We now have a term to describe the Francis fanatics: “hypertrophic ultramontanism” which is defined by Dr. Peter Kwasniewski as “a sort of excessive adherence to the person and policies of the pope by which one simplistically takes everything he says as a definitive judgment and everything he does as a praiseworthy example, wrapping the mantle of infallibility around all his teachings and the …More
We now have a term to describe the Francis fanatics: “hypertrophic ultramontanism” which is defined by Dr. Peter Kwasniewski as “a sort of excessive adherence to the person and policies of the pope by which one simplistically takes everything he says as a definitive judgment and everything he does as a praiseworthy example, wrapping the mantle of infallibility around all his teachings and the garment of impeccability around all his behavior.”

But according to this article: “One wonders, however, where are those who genuinely think that everything Francis says – his numerous interviews, speeches, in-air pressers, etc. – is definitive? Exactly who is guilty of wrapping all of his teachings – heck, any of his teachings for that matter – in the mantle of infallibility? I’ve encountered some fervent Francis fanatics over the years, but I’ve never run into even one such “hypertrophic ultramontanist” – not in person, not on social media, not anywhere. To the extent that these unicorns actually do exist, there is no evidence whatsoever that they are winning converts to their misguided cause. In other words, all indications are that Dr. Kwasniewski, despite his good intentions, is at war with a straw man.”

If he wants to find a whole community of hypertrophic ultramontanism, I would suggest a perusal of the website Where Peter Is.

The author of the article is a sedevacantist and views Dr Kwasniewski as a hyperpapalist (believing that Francis really is the pope, despite his heresies, he must attack people who write Francis off as an impostor anti-pope). Hence, also from the article: “Yes, my friends, hyperpapalism [i.e., the perspective of Dr Kwasniewski] is real and it’s dangerous. Its proponents are essentially conceding that the Protestants have been right all along, one must be on guard against the false doctrines of the Catholic Church and her pope. Don’t get me wrong, we absolutely must stand firm against the garbage that flows forth from Bergoglian Rome on a near daily basis, but let us be clear: None of it is coming to us from the Church and her pope.”

In the real world people would vote with their feet and leave the Catholic Church en masse. A total boycott. A strangling of funds. But we are in a tricky position. We have to stay even though it is so utterly corrupted through and through, from it highest hierarchy to its middle management and to much of its clientele. Everyday people are wondering: what to do? Bishops close up devout churches (which the devout paid for entirely!) and force them to dead, hippy churches used for entertainment. How to get their attention? What to do?

WARNING: Hyperpapalism is real and it’s dangerous - AKA Catholic

Dr. Peter Kwasniewski is on a crusade to combat what he sees as a serious problem, “hypertrophic ultramontanism,” a condition he defines as follows: …
Bonnie Louise
Tried to get Louie to write an expose on persecution of Latin Mass Catholics in our diocese years ago. At the time, he did not agree with me. Boy, has he changed!
Dante Alighieri
@Bonnie Louise Much has changed and quickly too with Frankie.
John A Cassani
Louie is a sedevacantist now, but he has arrived there after being a celebrated and well published “hermeneutic of continuity” advocate from a decade ago. He accepted Francis as pope in the early days, with great reservation. He then came to the conclusion that he couldn’t be pope, because he’s clearly not a Catholic, and has more recently come to reject that Vatican II was a true Council, and …More
Louie is a sedevacantist now, but he has arrived there after being a celebrated and well published “hermeneutic of continuity” advocate from a decade ago. He accepted Francis as pope in the early days, with great reservation. He then came to the conclusion that he couldn’t be pope, because he’s clearly not a Catholic, and has more recently come to reject that Vatican II was a true Council, and rejected the popes in union with it. I could be wrong, but I don’t think he has endorsed the theory that Siri was the true pope elected in 1958.

All that aside, a huge problem today comes from the fact that the oath clerics swear requires them to act with “religious submission of intellect and will” to acts of the Roman Pontiff and College of Bishops, even if they are not definitive. It’s a far cry from the oath against modernism, and makes being a priest very difficult.
Dante Alighieri
I guess the point is that so many Catholics know what a bad pope we have and nobody knows how to resolve it, except to devise theories explaining the situation. Jesus is supposed to step in and fix it, answering prayer requests truly in his will to answer, since it is unsolvable any other way, but he remains silent, things get worse and more strident and one wonders if it must be the End Times. …More
I guess the point is that so many Catholics know what a bad pope we have and nobody knows how to resolve it, except to devise theories explaining the situation. Jesus is supposed to step in and fix it, answering prayer requests truly in his will to answer, since it is unsolvable any other way, but he remains silent, things get worse and more strident and one wonders if it must be the End Times. As the Church itself preaches immorality, you would think God's justice would be swift.