This just in from Trueorfalsepope.com:
Let’s face it. Many Catholics – and not just the “rad trads,” – are questioning whether Francis is the true Pope. The issues which have given rise to this questioning are no secret, and have left many Catholics in a state of bewilderment. Putting aside those who have publicly denounced Francis as an antipope, many others simply don’t know what to believe, or even what principles should guide them in forming their judgment. Recently, one Catholic writer stated that “we don’t have the authority” to declare Francis an antipope, and “Francis is the pope until a future pope says he’s not.” Yet, the same writer, in the same article, said she didn’t have “any real objection to someone thinking that perhaps Bergoglio is an antipope” and even concluded that “You can believe it” [that Francis is an antipope].
Confusion and even contradictions seem commonplace, even among knowledgeable Catholics.
In this article, we will take up the controversy surrounding the questionable resignation of Pope Benedict and whether Francis “the Bishop of Rome” is the legitimate Pope. At the outset we should note that it is not our intent to provide definitive answers to all of the questions involved, but only to apply the applicable principles and present what seems clear to us is the correct approach for Catholics to take, as they seek to navigate their way through the ever-increasing crisis of the Church and the papacy.
What are the issues that have caused some to doubt or deny Francis’ legitimacy? The primary issue concerns the validity of Benedict’s resignation. READ ARTICLE HERE
REMNANT COMMENT: One point I’ve always found somewhat perplexing about this issue: If tomorrow I were to denounce Francis as an antipope, what would that actually accomplish—other than making the neo-Catholic critics of The Remnant very happy? In other words, if I pronounce those words I'd be hailed by a few folks on the Internet for having the "courage to say it like it is". Our sedevacantist friends would waste no time pointing out how, "finally and at long last, The Remnant woke up". But then what? Is our situation somehow improved? Is the Church out of crisis? Do we get to leave the battlefield and go back home?
Either way, it seems to me, the Church we love and have sworn to defend remains in the control of her enemies. And since this thing is very difficult to prove, and exceedingly polarizing among good people -- what's the point? Either way we all need to stand together, proclaim the Truth, defend the Church AND get our buildings back.
To me it's rather a moot point, and one that I find less and less pressing under this pontificate. Why? Because making the big, dramatic proclamation that Francis is an antipope may feel good for a few minutes but, ultimately, it will only serve to divide and weaken his opposition. At the moment, many people in places high and low in the Church are waking up to what this troubled man is really all about. If we really want to form a movement that can certainly undermine his agenda, if not eventually stop him altogether, it seems supremely counterproductive to do or say that which can only divide those forces ready to stand and resist him.
He may be an antipope, and, if he is, that certainly would not shake my faith. It's happened before and it will happen again. But until those in authority are given the grace by God to stand and challenge him as such, I'm perfectly content to do whatever I can to resist him -- to resist POPE Francis and to pray for him.