Charlie's Blog: P/AP



 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way.

Is Francis the true pope? Or, is he an antipope? This question circulates among the Catholic blogosphere and is discussed in various forums over pipes and ale. At the outset, I have to declare that I have no authority to pronounce an answer to the question or issue any declaration on it. I am just a layman with a blog. What do I know? But the issue is there nonetheless, and I will tackle it.

At the outset, there are two things we can say for sure. We can't say for certain if Francis is an antipope. But we can say that there are many faithful Catholics who sure hope he is an antipope. And the reason for this calamity is because Pope Francis is certainly a bad pope. Some even say that he is the worst of the bad popes because he has attempted to rewrite the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. Even the bad popes before Francis never attempted this. They just did bad things and left the Magisterium alone.

Now, my devotion is to the pope. After Jesus and Mary, the pope is number three for me in order of love and devotion. I am always in obedience to the one who occupies the Chair of Peter. But if no one occupies that chair, that is another matter. It is one thing to have love and obedience. It is another to have unquestioning love and obedience. This would be papolatry. This is when you remove the pope from the Chair of Peter and put him on the Throne of Christ. That is anathema. Even the pope must be obedient to our Lord.

There are three arguments for the claim that Francis is an antipope. I will try and explain them as best I can.


Ann Barnhardt is the controversial blogger who argues that Pope Benedict XVI offered no valid resignation from the papacy meaning that he remains the true pope to this day making Francis an antipope. Steve Skojec derides this thesis as "Benevacantism." You can find her entire argument here.

The gist of Barnhardt's argument is that Benedict thought he could split the papacy into an active role and a passive contemplative role. This would explain why Benedict continues to use his papal name, wear his papal garb, and still wears his papal ring. Prior popes who resigned got out of the Vatican and dropped all papal signifiers completely. Benedict describes himself as "Pope Emeritus" which is his own innovation.

Another aspect to this argument is that Benedict was under pressure to resign from those belonging to the Saint Gallen Mafia. There is also a weird subplot to this involving the shutdown of ATMs in the Vatican which magically got turned back on following Benedict's abdication. If B16 was forced to resign, it would certainly make his resignation invalid.

So, what is the truth? The only guy who can tell us the truth is Benedict who acts and claims that he is no longer the supreme pontiff despite indications to the contrary.


The Saint Gallen Mafia gets its name from a town in Switzerland called Sankt Gallen where some modernist heretical bishops met to discuss various issues but secretly conspired to put their man on the Throne of Peter. Such a conspiracy would invalidate their candidate as their actions would be a violation of canon law. This conspiracy was discussed in much detail in The Dictator Pope.

Do I believe this group exists and did what is alleged? Absolutely. The Saint Gallen boys tried to keep Ratzinger from getting elected after JP2, and this is when Bergoglio popped up on the radar. He was their guy. But they didn't have the votes in 2005. But by 2013, they did have the votes as some of the cardinal electors that voted for Ratzinger were out due to age. They had a golden moment if Benedict died or resigned. Somehow, this moment came to them.

My personal opinion is that the Saint Gallen Mafia is the point of the spear for the Lavendar Mafia of sodomites that exists in the Church representing the Antichurch. If such a conspiracy happened, it would make the Francis pontificate invalid under canon law. If Benedict validly resigned but Pope Francis was invalidly elected, it would make the present situation sedevacante with no one occupying the Chair of Peter.


There is no question that Pope Francis is a heretic. There was a lot of popesplaining at the beginning of this pontificate as orthodox Catholics and prelates tried to put the best spin on what Francis said and did. Those days are long over as virtually everyone has dropped this farce. This is called being "red pilled on Francis."

Now, some people would argue that these heresies invalidate the Francis pontificate. Some go on to argue that because Bergoglio held these same heretical ideas before becoming pope, he was under excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church making him an invalid candidate to become pope. This would make him an antipope.

What do I think?

I can't say if the man is an antipope. Like I said, this is above my pay grade. But of these three theories, I believe that all three are possibly true. I believe that Bergoglio was picked precisely because he was a modernist heretic but also an unknown since he was far away in Argentina. I believe that the Lavender Mafia put the pressure on Benedict to resign the papacy. Benedict did not want to resign the papacy, but he also didn't have the fight in him. Being a coward, he pulled off a half ass resignation which is why he still wears white and goes around calling himself "Pope Emeritus Benedict" which is a total farce. I can say that when you resign the papacy that you should get into a black cassock and disappear from Rome.

When Benedict resigned the papacy, the Saint Gallen boys put their guy in knowing all the way back in 2005 that he was their guy if they ever got the chance. They created that chance and made it happen. And I believe Bergoglio campaigned for the spot.

Behind all of this crap would be the Devil himself. It is relatively easy to get a bad guy on the throne as this has happened before in history. Because of the promise our Lord made to Peter, those bad guys were powerless to do anything because of divine restraint. As for antipopes, they were recognized as antipopes. The Devil needed an antipope who would not be restrained but would be falsely recognized as the true pope.

My gut says that Francis is an antipope. Benedict could clear this up relatively quickly if he had resigned invalidly. But he is not going to do this because he fears for his life. There is also talk of possible dirt and blackmail on Ratzinger. But Benedict's cryptic status and statements indicate to me that he still retains the papacy even if this is unrecognized. I do find Barnhardt's thesis to be very convincing.

Mentally, I can't make the case. And if Francis is the true pope, I can't be against him simply because he is the Vicar of Christ even if he is a bad one. But if he isn't the true pope, I can't be for him either. So, we are left with a total state of confusion on the matter. Regardless, one man bears the responsibility and blame for this state of affairs and calamity, and it is not Bergoglio. It is Ratzinger. He should have never resigned. His resignation was simply a betrayal of the Catholic faithful.

How does this situation get resolved?

If Barnhardt is correct, this situation can only be resolved by Benedict's death which would vacate the Chair. But if Francis is an antipope, the cardinals he has selected would be invalid making the next pope a possible antipope. This would daisy chain into the absolute destruction of the Petrine office as a point would come when no valid election of a pope would be possible because all of the cardinals would be invalid. Now, you see how the satanic game is being played out.

The sedevacantists are a nutty bunch claiming we have not had a valid pope since Pius XII. If every pope since then was invalid, the entire College of Cardinals is invalid by this point making it impossible to elect a legitimate successor. I don't believe this actually happened, and I reject sedevacantism. But their crackpot theory would be a deliciously diabolical strategy if it could be carried out in reality. I suspect that this is what is happening now.

What happens if this succeeds? Without a true pope or even the possibility of ever electing one for the rest of time, the Chair of Peter would become permanently empty. The Roman Catholic Church would shatter to pieces, and the One True Faith would vanish into heresy and schism. This would be the end of the faith.

I believe this situation will be resolved in this way. Pope Francis will declare something or do something which will make it impossible for faithful prelates to be in communion with him. An example of this would be declaring a heresy as doctrine ex cathedra. Another example would be some sort of change to the Mass making it invalid. Whatever he does, it will leave no doubt that he is not the true pope but an antipope. This will lead to a massive schism as faithful prelates shun him while the heretical prelates will pledge undying loyalty to him. Then, in one fell swoop, the Lord smites them all ending the affair. This would include Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. This will leave valid cardinals to elect a new pope.

The satanic game plan as it stands now would be for Francis to abdicate while Benedict remains alive. The next pope to be elected would almost certainly be Pietro Parolin who is even more diabolical than Bergoglio. If Benedict retains the papacy, this would be the election of a second antipope who would finish packing the College of Cardinals with invalid cardinals.

All of this sounds like a chess game between God and the Devil. I have already discussed those things here. My gut tells me that a great chastisement is coming which will result in massive bloodshed at the hands of Musloid terrorists belonging to ISIS. The time for this is drawing near.

Why is God permitting this? I think all of this is a separation of the wheat and the chaff. You can already see the fault lines of schism emerging between the Church and the Antichurch. These fault lines can only deepen as this train wreck of the papacy continues. God uses evil men with evil intentions to bring about His good intentions. The Bible is replete with this sort of thing culminating in the worst calamity of all time--the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The greatest evil turned into the greatest good.

Since the election of Francis, you can clearly see who is who as the bishops separate from each other. It seems like an awful thing, but it is a good thing. God is using a wicked man to cleanse the wickedness from His church. The sheep suits are coming off of these wolves.

God wins in the end. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said this upon the elevation of some nasty modernist bishops to the cardinalate. Why would he say something like this? The simple fact is that this man knows more than he is saying. As Our Lady of Good Success told us, "In this supreme moment of need of the Church, the one who should speak will fall silent!" I believe that Pope Benedict is the silent one.

This entire essay is built upon speculation from all of the things I have read and heard. You should take all of this with a grain of salt. But I write these things to reassure the faithful that if what I think will happen actually happens, people will not lose their faith in the aftermath of it all. The faithful will realize that they were told beforehand, and things happened exactly as they were foretold. I already get the goosebumps from reading all of these various prophecies. The time draws near, and I do believe God wins in the end. Just don't lose your faith but trust that God has this.