[Catholic Caucus] Will the Next Conclave Produce a Pope for the Catholic Church, or Just a Heretical Bishop of Rome for the Synodal Church?

Remant Newspaper ^ | March 7, 2025 | Robert Morrison

[ebb tide]

[Catholic Caucus] Will the Next Conclave Produce a Pope for the Catholic Church, or Just a Heretical Bishop of Rome for the Synodal Church?

The health of Pope Francis has been the subject of much debate, but as of March 6th the official Vatican report stated that the Pope's “condition has remained stable compared to previous days. Today as well, he has not experienced any episodes of respiratory insufficiency... The doctors still maintain a reserved prognosis.” Still, the thoughts of many are turning toward the next conclave.

With the strong possibility that we may have a papal conclave in the near future, many serious Catholics are contemplating the prospect of an openly heretical cardinal being elected to replace Francis. As disastrous as Francis’s hostile occupation of the papacy has been, at least it seems that many of the cardinals at the 2013 conclave might not have known he was a heretic. This would probably not be the case at the next conclave: if Francis’s allies succeed in advancing a man cut from the same heretical, anti-Catholic cloth, everyone will have a fairly good sense of how catastrophic it will be.

If that happens, it seems that we will face something far worse than the mere continuation of a disastrous status quo. All throughout salvation history, and in every aspect of our spiritual lives, we see that God judges us based on whether or not we know the moral consequences of our actions. We deserve far worse punishments when we commit evil with full knowledge of how much it offends God. Viewed from that perspective, the greatest threat to all of us is not the war in Ukraine or the tension in the Middle East, but the possibility that the College of Cardinals will tempt and mock God by electing a public heretic to the papacy.

God’s wrath would be even more certain and justified given the fact that for twelve years we have been told that we must accept Francis as pope because (a) the Church “universally accepted him” after his election, and (b) even though he is a manifest heretic, there is no settled process to declare him an anti-pope and elect another pope. Many serious Catholics doubt these explanations, but if they are valid the only way to avoid a heretical pope is to refuse to accept his election.

For this reason, the central message from Bishop Joseph Strickland’s recent letter to the College of Cardinals appears to be absolutely vital:

“If a public heretic, or a man who is reasonably suspected of being a public heretic, receives sufficient votes, faithful cardinals have an obligation to refuse to accept the validity of his election.”

The remaining faithful cardinals have an obligation to refuse to accept the validity of the election of a public heretic. They are the shepherds who must protect the world from the ravening wolves, even if they are far outnumbered by the wolves.

Faithful cardinals have an obligation to refuse to accept the validity of the election of a public heretic. They are the shepherds who must protect the world from the ravening wolves, even if they are far outnumbered by the wolves.

If the remaining faithful cardinals were to refuse to accept the validity of the election of a public heretic, one of two possible scenarios would presumably emerge: (a) the faithful cardinals would proceed to elect a Catholic pope, chosen from among those who rejected the heretical pope, or (b) the cardinals would merely protest without taking the logical step of electing a true pope. Given the nonsensical nature of the latter option, surely the rejection of a heretical pope would result in two men claiming the papacy: a heretical anti-pope for the Synodal Church, and a Catholic pope for the Catholic Church.

Even though the prospect of a Catholic pope for the Catholic Church seems like an obvious blessing, it is worth addressing a few potential objections:

• Would the Catholic pope be universally accepted by the Church? If we are considering the total population of over a billion people who identify as Catholic, the answer is surely “no” because most nominal Catholics would likely accept the heretical anti-pope. But if we were to divide the population of those who identity as Catholic into two categories — (a) those who actually believe what the Church teaches, and (b) heretics — we would presumably find that most actual Catholics would be inclined to accept the Catholic pope.
• Shouldn’t the cardinals allow the Holy Ghost to guide the Church through the conclave? Some might argue that the Holy Ghost will protect the ordinary conclave process, so any refusal to accept its outcome would be against God’s will. This argument might have made much more sense were it not for the experience of the past twelve years. As it is, though, Francis’s openly anti-Catholic reign appears to conclusively demonstrate that God is not pleased by our tacit acceptance of heretics as successors of St. Peter. Rather, it seems that the Holy Ghost’s protection today consists at least in part in making it clear that many cardinals are public heretics, whose election to the papacy would need to be rejected.
• Aren’t schisms among the greatest evils? To be in schism from the Catholic Church would of course be a great evil. At present, though, the hierarchy in Rome is effectively in schism from the actual Catholic Church as represented by the timeless beliefs and practices of the Mystical Body of Christ. There is also a sense in which the true Catholic Church is being held captive by the heretical Synodal Church. So, although non-Catholics might mistakenly view the truly Catholic pope and his followers as schismatics, the reality would be far different: the new Catholic pope would be liberating the Catholic Church from the schismatic Synodal Church led by the heretical pope.
• Could any cardinal unite all serious Catholics? Even though several cardinals have stood strongly against the abuses from Francis, some Traditional Catholics appear to have given up on the entire College of Cardinals. Here, though, we should think about three broad categories of cardinals who would vote in the conclave: (a) those who truly seek to destroy the Church; (b) those who do not seek to destroy the Church but accept the Modernist heresy that the Faith can evolve to contradict what it once was; and (c) those who do not seek to destroy the Church and reject the Modernist heresy that the Faith can evolve to contradict what it once was. Although the relatively small number of cardinals in this latter group are not as strong as we would like on all issues, they are at least Catholic. And, if the faithful cardinals can cooperate with God’s grace to ensure we have a true pope at the end of the conclave, we can trust and pray that God will guide him to unite all serious Catholics.
• Wouldn’t such a scenario cause tremendous chaos and turmoil? Those who have witnessed what has taken place since Vatican II, and especially during Francis’s occupation of the papacy, have seen little other than chaos and turmoil from Rome. The single greatest contributor to this chaos and turmoil has been the divorce between immutable Catholic truth and the authority of the papacy. Once we understand this fundamental reality, it should be clear that we need a truly Catholic pope to restore order in the spiritual realm. Far from causing chaos and turmoil, the election of a truly Catholic pope — even if he is opposed by the heretics — appears to be the surest path to reducing the chaos and turmoil all around us.

Given these considerations, it seems evident that the remaining faithful cardinals should enter the next conclave fully intending to elect a truly Catholic pope. If this happens because a Catholic cardinal receives two-thirds of the votes, Deo Gratias! If this happens because the faithful cardinals reject a heretic who has received two-thirds of the votes and then proceed to elect a true pope, Deo Gratias! Heaven help us, though, if the next conclave produces only a heretical claimant to the papacy. If the cardinals tempt God in that way, we will surely find out that God will not be mocked. Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!

[ebb tide]

For this reason, the central message from Bishop Joseph Strickland’s recent letter to the College of Cardinals appears to be absolutely vital:

“If a public heretic, or a man who is reasonably suspected of being a public heretic, receives sufficient votes, faithful cardinals have an obligation to refuse to accept the validity of his election.”

[ebb tide]

Ping

[rexthecat]

Pope Francis appointed socialist cardinals, ensuring that future popes will be socialists or outright communists.

[Uncle Miltie]

The Church is run by gay communists.

How does it ever recover?

[SaxxonWoods]

I would be surprised if the majority of the current College of Cardinals is heterosexual. I have assumed that they aren’t since the decades-long coverup/non-prosecution of predation on children by clergy first came to light.

[Da Coyote]

‘Twould appear that there are few Catholics in the Vatican. And not sure about the percentage of Christains there.

[Bigg Red]

Did you miss the “Catholic Caucus” label above?

[Bigg Red]

This thread is labeled “Catholic Caucus.”

[Bigg Red]

I am praying that the Holy Spirit rights His Church and gives us a faithful shepherd such as Vigano.