UPDATE 4 March 17:00 EST
Some post-poll house-cleaning.
First, I am going to reduce some of the screen shot, so this post isn’t so overloaded.
Next, Ann Barnhardt had a wrap-up about the poll at here place. HERE She has some pointed comments.
UPDATE 3 March 17:00 EST
The poll is closed. 5250 votes
_______Published on: Mar 1, 2021
At Canon212 there is an interesting poll. I mention it here to expand the sample size. (Maybe others could do that when I post a poll?!? Maybe?)
The poll question:
Who is the Pope?
This is not about whom you wish were Pope.
This is about who IS Pope right now. HERE
UPDATE: 1 March 2320 EST
Neither? Those are the serious outliers.
UPDATE 2 March 10:00 EST
It looks a doubling in all choices except for Francis, which grew more.
UPDATE 2 March 22:00 EST
Some of you can do the math. Does it look rather consistent?
UPDATE 3 March 10:00 EST
UPDATE 3 March 1400 EST
UPDATE 3 March 1700 EST _ FINAL RESULTS
To my untrained eye,
|F 12% Not sure 8%||B 70%|
|F 22%||B 62%|
|F 26%||B 57%|
|F 24%||B 60%|
|F 23% Not sure 6%||B 59%|
|F 23% Not sure 6%||B 59%|
A problem: it seems that you can vote more than once in the same “session”.
It would be interesting to see this poll on a “lib” site (though lib site traffic is negligible).
Alright… everyone get back to work.
I voted Francis. As much as I question many of the things he has done, it seems to me that if there was really a question of his legitimacy, various prelates that I trust such as Cardinals Burke, Sarah, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, etc. would be but instead they are treating Francis as the legitimate pope.
How about a sixth option: All of us. (for our protestant brothers and sisters).
IMHO, we shall see. One vision of Fatima was the children saw “a Bishop dressed in white” climbing over the bodies of fallen religious in a city of ruins. This Bishop is killed with arrows at the top of a hill.
Pope Francis is going to a city of ruins this month, in a country where arrows are still used.
If only he would listen to Our Lady and consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart!
This Saturday is a First Saturday. Al readers, please make a First Saturday devotion. Our Lady asked us to.
The only reason I voted “Francis” is because in Pope Benedict’s recent interview he said Francis if the Pope. Do I like it? No! I pay no attention to his personal thoughts and feeling on things or anything else I am not bound by God to accept. I just have to keep remembering God is in control, not Francis and certainly not any of us.
O Jesus, I surrender myself to You, take are of everything.
Though, as I was voting, I was reminded of a question on a comedy quiz show – “Is the Pope Catholic?” Their angle was that “Pope” wasn’t an official name or job title in the Catholic Church, but that it was so for the patriarch of one of the eastern churches and therefore “the Pope isn’t Catholic”. I had forgotten about that – I had always meant to go back and read a little background/context to see how much truth there was behind that comedy bit.
1. It’s an online poll. Which means it’s as meaningful as an online poll.
2. Technically, a rocket from a rocket launcher would also be an “arrow.” Just saying….
3. Every priest is always a target, everywhere, and every Christian is on notice that they could be called to witness with their lives, as martyrs. Back in 1910, some priest in Denver got assassinated at the communion rail by an anarchist. I’m pretty sure that wasn’t on his plans for the day; but he was ready, and he died well.
I am not a prophet, but I play one on the internet…
My prediction that in a great act of mercy for the Church, God will allow both of these men to die on the same day, leaving no question of proper succession.
semperficatholic says: Benedict’s recent interview he said Francis if the Pope.
No, I don’t think Benedict said that. The CNA summary has something along that line, but the word “Francis” is stuck in as a parenthetical.
“He also underlined that there is only one pope — Francis — rather than two.”
However, if you go back to the Italian original in Corriere della sera, there is no such statement. It says that Benedict said: «Non ci sono due Papi. Il Papa è uno solo…». There are not two popes. The pope is only one. (There is only one pope.)
Corriere has an ellipsis. However, if Benedict had named Francis, that would have been included. We have to concluded that he did not, in fact, say Francis’ name after “uno solo”. CNA stuck Francis’ name in there.
I would very much like to see a transcript of the conversation, but I don’t think it is forthcoming, especially given the description of the conversation, with Gänswein getting involved, repeating and interpreting.
I wonder: Has Benedict XVI ever explicitly said in some interview or other – explicitly, mind you – that “Francesco è il Papa, non io”, or unambiguous words to that effect?
In his letter to Card. Brandmüller, Benedict wrote about his choice of “Emeritus”, saying that there’s one Pope. But it looks like he did not, in fact, add what the headline in La Stampa said: “non sono io”.
“Con il Papa emerito ho cercato di creare una situazione nella quale io fossi per i mass media assolutamente inaccessibile e nella quale fosse pienamente chiaro che c’è solo un Papa.”
However, in that same La Stampa account, apparently Benedict brushed aside the divided papacy theory as absurd and nonsense.
Do we know for sure that his recent interview really was his interview?
I sympathize with the wishful thinking that Pope Francis is an antipope. But it is just that: wishful thinking. The thinking is as wishful as the comfort is cold in the idea that the man at the top trying (in vain) to demolish everything is not really the Pope. And, unless and until this issue is adjudicated by a lawful authority, it is purely a private opinion, with no more binding force than any other private opinion. No one who holds this private opinion has the right to lay it as a burden on the consciences of their fellow Catholics, requiring them to believe it on pain of sin. I see the Antipope Bergoglio crowd calling people who disagree with them blasphemers and sedevacantists, and they need to cut it out, now.
Let’s say it’s true that Francis is an antipope. What then? What are we supposed to do about it exactly? None of us in the pews has the power, authority or influence to fix the problem. Not one member of the hierarchy has ever asked me my opinion about anything when it comes to church affairs. If I believed, with every fiber of my being, that Francis is an antipope, there wouldn’t be a single thing I could do about it. On the other hand, if Francis really is an antipope, why would God condemn me to hell just for mistakenly believing him to be the true Pope? Holy priests, bishops and theologians today accept Francis as the true Pope. Are they all going to hell too? Even saints, like Vincent Ferrer, have mistakenly backed antipopes.
The Antipope Bergoglio crusade is surely an occasion for unnecessary division and a distraction from the tasks that do lie to hand, like evangelizing our neighbors and striving for our own holiness.
I agree with Anita Moore. Wishful thinking might even be too generous of a description. If it were true, then it would mean that Pope Benedict has willfully allowed all of this confusion, division, and blasphemy to be carried out under his watch and without speaking out against it in any way – the same for Cardinal Sarah and Cardinal Burke . . .etc. It would mean that at least 99% of the Catholic Masses said for years now were offered to the wrong man as Holy Father. It would open up a level of uncertainty regarding the papacy that hasn’t been seen since there were 3 men claiming to be pope.
And in the end, there ain’t nothing anyone of us can do about other than to fast, pray, and remain steadfast in our faith and hope in the Lord. Which is the same things we should already be doing. The Church isn’t a democracy (thank God). If 100% of the Catholics vote thinking Benedict is still Pope, that doesn’t change anything.
It does beg the question why Pope Benedict thought it prudent to create such a radical innovation with the whole Pope Emeritus concept. While I still hold Summorum Pontificum as the most important papal act since Vatican II, the Emeritus nonsense has me scratching my head. Maybe it sounded better on paper . . . ?
With the way things are going in the world and in the Church the faith and a life of holiness are under assault. There are those in the Church who make comments that sound like they are in solidarity with unrepentant sinners. It’s as if holiness is a sin against mercy. A moral inversion of roles. The clerical abuse crisis has its roots in “Who am I to judge?” thinking. The same with the financial wrongdoing in the Church. Conscience failed big time. It’s hard to evangelize when the Church refuses to get her act together. Where is Apostolic Succession, where is the sure guide of faith? I see the Fulton Sheen quote on this web page. How does the laity hold the Church hierarchy to account when we are told “Who am I to judge?”
Pingback: Canon212 Update: Slogging Through Sickening FrancisBlather is a Dirty Job You Don’t Have To Do – The Stumbling Block
Thank you Father for bringing this to light. I feel like many are extremely confused on this subject, but feel they are either too polite, too scared, or too uneducated on the subject to talk or discuss it (or all 3).
The fact that a lot of people feel multiple ways on this subject during these confusing times is extremely, weirdly comforting. It shows we’re not alone during this mass confusion and uncertainty.
For a while, a lot of people felt like they were alone on these confusing, conflicting thoughts for this matter. Pandora’s box has been open, and we may not see the correct answer anytime soon.
Regardless of the eventual conclusion, we shall continue to pray for the church, for forgiveness of our own sins, for the church’s ministers, and for clarity sooner rather than later.
Interesting trend of the commenters above me. I agree with them, and said “Francis” too. I would like there to be some viable option, but I haven’t seen one. I have paid pretty close attention to some of the attempts to argue Francis isn’t the pope, but none of them are sufficiently weighty and clear. They are mostly powder-puff arguments, or based on really abstruse and ambiguous readings of the rules, or on really disputable “facts”. Given that all of the cardinals of the Church are treating Francis as pope and his acts as authoritative papal acts, and they (the cardinals) are the ones who were present for the election, I have to go along with what they are (all) saying now – which is “Francis is pope”.
May God preserve His Church.
Benedict – eight years and they still haven’t found a black cassock that fits BXVI??? C’mon Man!
Ann of the Sienna down by the river has been all over this – Dr. Mazza-rati is no slouch either – all kidding aside – I’m very grateful for their yeoman’s work for laying out and presenting the evidence that BIP
I voted Francis.
I am willing to entertain arguments that he isn’t pope or is an anti-pope and there are a few that are quite convincing. But he’s in Rome, he’s considered to be holding the office by most everyone (right or wrong), his name is in the Mass.
I’m just a little sinner keeping my head down working out my own salvation.
I figure it’s Francis. (That way, in the rather unlikely event it ever turns out to not be so, we can simply blame the College of Cardinals who elected him at the papal conclave.)
@Charivari Rob said:
That used to also be one of the common retorts to any question which had an obvious “yes” for an answer . . . just as its obvious- “no”- for- an- answer’s counterpart question, “Is the Pope Polish?”, used to work just fine, that is, up until Karol Cardinal Wojtyla became Pope (if he really, in all validity, did ).
With all the present confusion, I try to steer clear of the obvious-“yes- for-an- answer question, “Is the Pope Catholic?” and have substituted another obvious- “yes”-for-an-answer question in its place (which still gets its fair share of smiles):
Does a chicken have hard lips ?
Thanks (lol) for pointing that out. And you are to be commended for not alluding to the deadly potato gun that Fr. Z. featured in a piece on this blog a while back . . . (*”Ooops”*)
Even if my vote conflicted, it would not over-ride that of the Cardinals who participated in the conclave.
I find the poll interesting not for any practical insight it offers, but merely for the curiosity of demonstrating an aspect of that site’s readership.
I’m not familiar with the site, but the contrast between the conditional statement in the code they chose as their name of “with reverence toward their pastors” and the titles of some of their links is bothersome.
I voted Francis. I agree with what JonPatrick said. None of the prelates I trust have said anything to the contrary.
Historically, there have been “good Popes” and “bad Popes.” It amazes me that somehow, in these times, many appear to feel that we are in an “enlightened era”, perhaps due to technology.
Same human condition, same sins of mankind, perhaps with new names.
It ain’t going to change until He returns.
I’m disappointed Leo XIII isn’t an option.
I voted “I’m not sure.”
There is a saying, “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” There sure is a lot of smoke around this issue no matter where you turn, and most of it is neither white nor holy.
I greatly hesitate to say that Francis is not Pope; but today I was reminded of his comments on the martyrdom of Fr. Hamel, and I suddenly felt tired of the exertions I require to satisfy myself that this man continues to act as the successor of Peter. He speaks and behaves so very differently from Peter, and all of his other predecessors! So I found myself voting, sadly, “not sure”.
I don’t really understand what’s going on, but I know that the Lord will never forsake us or His Holy Church, and that the wicked do not flourish forever.
I didn’t get to the poll before it closed, so I guess my vote doesn’t get to be counted.
However, re: “It would mean that at least 99% of the Catholic Masses said for years now were offered to the wrong man as Holy Father,” I’d like to say that I don’t understand why the name of the pope must be inserted into prayers for the pope. Even the “oremus pro pontifice” chant could easily skip the name, and go onward through the prayer.
I have stopped naming the pope in many of my prayers, but when I feel in any way forced to add names, I pray, “for Pope Benedict, Francis, Cdl_____, BP _____,” etc., and know that God can sort it out.
I said publicly on 2/11/13 that if Benedict mirrored Celestine, who he alluded to by name repeatedly, left and went back to Germany, took the black, dropped the name, and essentially lived quietly as a hermit, I would defer to his choice and not regard him as pope.
He did anything but.
Then I read the declaratio in Latin, before it became a thing. The switch from munus to ministerium left me cold.
Then I listened to Fr. Kramer’s arguments and Ann Barnhardt arguments. A wee bit strident, eh? Not really into being brow beaten into submission.
Nevertheless I find, generally, the arguments that Benedict may think he resigned but didn’t as a matter of truth actually resign, or was coerced and is lying, or that he resigned as Bishop of Rome and not the Petrine Ministry, are at least worthy of REAL debate by real Catholics.
Francis’ retreat from orthodoxy and orthopraxy; the apparent collusion by the Sankt Gallen Mafia; the stunning loss in grace where exorcists can’t even successfully prosecute an exorcism now (noted recently by Fr. Ripperger); and the utter collapse by the global episcopacy in the face of the CCP, globalists, and “COVID” tell me something os terribly, terribly wrong.
We MUST have a pope to fulfill Fatima, but given how bad the malefactors around Francis are, I don’t see at ALL the pope commanding the bishops of the world to do anything like consecrate Russia.
Instead, Francis seems to be legitimately trying to break the limits of infallibility defined at Vatican I.
And he allowed idols on the altar of St. Peter. THAT was not a very papal thing to do.
perhaps another pole – “who was the last pope?” I vote Pius X
[Oh dear. And… no, the last “pole” who was Pope was JP2.]
Since everyone else has stated who they voted for, I shall do likewise. I voted for Benedict.
My argument for Benedict being the one true Pope has nothing to do with personality. It has to do with objective reality. I agree with Ann Barnhardt: Benedict XVI – both for what he did in 2013 and before that – is one of the worst Popes in the history of the Church. Benedict has always been a Modernist (he himself admitted that in the latest Peter Seewald book), and he subscribes to the 20th Century German heresy that more than one man can occupy the Chair of Peter at the same time – hence his partial faux-abdication and the reason why he still retains practically everything appertaining to the Roman Pontiff, including still giving the Apostolic Blessing that only the Roman Pontiff can impart.
There are many comments here that need addressing, but naturally I can’t address them all, and this is not the place to do it. Many comments here are easily refuted and have been addressed by others, such as Ann Barnhardt. I’d recommend people go read her blog and watch her videos covering this topic if they truly wish to know our side of the argument.
And kudos to Fr. Z for linking to her blog.