First Novus Ordo Bishop to question Francis’ legitimacy

Retired “Bishop” of Corpus Christi:
‘Francis might be an Antipope!’

It has finally happened: A Novus Ordo bishop has announced that he suspects that Francis is not in fact a true Pope.

We are talking about René Henry Gracida, the retired “bishop” of the diocese of Corpus Christi, Texas. Yes, he is officially a part of the Vatican II Church, and he is in good standing to boot. You can find information about him on the diocesan web site here. We are clearly not talking about some whacko whom the Novus Ordo Sect doesn’t recognize or approve of.

Retired or not, for an official “Catholic bishop” to announce that the man all of his confreres accept as Pope might not be what he claims to be, is a huge milestone in the post-conciliar drama — even if it comes at the expense of the same individual affirming, alas, that the Modernist Benedict XVI might still be the true Pope.

“Bishop” Gracida was ordained a priest for the Benedictine order on May 23, 1959, so he is definitely a valid priest. In 1971, “Pope” Paul VI appointed him bishop, and he received “episcopal consecration” in the invalid Novus Ordo rite on Jan. 25, 1972 (source). Gracida has welcomed the recent “Filial Correction” of Francis and has publicly asked for his name to be added as a signatory (and it now appears on the official web site).

Despite his 94 years of age, Gracida maintains a lively blog, entitled Abyssus Abyssum Invocat / Deep Calls to Deep. On his “About Me” page, he invites people to correspond with him about his posts.

On Sep. 5, 2017, the “bishop” emeritus of Corpus Christi published on his blog the following post:

It is essentially a re-publication of the post “The Time Has Come” by Jonathan Byrd, a layman who has been editing the blog Traditional Catholic Priest since its original author, “Fr.” Peter Carota, fell ill and died last year.

When Gracida first published Byrd’s post on his blog, he put it up without any comments of his own; but he has since appended some “supplemental information” to the end of the post which relativizes a little the most salient line found in the body of the text: “In my estimation, for what it is worth, Jorge Bergoglio is an Anti-Pope and Pope Benedict is still the reigning pontiff.”

In substance, the comments added by “Bp.” Gracida are the following:

Only God knows whether or not Francis is an Antipope.

There is no doubt that he was elected a pope, but is he a pope or is he an antipope?

There is doubt that his election was both valid and licit, there is good reason to believe that it was either illicit but valid or licit and invalid. The reason for the confusion is that the Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis [of John Paul II], governing papal conclaves provides for the automatic excommunication of any cardinal who participates in a conspiracy to cause or prevent the election of a cardinal. There is no doubt that Francis was party to a conspiracy to get him elected. Therefore it is a legitimate question whether or not it is possible for an excommunicated cardinal to be both licitly and validly elected pope.

All of this combined with doubt about the validity of the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI justifies doubt concerning whether Francis is THE pope.

There is some evidence that Benedict was forced to resign. If that is true, his resignation was invalid. The one person who could have ruled on the validity or invalidity of his resignation was the Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura who at that time was Cardinal Raymond Burke. The first act of Francis as Pope was to remove Cardinal Burke as Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura and to appoint Cardinal Pinto, a supporter of Francis. If Pope Benedict’s resignation was forced it was invalid and he is still the Pope of the Church but with the chair of Saint Peter occupied by an antipope.


I hope that all of this helps you to understand the complexity of the present situation in the Church.


(“There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven”Abyssus Abyssum Invocat, Sep. 5, 2017; special formatting removed.)

There is no need to dissect this commentary now and debate whether or not Gracida has properly understood Novus Ordo church law governing conclaves, whether “Cardinal” Burke’s removal was indeed among Francis’ first acts (in fact, it did not happen until well over a year into his “pontificate”), or why in the world the retired “bishop” would think that violating a law set up by John Paul II could bar Bergoglio from a valid papal election but not his public departure from orthodoxy.

Rather, the important point is simply that the first Novus Ordo bishop has now gone on record at least questioning the validity of Mr. Bergoglio’s claim to the Papacy.

Any way you slice it, that is a huge crack in the facade of the Novus Ordo Sect, one that will hopefully lead eventually to its well-deserved total demise.

Image source: (screenshot)
License: fair use

Share this content now:

11 Responses to “Retired “Bishop” of Corpus Christi: ‘Francis might be an Antipope!’”

  1. Clare Forkin

    Well spotted,
    Novus Ordo Watch and Fair play to Bishop Gracida!
    Is this not reminiscent of 1930s Russia, when every banal pronouncement or denunciation of Uncle Josef was greeted with thundering applause! On and on they clapped, these Apparatchniks and minor luminaries.. The question was, with the prospect of exile in the Gulag before them, who would be the first to stop clapping?

  2. Susan Lauren

    And so it begins …. for the folks in the Vatican II Modernist Church.
    For the folks in the Eternal Church of Rome …. it began 55 years ago (give or take).

  3. barry

    Vatican 2 is the “fruit” of many years of “tradition”…….the rot in the Roman Catholic Church started
    way before John Paul 23rd, it is the sins and failings of the church in history that lead us to our present distress and shock at the actions of Francis 1st.
    Some people seem to think that all was peachy perfect prior to V2 …….cope on!
    The Church as a unit lost its courage and many wolves entered when it gained material and political power.

    • BurningEagle

      Although I agree that the infiltration was happening long before Vatican II, I do have to point out that evil disciplines, evil laws, and heretical doctrines were NOT put forth. That could not be done until they got the papacy out of the way, which occurred in October of 1958.

      I have been told that Cardinal De Lai remarked at the election of Pope Benedict XV: “humanly speaking the Church is finished.” Apparently there were enough folks of his mindset to cause Benedict XV himself to proclaim that he was not a Modernist. The point is that many of the popes, although orthodox, were soft on discipline and rooting out liberals and Modernists. Without the ruthless program of rooting out modernists, there apparently were so many bad clerics that “humanly speaking the Church” was indeed “finished.” It was just a matter of time. The election of Benedict XV, who would not carry out the ruthless warfare of St. Pius X, meant the modernists and the liberals would overrun the Church. And, they did.

      St. Pius X, saw how bad it was, and gave the Sodalitium Pianum and Cardinal Merry del Val great liberties in rooting out the hidden modernists, exposing them, and punishing them. Subsequent popes, starting with Benedict XV, “moderated” or stifled that approach. The hidden and discreet modernists and other liberals were biding their time until they could get an antipope on the throne. At the death of Pius XII, all hell broke loose. They had their guys in key positions throughout the Roman Curia, and in other influential posts. The preparations were made. The time had come to let loose the aggiornamento of Religious Liberty, Ecumenism, collegiality, “dialog,” Liberation Theology, of course Modernism (Agnosticism & Immanentism), and to call an unnecessary council.

      So, in many points, I agree with you. Everything was not “peachy perfect” prior to Vatican II. But essentially, the Catholic Church was (and still is) One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic in her Dogmas, Morals, and Worship. It is the duty of sincere Catholics to guard and defend Her, and not abandon Her; and to show that the Vatican II Church is the antithesis of the Catholic Church.

      The Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church has nothing to do with the rot of Vatican II. Sacred Tradition, the unwritten word of God, along with the written word of God, the Sacred Scriptures, are the sources of infallible truths which the Catholic Church proposed and defended from St. Peter through Pope Pius XII. Vatican II undid the Church’s traditional teachings on just about everything in the Catholic Church.

      Yes, the liberals and Modernists came to power due to the sinful negligence of popes, cardinals and bishops of the Catholic Church. The Church has always had bad members, and “soft” members. But the doctrines, morals, and worship of the Vatican II Church did not come from the Catholic Church. That is impossible. If evil doctrines, morals, and worship could come from the Catholic Church, one may as well become a Buddhist or a wanton atheist, because there would be no church on earth which could claim it is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. (May God forgive me for having to point it out this way.) It would mean that Christ was a liar, and NOT the Son of God, and any Christian religion is a sham.

      • Pascendi

        Well said. It angers me when people say the Church lost its way, or that the Church taught error at Vatican II. To say such a thing is blasphemy and heresy. Holy Mother Church can never be anything other than pure. We should be very careful about how we speak of Her with regards to the evil that was done. It was sinful men who proposed and approved the heresies at the Council.
        Some were within the Church, while others perhaps only appeared to still be within Her but in fact were already separated due to public defection.

  4. prayforme

    The enemies have entered the Church of Christ long before V2. Most of the Good popes of the 19th Century warned of their demonic plans to DESTROY and CONQUER. These agents (Masons) etc. servants of the prince of lies, have been working overtime since before the PROTESTANT REBELLION. Our Blessed Mother foretold of these miscreants. and their Modernist heresies centuries ago. However She has also informed us that they can’t WIN and soon they will be DESTROYED. Pray the Rosary! Attend the True Mass, make the Five First Sat. and the Nine First Fridays Offer up sorrows, sacrifices and penances. . .And pray for the Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart. Russia is arming (N. Korea) and communism is alive and well in Russia, as it is flourishing here and throughout the Americas and the modernist new world church As the Queen of Heaven foretold.
    Slaves we all soon shall be. And Bergoglio I have no doubt is most certainly an agent of this EVIL. Many of us will suffer and die, I hope and pray that I will be ready and hold fast to the FAITH.

  5. Pascendi

    I don’t think anything will come of this. It would require a movement that would turn into an avalanche, and the reality is that between the full throttle Mosernists and the cowards there isn’t enough opposition to depose him. There will only be some loud complaining along with the occasional questioning of his status, but nothing more. Even in the unlikely event that they reached the point of considering a legal remedy they would approach it as though they were merely impeaching Bill Clinton, and Bergoglio is shrewd enough to throw cold water on any attempt to remove him simply by appearing to sufficiently walk back his outrages or by throwing out the occasional orthodox sounding statement like he just did.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.