sedebeneplenebergogliovacantism  (see is filled with Benedict and empty of Bergoglio)

This is priceless!

How about Frank and Benny or Frankenbenny?

LOVE IT!

But the hireling, and he that is not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and flieth: and the wolf catcheth, and scattereth the sheep ~ John 10:12

is about the dumbest "solution" to the Crisis that I've heard -- it's right above the Siri Thesis.

I disagree with your assessment of the Siri thesis being so dumb. I think it is less dumb than straight sedevacantism and much less dumb than sedeprivationism. So different traditional Catholics have different opinions about such things. Where would you rate the theory that Paul VI was really good but all the bad things he did were really done by his body double? Or the idea that all the popes were good but they were held prisoner in the Vatican and the Freemasons and Jєωs wrote all of the heretical letters and made all of their evil decisions while the popes were innocent?

sede-bene-plene-bergoglio-vacantism

is about the dumbest "solution" to the Crisis that I've heard -- it's right above the Siri Thesis.

Saying Benedict is the true pope solves NOTHING. What about all the other horrible post-V2 popes? What about after Benedict dies? (Let's just say that even most eighty-somethings will live to see it...)

And Benedict is hardly a good pope himself! He was a radical liberal during Vatican II. Now he's a "conservative". Talk about an example of the ever-shifting Overton window!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

But it doesn’t matter whether it is or isn’t a good solution.  For my part, I’m just looking to determine whether it’s true or not.  Maybe it’s a really bad solution because we’re still stuck with a material heretic as Pope.  But going along a similar line to +ABL’s choice of the 1962 missal as the last acceptable, not necessarily the best, it seems that Pope Benedict was the last Pope who could possibly have had the intention of remaining subordinate to the Catholic Faith, while unintentionally holding and teaching heresies.  Long stretch of the imagination, I know.  But we can give him the benefit of the doubt at least.  He never said he wanted to say things that might be heretical.  He used his German, overly intellectual imagination to convince himself that you can mix old theology with new theology and still remain true to the Faith.  So the arguments against Francis are not arguments FOR Benedict.  Francis indicated that he does not care what the Catholic Church’s infallible teachings are.  He showed that he holds his beliefs independently from the Church’s teachings.  That proves his intentions are heretical.  There’s no way argue he didn’t intend heresy.  If I said “I would like to do something that might be adulterous.  I don’t know, but here goes.”, by my own words, I would have just shown intent to commit adultery.  Total lack of subordination of myself to the laws of marriage.  Same with Francis.  Now I don’t believe that God would allow a true Pope to betray Him on that level.  I’ve always been taught that the Pope cannot teach heresy.  If we’ve got one who is pertinaciously teaching heresy after several corrections, then how could this be real.  Then I look at Ann Barnhardt’s explanation.  I know.  She’s the laughing stock.  Poor woman has endured so much abuse from fellow Catholics just for articulating what seems to me to be common sense.  I’m not saying she’s right.  I’m just saying it’s a very compelling argument.  Yes, we don’t have the authority to depose a pope, but if it’s obvious that the man is a heretic, then how can he BE a Pope?  And I believe sedevacantism has been shown to be heretical, so then what is the simplest explanation for how we got to this point?  Someone else must be the True Pope.  I’m pretty sure it’s not Pope Michael.  That leaves us with Benedict.  And look at all of the vast number of canonical irregularities associated with his resignation.  Look at the irregularities of his relationship to Francis after the resignation.  Look at the explanation given by Archbishop Gaenschwein regarding the new expanded office of the Papacy.  It begins to make more sense.  Certainly not a solution to our problems, but might be the reality of what we’re living through.  And yes, what happens when he dies?  Good question.  God help us.

Unless one believes that he made secret cardinals and there is a secret hierarchy somewhere with a true Pope from the Siri line. That belief is what I think is better than straight sedevacantism, because to me a secret pope and a secret Church in the catacombs seems better than no Pope at all. I know this seems absurd, but so is life in the times of the antichrist. And don't think that I despise sedevacantism, I just have a different hierarchy of theories.

What true shepherd leaves his flock to be scattered and preyed upon by wolves, just to save himself (for fear of the Jєωs)?

John 10:12

St. Peter did. He fled from the Crucifixion. Of the apostles, only St. John stayed.

Peter wasn't the pope at that time, and he fled Jesus' imprisonment and scourging, not His crucifixion. The Divine Sacrifice had not yet taken place, hence, Peter wasn't the pope until Pentecost.

Peter wasn't the pope at that time, and he fled Jesus' imprisonment and scourging, not His crucifixion. The Divine Sacrifice had not yet taken place, hence, Peter wasn't the pope until Pentecost.

Correct, although it was not at Pentecost.  I had always thought so too, but someone else pointed it out to me that Peter became Pope before Pentecost when Christ told Peter to "feed His sheep" (John 21:15-17).  See Haydock's commentary:

Ver. 15. Simon, son of John, lovest thou me more than these? That is, more than any one of these love me. Christ puts this question thrice to S. Peter, that this triple protestation of love, says S. Aug. might correspond to his triple denial. S. Peter did not answer that he loved him more than the rest did, which he could not know, but modestly said: yea, Lord, thou knowest I love thee: and the third time, thou knowest all things, and the hearts of all men, thou knowest how much I love thee. At each protestation, Jesus answered, feed my lambs; and the third time, feed my sheep. To feed, in the style of the Scriptures, is to guide, rule, and govern. S. Ambrose and some others take notice, as if by the lambs, might be understood the people, and by the sheep, those placed over them, as bishops, priests, &c. but others make no such difference in this place, betwixt lambs and sheep, only as comprehending all the members of Christ's Church, of what condition soever, even the rest of the apostles. For here it was that Christ gave to S. Peter that power which he had promised him, (Matt. xvi. 18.) that is, He now made S. Peter head[1] of his whole Church, as he had insinuated at the first meeting, when S. Andrew brought him to our Saviour, when he changed his name from Simon to Peter: again, when he chose him, and made him the first of his twelve apostles; but particularly, when he said, thou art Peter, (a rock) and upon this rock will I build my Church, &c. Upon this account the Catholic Church, from the very first ages, hath always reverenced, and acknowledged the supreme power of the successors of S. Peter, in spirituals, over all Christian Churches. This appears also by the writings of Tertullian, of S. Irenæus, of S. Cyprian, of the greatest doctors and bishops, both of the west and east, of S. Jerom, S. Augustin, of S. Chrysostom, in several places, of the first general Councils, particularly of the great Council of Chalcedon, &c. Wi. — Simon (son) of John. The father's name is here added, to discriminate him from Simon Thaddeus, that every one might know that the chief care of the universal Church was not given to any other apostle but Peter. This Simon of John is the same as Simon Bar-jona. See Matt. xvi. 17. Menochius. — S. Peter had three times renounced his master; and Jesus, to give him an opportunity of repairing his fault by a triple confession, three several times demanded of him, if he loved him more than these? That, as S. Augustin remarks, he who had thrice denied through fear might thrice confess through love. Calmet.


Ver. 16-17. The lambs and the sheep of our Saviour here mean the faithful, who compose his Church, without any distinction of Jєω or Gentile. S. Peter, by these words, is appointed to take charge of the whole flock, as being the chief and prince of the apostles. He is, in some manner, the pastor, not of the sheep only, but of the pastors themselves. They have each their own flock to look after; but to him is committed the care of all; he alone is the pastor of all. Calmet. — Feed my sheep. Our Lord had promised the spiritual supremacy to S. Peter; (S. Matt. xvi. 19.) and here he fulfils that promise, by charging him with the superintendency of all his sheep, without exception; and consequently of his whole flock, that is, of his whole Church. Ch.