What's with all of the sudden denunciation of Ann Barnhardt?

She has to pick up where men fail to be men, where they fail to teach and lead. God will use women to fill the places of men who are cowards or too degenerate to do anything of God's calling.

She doesn't mince her words like the milquetoast sissy males of the Church.

I will, also, add that she longs for a real man to conquer her - to dominate her.

Apart from your perverse impure fantasy at the end, Croix, are you incapable of reading what the criticism of Barnhardt has been?  It's been explained quite adequately throughout this thread.

1) She postures as a theologian and Canon Lawyer, and comes up with some absurd narrative that even her fellow Bennyvacantists reject (Patrick Coffin, Br. Bugnolo, et al.) reject.  I counted at least a half dozen errors in just the first few minutes of her "Antipope Bergoglio" video before I couldn't take any more and had to turn it off.

2) When other people have refuted her narrative (again, fellow Bennyvacantists Patrick Coffin, Andrea Cionci, Br. Bugnolo) she resorts to vile insults against their masculinity to cling (out of pride) to her ridiculous "substantial error" nonsense.  Instead of rebutting their arguments -- which she can't do -- she resorts to name-calling.

3) She derides sedevacantists, likening them to тαℓмυdic Jєωs, because they don't buy into her gross error of Bennyvacantism, claiming they've been "mean" to her, considering themselves right, while ripping anyone and everyone who disagrees with her position.  Can dish it out but then can't take it.  I'll bet too that she completely fabricated out of whole cloth the assertion that she's been savaged by these evil тαℓмυdic-Jєω sedevacantists.

4) Continues to promote the error of Bennyvacantism, pretending that Ratzinger was some katechon against the destruction of the Church, rather than an active participant.  Pretends that the crisis in the Church began in 2013 with the arrival of Bergoglio.

5) Displays additional narcissim by pretending to improve upon the term "Anno Domini", which has been used by all Roman Rite Catholics for over 1500 years, and has appeared in every papal teaching and every Roman missal, etc. since then.

6) Then in general, she was also criticize as being one of a number of lay grifters making a living off of "Trad, Inc."

7) She also makes things up, claiming that she's only promoting Bennyvacantism because she's seeing throngs of people losing the faith becacuse of Bergoglio.  That's completely made up.  Nobody has lost the faith on account of Bergoglio.  Those who have kept the faith despite the V2 crisis have only become more resolute because of Bergoglio.  Pay no attention to the literally 100s of millions who lost the faith after and on account of Vatican II, including under the glorious reign of Ratzinger.

Generally, you find Brother Bugnolo saying that he used to admire her but that she's crossed a line by personal insults against people that don't agree with some of her positions.

What's with all of the sudden denunciation of Ann Barnhardt?

She has to pick up where men fail to be men, where they fail to teach and lead. God will use women to fill the places of men who are cowards or too degenerate to do anything of God's calling.

She doesn't mince her words like the milquetoast sissy males of the Church.

I will, also, add that she longs for a real man to conquer her - to dominate her.

Lay people should not play theologian. The end.

There goes ~90% of all CI posts.

We've already talked about this.  People are allowed to have opinions, and in this crisis it's pretty much everyone for himself.  It's fine to say, "go see a priest" or "talk to a bishop" ... but the answer is ... "Which one?"  Bishops and Priests are all divided about their approaches to the crisis.

Posting on CI takes on the aspect of conversations over coffee and donuts after Mass in the church hall or baseement, where people share opinions are peers.  But that's quite different from having a layman get up on a podium in said church hall or basement and giving a speech or lecturing.  At that point, the individual is assuming a  position of being a "thought leader".  Blogging still has the aspect of opining about some matter.  But when lay people start appearing on video or podcasting with an attitude of guiding people, that takes on the aspect of posing as a theologian (when the subject is theology of course).  IMO, it would be OK to host a show where individuals debate one another, as that too puts an individual on the level of a peer with someone else, v.s monologuing and lecturing people.

When you have a Taylor Marshall or Ann Barnhardt (or any of these other lay preaches / teachers) putting out vidoes where they're "mansplaining" theology to other people as if they were some kind of authority or theological thought leader, that is to posture as a theologian, and that kind of public posturing was always strictly controlled by bishops before Vatican II.

I have better trust in a real lay theologian, i.e., someone holding a pontifical degree (STL, STD, SSL, SSD, JCL, JCD, LEccHist, DEccHist), than I do in the theological opinions of most priests.

Yes, Pontifical degrees are certifications from the Church, but no one being discussed here has such degrees.  Lay people with such degrees or certifications can be delegated by their ordinary to act in a public capacity, but the thought of people parading around with degrees in finance and/or Ph.D.s from Conciliar Universities or even Protestant Universities presenting themselves as quasi-theologians, that's what I have a problem with.  There's sometimes a fine line between opining and presuming to teach or lecture the faithful, but some of these celebrities have clearly crossed the line with their large followings.

So, we have Ann Barnhardt "mansplaining" Canon Law and within 5-10 minutes declaring that you don't need to be a Canon Lawyer to understand the "plain sense" (as she sees it) of Canon Law.  Absolute hogwash.  Canon Law is replete with technical terms with very precise legal definitions that one must be thoroughly acquainted with in order to properly interpret, understand, and apply.  She goes on to say that it's a requirement of Law that it be made openly understadable to the faithful.  Uhm, yeah, that's where the Canon Lawyers come in; they explain to lay people and even priests who are not fully trained in Canon Law how it applies to their situation(s).

I'll dig up the passages from her video to which I particularly object, where Barnhardt says what I wrot above.

^^^^^
Exactly!

I edited my post before you had responded, but I'll dig up the offensive portions of Ann Barnhardt's video that I mention in the second portion of my post above.  That was when I turned if off and soured on Ann Barnhardt.

Barnhardt’s fine.

Barnhardt’s fine.

Of course she is.

Seems to be a lot of pearl-clutching in these parts.