FEAR or FAITH? FRIGHT or FLIGHT?
Welcome Eagles to the New Crusade!
Will thou help defend the Fortress of Faith?

TradCatKnight- MOST VIEWED & FOLLOWED Traditional Catholic APOSTOLATE Worldwide!
As Seen on: Gloria.tv, SpiritDaily, Shoebat, Canon212, VeteransToday, Beforeitsnews & many other notable websites
BOOKMARK us & check in DAILY for the latest Endtimes News!
Welcome to my Nest. #EagleoftheFortress
SPREAD WORD TO YOUR FRIENDS & FAMILY!

Thursday, March 9, 2017

More Sound Reasoning on the Antipope Situation: Coercion and Lies

More Sound Reasoning on the Antipope Situation: Coercion and Lies
Note: Not an endorsement for the author
Yes, I would be happy to expand further on the fact of the Bergoglian Antipapacy, and to answer those few substantive counter-arguments that have been raised.  Sure.  Why wouldn’t I? It seems to me that it would be very, very odd indeed to hold a position as a moral certainty, and then categorically refuse to discuss or defend it.  Especially when the stakes are so spectacularly high.



First: I must reiterate that the top-level of my argument that Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger’s attempted resignation was invalid per Canon 188 is that the resignation was made IN SUBSTANTIAL ERROR.  I view the coercion argument as a confirming subset, but not as the top-level argument.  But I will address coercion, because it is certainly very, very important.  And, again, it must be stated that since Pope Ratzinger’s attempted resignation pre-occurred the Bergoglian usurpation of the See of Peter and Antipapacy by two weeks, Bergoglio’s heresy is not germane to the argument.  Heck, it isn’t Tito, Marlon, or even LaToya.

1. COERCION: Refuting the circular argument

One of the most common arguments I see roundabout with regards to the fact that Pope Benedict was clearly coerced is this, and it is so staggeringly obvious in its circularity, that it leaves me stupefied every time I see it:  Pope Benedict clearly wasn’t coerced into resigning because he resigned, and therefore because he did the thing that it is postulated that he was coerced into doing, this proves that he wasn’t coerced.
Well, what have we been thinking? Clearly the islamic political system and its “sword” has had it right all along, eh?  All of those men over the centuries who, for example, were captured by musloids, had their wives and children paraded in front of them and were told, “Either recite the words, ‘There is no god but allah-satan, and mohammed the pedophile is his prophet’ or we will rape your wife and children to death in front of you, and then saw your head off slowly with a dull knife…” Because those men recited the islamic creed, because they did the thing that they were COERCED into doing, this is proof that they weren’t coerced.  After all, it says it right there in the koran. Sura 2 verse 256: There is no compulsion in religion.  Because the man on his knees with the knife to his neck and his wife and children being held by a gang of men with visible erections recited the musloid creed, the fact that he said the words is proof that he wasn’t coerced.  See!  There is no compulsion in religion!
Every person who has ever signed or made a false confession under torture – the fact that they made the false confession is proof that they were not coerced, by this argument.
Coercion is being forced to DO SOMETHING that one does not want to do.  Note that the DOING SOMETHING is required to bring coercion into existence. So to argue that the fact that someone DID SOMETHING is itself proof that they were NOT coerced is to completely deny the existence of the very concept of coercion itself.
“The fact that he did the thing that he was coerced into doing is proof that he wasn’t coerced.”
This argument is so staggeringly and blatantly irrational that it actually confirms me in my moral certainty about the Bergoglian Antipapacy.
Further, the argument is made that because Pope Benedict did not immediately declare himself to have been coerced is further proof that he wasn’t coerced.  Because, apparently, coercion is something that exists only in one moment, and then ceases.  There is no such thing as a continuing threat.  So, the fact the the man who recited the islamic creed to save his family didn’t IMMEDIATELY jump up and declare himself to have been coerced, is FURTHER PROOF that he wasn’t coerced.  The fact that he went home with his family and resigned himself to living under the sword of islam is PROOF that he was fully on-board with the whole thing.  Riiiiiight.  We all do realize that this is exactly how the islamic political system spread like a cancer, yes?  Have we not noticed that apostasy from all satanic ideologies is a capital offense? You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave….

2. So then you think Pope Benedict XVI is a liar?  YES. ABSOLUTELY.

I continue to be surprised at how many people bring this up like it is some sort of a checkmate.  Is Pope Benedict XVI a liar?  Yes.  Of course he is.  Let’s relive some of his greatest whoppers:
I am wearing white because there wasn’t a single black cassock in the city of Rome for me to wear, nor could one have been sourced in the two and a half weeks between the announcement of my “resignation” and its date of efficacy.
That, folks, is called a LIE.
How about this one:
I had to resign because the jet-lag that I would have had from going to World Youth Day in Brazil, an event which in no way even required my presence, would have prevented me from carrying on as the Vicar of Jesus Christ on Earth.
That is a boldfaced lie, folks.
And finally, this whopper:
There were four or five sodomites in the Roman Curia, but I got rid of them, and everything is fine now.
Mathematics has not yet progressed to the point enabling mankind to quantify the enormity of that lie.
Pope Benedict XVI, let me remind one and all, is no hero.  He is, because of what he has done, without question, the worst pope in the history of the Church.  All of this has its source with him.  He capitulated to the coercion.  He, in his pride, thought that he could “head fake” his enemies by fundamentally transforming the papacy itself into a polyarchy – a substantial error if ever there was one.  He thought that he could appease his enemies while still “participating in the Petrine Office”.  But he was and is wrong.  He remains the one and only Vicar of Christ, albeit “inactive” and refusing to do his duty, and he has enabled the usurpation and ascension of an Antipope hellbent on destroying the Bride of Christ from the inside out. He has enabled scandal that has, is, and will continue to drive people into eternal damnation in numbers that are terrifying to ponder.  Weak, supine, effeminate – he truly is the Pope for this age, the Pope we so richly deserve.
More to come.