Why Pope Bawden?

©Lucio J. Mascarenhas. Good Friday. 18th April 2003.

Dear Richard,

This is in reply to your query, asking to know why I believe Pope Michael to be the true Pope today, as below. Please pardon the delay. I usually take my time to get my replies right.

We start from the fact that in 1958 and subsequently, Roncalli and Montini, and their stage-managed Latrocinium or Robber Council, 'Vatican II' commenced a schism and apostacy from the Catholic faith, establishing a new religion. And that therefore, the papacy has been vacant since then, the last legitimate pontiff being Pope Pius XII, Don Eugenio Pacelli.

This fact is the ideological foundation of what is called the Sede Vacantist School. However, one cannot remain a Sedevacantist forever, for it is Catholic Doctrine, and one dating from the beginning, that Peter will have successors continually until the Second Coming.

But given the mass apostacy and schism of clerics, bishops, cardinals, etc., the normal means of electing the new pope is not possible.

In this event, how do we proceed?

Many have given up. Some say that there will never be another legitimate pope. Others say that only God can help us, and He will sometime do so by intervening and supplying a legitimate pope.

Both ideas are illegitimate.

That there will always be popes, until the return of our Lord, is certain and to deny it is to depart into heresy.

But even the second idea is wrong. God is not going to intervene. God is not going to furnish a new Revelation.

Public Revelation ended with the death of the Apostle John, and there is not going to be any addition.

But if God is going to intervene and supply a pope, then the act of intervention and of supplying a new pope is going to add to and modify Public Revelation, for it will be necessary for souls to credit these events in order to adhere to the new, supplied pope that they may be saved, as delineated by Pope Bonifatius VIII in Unam Sanctam.

So, where does that leave us?

When we turn to the history and teachings of the Church down the ages, we obtain a wealth of information.

For example, following the havoc unleashed by the impious French King Philip IV (le Bel) upon Pope Bonifatius VIII and the Church, resulted in the Babylonian Captivity in Avignon and in the Great Western Schism, when two and then three different lines of men claimed to be the true popes.

To solve this grave crisis, laymen of different persuasions forced the holding of Councils, first at Pisa, then at Constance. The latter succeeded in solving the problem, unifying the claims in Pope Martin V.

We notice that Constance was not a regular council, that is, summoned by a legitimate pope. That was, and is, an innovation. And also a precedent.

The precedent is first of all, for innovating in times of emergencies, to meet new circumstances. Now the very word "innovation" is anathema to Traditionalists, because we have been battling the Modernists who continuously justify their crimes on the basis of "innovations". But the attitude of a complete rejection of innovation is wrong.

There are many things in which no innovation whatsoever can be permitted. But there are also many things in which we can and must, when necessary, innovate so as to be able to defend the faith and rebuff our enemies.

Today, it is become essential to innovate in order to assure the perpetuation of the Church.

But Constance is also a precedent for a lay-organized and even a lay-dominated Council or Congress to supply the Church with an undoubtable pope.

In the book, Will The Catholic Church Survive The Twentieth Century?, we read this interesting speech given by the Bishop of Mantua, Joseph Sarto, who was later to become Pope Pius X: "Catholic Action is directed towards the defense of and the revindication of the rights of the Roman Pontiff... for where the pope is, there is the Church. The more open the war against the pope is, the more open, the more active, the more resolute should Catholic Action be in defending and maintaining the inviolable rights of the Sovereign Pontiff. In other times, it was the popes who intervened in defense of their children... today, it must be the children wh will rise up in defense of their Father, the laity in defense of the hierarchy... Catholic Action will not please certain timid souls... so attached to their habitual quiet and so afraid of every innovation that they believe it quite sufficient to pray.

"Others who, in order to justify their inertia, give up the world for lost. We have been like to rabbits; too frightened of everything and everyone... in order not to give offense. To whom could give offense? To the bad... and to good people who shrink from innovations... As the bad unite, so also must the good... These innovations... are desired by the Vicar of Christ and he who does not obey the Pope, does not obey God.

"These good people will wait in vain for Society to re-Christianize itself simply by the prayers of the good... Japan would never have been converted by the prayers alone of Xavier, the apostles would never have conquered the world, if they had not done the work of heroes and martyrs. It is necessary, therefore, to join prayer with action.

"Catholic Action has been commanded by the Pope, who has signified his own mind in so many ways, and that is enough for us to be sure that it is the will of God also. One would need, then, a pretty dose of temerity and pride to say that a work, which has been commanded by the Pope and is the will of God, is useless and of no avail... difficulties will be found, but what good work has there ever been which has not encountered difficulties? Where there is good will, all difficulties will vanish and even when it seems that we are face to face with the impossible, if there is a will, there will be a way..."

Restoring All Things: A Guide to Catholic Action, John Fitzsimons and Paul Maguire, pp. 107-110, quoted in Will The Catholic Church Survive The Twentieth Century?, Benns & Bawden, pp. 325-326.
When we study the Election of the Popes, we find that Lay Elections, participation and interference has long existed in the Church. Several popes were never elected but merely nominated by the Holy Roman Emperors of the Ottonian German dynasty.

Today, when there is no other means of providing for the pope, a lay organized election is very much a legitimate means of doing so.

We must also bear in mind that such an election is not an usurpation of clerical functions, but an alternative when clerics are not able to function or unwilling, for whatever reasons, to function.


Now, when we posit a lay-organized election, we are forced to inquire as to what could be the procedures that could apply. Obviously, while the Church has not legislated for the conduct of such an emergency method, the rules that apply to the regularly designated body of electors would apply.

And since the election would be not only a lay-organized election, but also one in which it would largely be the laity who participate, then the election must necessarily be open to all legitimate Catholics.

Now, the Church can have only one legitimate pope at a time, not two or more. Therefore, we can credit only the first legitimate election resulting in the first legitimate pope supplied to the Church. Any attempt after this attempt, would be necessarily a schismatic and anti-Catholic act, unless the organizers and participants demonstrate publicly and convincingly that the papacy is vacant, that a particular claimant is false, etc.

This is the situation that pertains today.

Aside from the clownarch Karol Wojtyla, whom we can safely discount, there are innumerable claimants who claim to be constituted pope by God the Father, God the Son, Mother Mary, etc., in private apparitions. Therefore, we can safely discount each and everyone of these also.

That leaves us with Mr. David Bawden, Fr. Victor von Pentz and Fr. Lucian Pulvermacher, who were elected in 1990, 1994 & 1998 respectively.

David Bawden was the first to be elected, and the organizers of his election — Mrs. Teresa Stanfill-Benns and Mr. David Bawden — made an effort to notify all believers and persuade them to participate. In the end, only Bawden, his parents, Mr. & Mrs. Benns and another couple participated, a total of seven persons, and which resulted in the election of Mr. Bawden.

The organizers of the election that resulted in the 'election' of von Pentz did not provide any public explanation of their action showing that there was in fact no pope and that the election of Mr. Bawden was null, void and invalid.

The same holds true for Pulvermacher.

Therefore, the election of Bawden is to be held to valid.
  1. Constance
  2. Election of the Popes
  3. Papal Elections
  4. Orthopapism: Mission Statement
  5. Innovation
  6. Lay Election
  7. Pro-Election
  8. Benns & Bawden: Justifying an Extra-Ordinary Papal Election
To: [email protected]
From: "CatholicMission.co.uk" <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:47:23 +0100 (BST)

Dear Prax,

Please explain why you believe that 'pope michael' is the true pope?


Prax Maskaren <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Friend,

By returning to Catholicism you do yourself a world of good. But I would recommend that you join the group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TraditionalCatholicsClub

And I would recommend you strongly to Pope Michael I at http://PopeMichael.homestead.com

I believe that Pope Michael is the true Catholic pope today.

Yours sincerely,

Prax Maskaren

©Lucio J. Mascarenhas. Good Friday. 18th April 2003.
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws