addicts. Some men are addicted to sex.

      Type II f*ggots fall into sodomy as a part of a larger arc downward, one focused on the Flesh and the pleasures of the flesh. As the good book says, “Whose end is destruction; whose God is their belly; and whose glory is in their shame; who mind earthly things.” When women are not enough, they turn to men; when men are not enough, they turn to worse things yet.

      Like all addicts, sex addicts seek higher highs and lower lows. Let us not go further into the degeneracy; our culture has brought us all to know too well to what evil lengths this goes and where it ends.

      TYPE III. The World


      Ann has provided a very, very useful window into the bathhouse culture, including many insights that few who are not entirely corrupt would come to on their own. I am specifically referring to the prevalence of blackmail in the bathhouses, the so-called Sodomite Mafia.

      There are some people who turn to sodomy, who actually sell and continue to sell their bodies to others, out of a desire for worldly success and power, especially over their… partners. The thought is almost more disgusting then the actual acts in which they engage. It is disgusting, repulsive, and inhuman.

      Further, in today’s degenerate culture – a culture in the last stages of decay – we see something only seen a few times in the history of the world. People are choosing to contract sodomy out of a desire that is nowadays called “virtue signalling” – a desire for worldly approbation and approval.

      If Type I f*ggots are – not blameless – but at least in diminished capacity. Type II f*ggots are again very much not blameless but mostly driven by a lack of discipline or a weak will; they almost fall into sodomy. Type III f*ggots are where in most cases we see, from the beginning, a truly evil will – one that delights in holding and exercising power over others.

      Type IV. The Devil

      I have compared in this wall of text sodomy to cancer. The comparison is deliberate. Absent divine grace, possibly absent supernatural intervention, the cancer of sodomy spiritually quickly both metastasizes and grows in malignancy, becoming worse and degrading all the other natural virtues. The road from Type I, absent God’s immediate and constant help, inevitably ends in spiritually terminal Stage IV f*ggotry.

      Please think, for a moment, about the language we use to describe this phenomenon.

      “Perverse”. Something turned away, turned AGAINST, it’s original purpose.

      “Degenerate”. Something that is lessened, rotten, decayed. Defamed and defaced. Degraded.

      Sodomy is inherently degrading to both (or all, God forbid) of the parties involved. There is something about sodomy that is inherently repulsive. Particularly interesting, at least to myself, is that men are particularly, viscerally repulsed by male f*ggots, while women are or seem similarly repulsed by female homosexuals. Something about f*ggotry contradicts the inherent meaning of being a man, or a woman. Men and women recognize this, and, where not propagandized and desensitized, naturally recoil from it.

      A Type IV f*ggot probably started as something less worse. But now, even if he still seeks out sodomy for the pleasure of the flesh, or worldly power, that is not his primary motivation. He has come to embrace (*urgh, bad mental images*) the contradiction, the EVIL inherent in sodomy. The evil itself is his reason to commit the sin.

      The sodomy is not valued for itself, or the pleasure, or the power. It is the fully degenerate f*ggots way of cursing God. Of rejecting, and reveling in rejecting, the Good, the True, the Beautiful, and the Real.

      This is why f*ggotry is so spiritually dangerous; it is an express path straight to an existence that can in all charity be called by its proper name of Hell.

      Further, f*ggots are not dangerous only to themselves. Many, if not most, are diabolical narcissists; all are VAMPIRES.


      Do you remember the news stories about f*ggots attempting, deliberately, to infect other people – especially straight people – with AIDS? Leaving dirty syringes in movie theatre cushions? Worse? If you are not totally morally depraved, you were both dumbfounded and repulsed by the actions. How could anyone even THINK of doing something like that? Well, those f*ggots are only continuing and extending a predatory pattern that is BAKED IN to their psyche.

      All f*ggots are infected with a disease, a cancer, and seek to spread it to others. The disease is called sodomy.

      I mentioned Milo above. If there is any f*ggot that is /ourguy/, he’s the one. Do you remember the scandal that the MSM used to hound him out of the media?

      Here are his exact words.

      “The law is probably about right, that’s probably roughly the right age. I think it’s probably about okay, but there are certainly people who are capable of giving consent at a younger age, I certainly consider myself to be one of them, people who are sexually active younger. I think it particularly happens in the gay world by the way. In many cases actually those relationships with older men…This is one reason I hate the left. This stupid one size fits all policing of culture…. This sort of arbitrary and oppressive idea of consent, which totally destroys you know understanding that many of us have. The complexities and subtleties and complicated nature of many relationships. You know, people are messy and complex. In the homosexual world particularly. Some of those relationships between younger boys and older men, the sort of coming of age relationships, the relationships in which those older men help those young boys to discover who they are, and give them security and safety and provide them with love and a reliable and sort of a rock where they can’t speak to their parents.” – Milo Yiannopolis on Drunken Peasants

      Milo supports older men screwing your kids to turn them into f*ggots.

      Even granting, out of charity, the best will in the world. Even granting deep inner confusion and a desire to rationalize his own abuse. Milo wants to infect CHILDREN with F*GGOTRY. The same way he was infected as a child.

      This is why our ancestors executed f*ggots. You can’t trust ANY of them. Not with your children, not with your patrimony. Not even the ‘good’ ones.

      The only solution, besides execution, is hermitage. Maybe excepting ONLY SSA-afflicted people who have never acted on their impulses. Depends on how much danger to your kids you’re willing to tolerate.

      Permanent exile from society is the minimum. And there are damn few f*ggots who are willing to repent, and to go that far for repentance.

    4. Hienz, if I may beg your credulity for a moment, I believe her position on the issue is not that temptation in this area is mortal sin, but that a lack of charity can lead one down the road to the sins of sodom. 3x Ave Maria’s for you.

  9. Steve has done nothing but pretend to be the vanguard since he stepped into the Catholic media machine, beating his chest while claiming a superior hold on holiness. Or humility. Sickens me. (Told me one he wanted to be like FR. Z which told me plenty.)

    He’ll smear anyone he pleases, publicly, and then adopt their position when he’s licked the red pill sufficiently for “his” tastes.

    Good grief. I’m so exhausted with individuals who pretend that their line–their fears, etc–are what defines the truth of any situation. The dude has lacked self-awareness from the beginning. But in a world of scandalized sheep, the holy horn calls ’em in.

    What I’d truly like to see from him is an APOLOGY for his BOORISH behavior that always recast as “Catholic” masculinity. Disgusting. And I’m with his wife.

    “Why are you DOING this, Steve?” (Seriously good question.)

    It’s for market share and a place to toot his own horn, methinks. (In one article he claimed there’s a “cottage” industry building around the Benevecantists. Laughable considering Steve is doing nothing but using his own personal spiritual, me-centered journey to foment a cottage industry. And over-set others by pretending he’s king of the hill.)

    Sorry for the rant, but the dude has serious issues and I have an issue with him, too, having been accused of sophistry. (When calling out his antics, of course.)

  10. Here’s a response I received from Mr. Skojec when I inquired about his $150,000 salary and his refusal to apologize to Annie for calling her use of the term ARSH “ridiculous.”

    Steve Skojec
    Fri, Aug 2, 2019, 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

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

  11. I know Ann reads your blog, Mark. Ann, I want you to know that I appreciate your clarity so very much, and I am of the same mindset as you. I’ve argued with many people on fb to no avail. Even the Lord says if someone will not receive the Gospel, shake the dust off your shoes and walk away. At this point, I am focusing on saving my family and friends. I’ve tried to bring them with me to the SSPX, and I’ve succeeded to a large extent. Except, my mother refuses. Please pray for our loved ones that they will see the truth before it’s too late. God bless you and keep up the good work!

  12. I learned more from Ann Barnhardt in a very short period of time than I ever did in my 20+ years as a Catholic. I took Catechism classes that taught nothing or incorrect information about what is morally acceptable. And who can argue against her and Mazza about the antipope? Seriously? The anti papacy and the infiltration in the church is so obvious. The need for tradition and speaking moral truths is obvious. She spells out everything that is wrong with America. The One True Faith is not defective- the men in charge are. And the laity are suffering for it, whether they know it and are in disbelief or not.

    The only time I’ve ever disagreed with her is when she spoke against coffee. Moms with young kids need an extra energy boost. Haha.

  13. Steve Skojec asks some insightful and thought provoking questions. Malachi Martin who died in 1999 wrote that for some unknown reason God is allowing all of this to happen. This was 1999. Look at “all of the water under the bridge” since then. We have to “stand fast” like an oak tree in a violent storm and trust in God.

  14. When will Cardinal Burke or Muller or Sarah or Zen or a good Archbishop or a good bishop or a good monsignor or a faithful priest…CALL FOR AN IMPERFECT COUNCIL TO ELECT A VALID POPE???? Does no one in the episcopy have a normal functional level of testosterone???? Self respect? Respect for Jesus and His bride, the Church?? As Joe Biden might say, “C’mon MAN”!!!!

  15. Once upon a time in the 1980s, “television evangelists” were part of the American landscape. To their credit, they and their pentecostal congregations were reliable conservatives who voted the right way and, while they not-so-secretly despised the Catholic Church, they were awkward allies in staving off dangerous legislation that would have brought on America’s demise much, much earlier. What does this have to do with the subject of Mark’s post here? Consider the following…

    1. The television evangelists of that time (Jim Baker, Oral Roberts, Jimmy Swaggert, Robert Tilton, etc.) gained their audiences with the (protestant/pentecostal) Bible and its teachings. But… in no time at all, they all evolved quickly into 90% fundraising operations. Every time you tuned in, the message increasingly was “give us money, give us money, give us money.” In the case of Oral Roberts he even said God would “call him home” if he didn’t raise X amount of funds by a certain date. Sadly, a lot of people did not see the warning signs and gave away much of their hard-earned funds to these charlatans.

    2. One by one starting around 1987 or so, scandals broke and so did their (fake) ministries. Those who contributed financially to these scoundrels had no return on their investment and were betrayed. But that was not the worst of it…

    3. After the aforementioned pentecostal megachurches and their television evangelists fell from grace, there emerged a new force to replace them… If I may borrow from Ann B, the “super-fun rockbound church.” The difference was that the focus of these new “churches” was and is to this day, not-so focused on Christianity but rather on feeling good, social justice and coming together on Sunday in the auditorium to listen to some electrical guitars and keyboard perform against light shows and in-between motivational speeches. The former pentecostal mega-church people flocked here in droves. They did not come into the Holy Catholic Church (not that anyone bothered to try and convert them but that’s another topic).

    4. Today the “moral majority” is all but dead. We had eight years of Barack Hussein Obama and the most anti-Christian administration that was elected and re-elected by the children of those former evangelists who flocked in record numbers to vote for Ronald Reagan. Socialism is favored by an increasing number of clueless young and old alike in this nation, many of whom have been raised as atheist or agnostic by their former Bible-thumping parents and grandparents. I could go on and on but you see how this country has changed both morally and spiritually since the end of the 1980s.

    Brining this into a Catholic perspective for 2020, I will say BEWARE of any Catholic news outlet, blog, etc. where “donate now” messages pop up immediately after login and you get stalked by them to donate via email or engagement in any sort of way. Also BEWARE of Catholic lay “media celebrities” who focus their ministries on themselves rather than Christ. BEWARE of any Catholic whatever group who militantly expresses a venomous desire to destroy the SSPX. Lastly BEWARE of people who are addicted to social media and especially Facebook and Twitter which do nothing but breed anger, narcissism and stupidity. YOUR CATHOLIC FAITH IS IN DANGER if you allow yourselves to be hooked by such people.

  16. So many ways to get lost today. We’re like a bunch of orphaned children trying to find out way out of the woods. What a hard year this has been, and likely to get harder before long. In between the craziness of my life right now, I try to cling to Jesus. I’m not so much involved anymore in even Catholic blogs. I have no heroes except Jesus my Savior.
    It’s good advice. Social media is a minefield. We’d all do better sitting outside talking to God.

    1. Dear Kate R,
      Perhaps, this is the reason why Our Lady of Good Success holds the crozier in Her hand. So that in these dark times we can turn to Her who will lead us to Her Son. Our Lady is the one who shepherds us in a world in which we are surrounded by evil men and in a Church gravely afflicted by the pastoral negligence of the upper hierarchy. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SjqGfK-iGxo/Vo3O29_JL1I/AAAAAAAAGM8/FcNdHSmxMmk/s1600/IMG_0170.JPG

  17. I used to follow 1P5, but then I stumbled upon Ann Barnhardt and when she began exposing Steve Skojec’s descent into madness, I stopped reading 1P5. Skojec is supposedly a traditionalist, yet calls Vatican I and Papal Infallibility into question, and now doubts the peculiarity of Catholicism. He says that Catholicism being the true Faith is an “ideal”. Just like the Commandments, Mr. Skojec? Isn’t that what Bergoglio teaches? No, Catholicism IS the true Faith, full stop. It’s not an ideal, but reality. People like Skojec are traditionalist only so far as they like the Latin Mass because it is aesthetically more pleasing than the Novus Ordo.

    I have to feel sorry for people like Skojec as he is going through a crisis of faith due to sundry reasons. Whilst he clings to Francis Is Pope, the further away he falls because he can’t reconcile how a man he believes to be Pope could be able to exercise such apostasy. His sense of the Faith is trying to tell him that a Pope who is an apostate clearly can’t be Pope, and that there is clearly something wrong with there being two men as Pope, but he tries to silence that sense. It seems to me that Bergoglio could full on commit Satanism – as in have an idol of Satan at St. Peter’s, bow down it and offer it libations – and Skojec would still say he was Pope. This need for Bergoglio to be Pope at all cost is disturbing, to say the least. And the fallacies that Skojec and others like him have to commit in order to preserve their position just beggars belief.

  18. What was that Sherlock Holmes line – when you have eliminated all other possibilities, the one remaining, no matter how improbable, is the truth. Seems to me the Barnhardt-Mazza thesis is one of, if not the last possibility standing. And frankly, it is not even all that improbable. It fits the available data points better than anything else I have come across.

  19. Also, on the universal acceptance thing. Reminds me of jurisdiction in legal context. Proper jurisdiction is an absolute prerequisite to the validity of any judicial act. If a court acted without proper jurisdiction, its action is void regardless of how accepted the act is.

    1. That’s a great analogy. Canon 359 is what grants jurisdiction, so to speak, to a conclave. If the terms of the canon are not met, no power of jurisdiction, conclave and its result are invalid.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.