Editor’s Note: The Anointed of Jakob attacked Trad Inc. for not admitting the heresies and aberration of “Leo XIV”. Yet he allows a commentator, without refutation, to post the most outrageous revisionist lie in all of papal history: there are no antipopes, so long as you shut up and stop calling them antipopes. — Click in image to expand, or click HERE to read Christ Jackson‘s limited hangout, ironically named, “The Ministry of Damage Control”.
Those who use the argument of “universal acceptance”, which John of Saint Thomas coined for valid and lawful papal elections, have rebranded it in suchwise as to pretend that anyone who sees that the election is unlawful or invalid does not exist, because by asserting universal and peaceful acceptance, their argument is basically that their opponents don’t exist. This is the kind of outrageous lies you find in books like the Talmud or the Koran, or a Nazi tract on Race.
In fact, by saying that there are no Catholics who rejected the claim to the papacy by Pope Francis or Cardinal Prevost, is a way of saying that Italians don’t exist or don’t count. You cannot get more racist than that. — And I pray that one day we have an Italian pope, who will excommunicate the scum who advance such arguments, even with the blasphemous daring of using the abbreviation for the Holy Family, “J.M.J”, in its perpetration.
For the record, three independent Italian publications published news, greeted by loud applause, that the Conclave was invalid and that Prevost is not the pope: FromRome.Info, ImmolaOggi.it and “Il Salotto di Mimar”, together garning probably way over 100,000 viewers/readers on that news alone, since FromRome.Info garnered nearly that on its own.
+ + +
+ + + + + + +
The Book on the Trinity, every faithful Catholic priest would love as his next present
This is Br. Bugnolo's English Translation, of Saint Bonaventure's encylopedic book of theology on the Trinity: With this book, your priest will always have something intelligent and awesomely inspiring to preach to you about
God the Father, God the Son & God the Holy Spirit!
+ + +
Please react:
https://www.traditionsanity.com/p/why-i-co-founded-pelican-and-why?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=1qmb5w&triedRedirect=true
AJ could turn his discerning eyes to this spectacle and lend perspective.
I think that announcement is clear enough. And I think the motivation is also clear enough. Trad Inc. 2.0, is what I would call it.
But the name, Pelican+, I think is a real marketing disaster.
Brother Alexis, regarding universal peaceful acceptance, what was the context or purpose for John of St. Thomas writing that? I can’t find anything that explains what he was perhaps responding to, or trying to clarify.
John of St. Thomas was addressing the case of a valid election of the Roman Pontiff, and its relation to the entire Church, regarding Her charism of infallibility. His argument being, that the Church, as the faithful Spouse of Christ will always accept the valid and legitimate election of the Roman Pontiff, and that having always done so, and having never ultimately sided with any antipope or heretic, She testifies to the world, that She is that Bride of the same Jesus Christ Who founded the Church upon Saint Peter.
I have explained how the Masons are taking his doctrine and flipping it upside down, here:
https://www.fromrome.info/2019/03/20/siscoes-triple-shell-game/
Enunciated by a former Freemason, who, as I demonstrate, still thinks like a Freemason.
But John of Saint Thomas is not a doctor of the Church, so we must refer to the events of history to understand his argument, namely by thee term, “ultimately”, as I have said above, since in the case of some antipopes, the Church only after long periods in her official documents declared or recognized them as antipopes. Take for example, Pope Stephen IX, who died in 1058. When he took the name Stephem, there was some dispute whether he should style himself Stephen X or Stephen IX, since there has been an antipope by the name of Stephem. He used the numeral IX explicitly on some occasions, to make it clear that this other Stephem was not a true pope. Also, after his death, when the clergy and nobility of Rome, violating his precept not to convene in apostolic assembly without Saint Hildebrand, the Archdeacon, elected John Minucius, Bishop of Velletri, as Benedict X, some lists of popes for 130 years after still listed Benedict X as a valid pope. In fact, the nefariously and often wrong Wikipedia, in its article on Benedict X, still attempts to claim this.
Thus, history shows us that the thesis of John of Saint Thomas has to be taken with a grain of salt, that is, understood as regarding only valid elections and only the ultimate recognition by the whole Church, since the facts of history clearly disprove every other interpretation.
But John of Saint Thomas could have done better if he had advanced a similar argument from different principles, namely, that it is Jesus Christ alone Who defines what is and what is not the true Church. And this definition is found in His declaration, to Saint Peter, “Whatsoever you bind etc..”, such that in regard to the papal laws on papal election, he who is first elected in a legitimate manner, is His true Vicar, and those in communion with this man, before or after his consecration as Pope, are members of the true Church.
Because such an argument is always valid and does not need qualifiers.