In this post, I demonstrated that if one holds that Novus Ordo Rite of Consecration is doubtful, then he must conclude that Jorge Bergoglio is a doubtful pope. The same would apply to the current pope, Benedict XVI. In a thread started today (January 23, 2020), the Admin of The Catacombs inches ever closer to unambiguously holding the position that Benedict XVI and Jorge Bergoglio (who I hold as an antipope) are doubtful popes. You may read the thread here. Now I qualify it with “ever closer” because I sense that the Admin still wants to be able to say that Jorge Bergoglio is pope. Here is how the Admin ends the thread:
“For Mélanie Calvat to use the phrase ‘doubtful popes’ in her prophecy validates the prudent stance taken by Archbishop Lefebvre and all his true sons that these Conciliar popes [particularly Benedict XVI and Francis to whom this prophecy may well apply!], are still considered ‘popes.’ But one cannot say with certainty that they are not doubtful.”
To pinpoint the words of interest, the Admin is saying that “Benedict XVI and Francis are still considered ‘popes’, but one cannot say with certainty they are not doubtful”. Notice the double negative, which is a good way of muddling expressions. Let’s make it a bit more clear:
I consider Jorge Bergoglio to be the pope, but I cannot say with certainty that there is no doubt he is the pope. In other words, I consider Jorge Bergoglio to be the pope, but not to the degree where I can say that he is certainly the pope.
Basically, based on the expression, the Admin holds that “Jorge Bergoglio is the pope” as an opinion. However, the Admin has to go back and state that “it is my opinion that the New Rite of Consecration is valid”. If the Admin insists that the validity of the New Rite of Consecration is doubtful, then the Admin has to conclude that “Jorge Bergoglio is a doubtful pope”. The Admin has to pick one or the other. Which one is it?