Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: SeanJohnson on January 17, 2023, 01:54:45 PM

Title: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: SeanJohnson on January 17, 2023, 01:54:45 PM
Just came from Tony LaRosa's website, and it appears that he is on a countdown to sedevacantism, giving the cardinals 4 days to elect another pope (the blurb having been written on the 14th):

The Cardinals Have Seven Days Left to Convene a Conclave
January 14, 2023 by Tony La Rosa (https://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/author/ecclesia-militans/)

The cardinals appointed by Pope Benedict XVI have seven days left to convene a conclave.  If they do not, in my opinion they will lose their ecclesiastical right to elect the next Supreme Pontiff.  Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI have promulgated the legislation (see this post (https://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2022/12/31/universal-dominici-gregis-and-the-modifications-promulgated-by-pope-benedict-xvi-are-now-in-effect/)) that gives the cardinals the ecclesiastical right to elect popes.  The legislation states that the cardinals must convene a conclave within 20 days maximum of the date of the death of the pope.  Time is ticking.
If you disagree, let me know in the comments how the cardinals would still have the ecclesiastical right to elect the next pope even after the 20 days maximum.


https://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2023/01/14/the-cardinals-have-seven-days-left-to-convene-a-conclave/

They won't really be sedevacantists, mind you, they'll just believe Francis isn't pope, no other papal claimant is pope, and there can never be another pope again.

But they won't be sedevacantist.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: SeanJohnson on January 17, 2023, 03:00:43 PM
Looks like Tony's timeline might have been a bit off, as Br. Bugnolo says thetime for a conclave has passed:
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/01/16/br-bugnolo-i-ask-the-catholic-world-to-prepare-for-the-coming-battle-at-rome/



BR. BUGNOLO: I ASK THE CATHOLIC WORLD TO PREPARE FOR THE COMING BATTLE AT ROME
JANUARY 16, 2023 (https://www.fromrome.info/2023/01/16/br-bugnolo-i-ask-the-catholic-world-to-prepare-for-the-coming-battle-at-rome/) EDITOR (https://www.fromrome.info/author/juniper0873/) 25 COMMENTS (https://www.fromrome.info/2023/01/16/br-bugnolo-i-ask-the-catholic-world-to-prepare-for-the-coming-battle-at-rome/#comments)
by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
The Papal Law on Conclaves has now been transgressed. The Cardinal Dean, Giovanni Battista Re, was obliged to convoke a Conclave, after the death of Benedict XVI: a conclave which would begin before the 21st day.
But he has not yet done this. And it seems wholly unlikely, as of the dusk which has settled here in Rome, that this will be done in the next 5 days.
This triggers a highly unusually ancient juridical mechanism, whereby the Faithful of Rome (Clergy, Religious and Lay) can enter into an Assembly and elect the Roman Pontiff.
Perhaps the last time in history this occurred, was in 964 A. D.. For in that year Pope John XII died on May 14. Not wanting to recognize the claim of the Holy Roman Emperor to appoint the pope, the Faithful of Rome met on May 18 elected Pope Benedict V to oppose the imperially backed antipope, Leo XII.
It was a matter of days, and the faithful of Rome acted. No one has ever contested the validity of that election. It was also done with a globalist puppet antipope reigning, and imperial threats against the election of Benedict V!
Such was the faith of our fathers. Such was their zeal!
Now we are called to help those who must be like them.

For the Church is in exactly the same circuмstances now. Because, since the current papal law of Pope John Paul II only gives the Cardinal Electors the exclusive right to elect the pope AFTER the death of a real pope, not a fake pope, and since Benedict XVI was a true pope, their failure to act now, means that the right of election is about to return to the Faithful of the Roman Church, for the election of Pope Benedict’s successor.
Catholics of Rome and of the suburbican Dioceses are now gathering together in a group to organize this election. This will take some planning, but the most difficult part will be the financial. As a member of the Roman Church in virtue of my ecclesiastical residence, am going to dedicate myself to that, since huge sums need to be raised to rent the space for such an Assembly and to pay for the publicity to get the message out to nearly 6000 clergy, numerous religious and 4 Million Catholics.
While not all of those would want to come — since an unknown quantity recognize Bergoglio, the antipope, or I should say, are forced to recognize him, because there are no masses offered in any of these 7 Dioceses in communion with Pope Benedict XVI or in suffrage for his soul, without naming the antipope – a condition which prevailed even under Anacletus II — a good faith effort must be made to get the message to all and to accommodate those who do decide to participate in the election of the Pope by this apostolic right.
For that reason, I ask everyone to whom this message comes to begin to pray with all seriousness and consider what will happen to the Church if this globalist antipope should be left without the rival of a true Pope. And how much it is necessary to have a man of God, backed by the infallible and victorious prayers of Christ, as the new Roman Pontiff, successor to Pope Benedict XVI.
I am currently getting cost estimates: I can only guess as of tonight that a half million euro may be necessary.
Pledges can be made in comments below, which will not be published. But when the time comes to raise funds, IN JUST A FEW DAYS, I will indicate the US Non profit which can receive them, as a work of charity to help the Catholics of Rome exercise their legal rights in the Catholic Church. For those who want other methods of donation, I will indicate these at that time.
I myself will ask the estate of a relative to donate $40,000, to give everyone a good example of the kind of zeal we need to have. These funds were set aside so that if I ever grow sick or old and need care, they would be available. But as I prefer to die in poverty and without care, rather than let Holy Mother Church die bound in the filthy hands of globalists and sɛҳuąƖ predators, I consider it nothing to take this risk.
And so, I ask your prayers that I may succeed, and I ask also the prayers of all, that OTHERS too might have the zeal to make truly heroic efforts to meet the needs of this holy work for God.
For we can have no doubt, that such a great service in such a great and just need, in such a dark hour, will not go without reward by Jesus Christ in a most marvelous way.



Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: SeanJohnson on January 17, 2023, 03:06:05 PM
Catholics of Rome and of the suburbican Dioceses are now gathering together in a group to organize this election. This will take some planning, but the most difficult part will be the financial. As a member of the Roman Church in virtue of my ecclesiastical residence, am going to dedicate myself to that, since huge sums need to be raised to rent the space for such an Assembly and to pay for the publicity to get the message out to nearly 6000 clergy, numerous religious and 4 Million Catholics.

:laugh2::laugh1::jester::facepalm:

Crazy as a rat in a tin shithouse.

From Benevacantism to conclavism.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Matthew on January 17, 2023, 03:39:56 PM
Inquiry, Captain.

Does the condition of crude or bespoke human sanitation facilities have a deleterious effect on the psychological health of rodents?
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Ladislaus on January 17, 2023, 04:26:41 PM
So, how many of these Cardinals believe that the See is vacant and that Ratzinger was the true pope?

It doesn't really matter anyway, as (approximately) 85 of the 125 Cardinal electors were appointed by Bergoglio, so whoever this college elects would be illegitimate.

Now, this Dr. Mazza guy (who works with Barnhardt) was saying that he consulted with a Canon Lawyer who said that they could still be legit cardinals due to even an Antipope being able to make appointments.  He never named the Canon Lawyer or clearly articulated the principle to which he appealed, whether it was sedeprivationism or the classic "Color of Title" allowing an Antipope to make appointments.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on January 17, 2023, 05:21:36 PM
:laugh2::laugh1::jester::facepalm:

Crazy as a rat in a tin shithouse.

From Benevacantism to conclavism.


Sounds like the “conclave” that “elected” David Bawden. :jester:
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Yeti on January 17, 2023, 05:27:37 PM
:popcorn:
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Ladislaus on January 17, 2023, 05:47:25 PM
Bro. Bugnolo:
Catholics of Rome and of the suburbican Dioceses are now gathering together in a group to organize this election. This will take some planning, but the most difficult part will be the financial.

Sounds like a bit of a money grab, honestly.

No, the most difficult part would be to have any kind of consensus or universal acceptance of such an election.

Now, in theory I don't think he's actually wrong.  I do believe that the clergy and faithful of Rome would be able to legitimately elect a Catholic pope ... under the right circuмstances.  But the weak point there is his allegation that the current Cardinals have lost their voting rights  Did any papal docuмent governing future conclaves make the stipulation that after a certain amount of time the Cardinals would lose their right to elect the Bishop of Rome?

There's nothing in Universi Dominici Gregis that stipulates the Cardinals would lose their right to elect a pope after 20 days.  It says that the Cardinals should wait at least 15 days before calling the conclave, to give time for all the Cardinal electors to get to Rome, but that after 20 days they should start the Conclave.  There's nothing in here says what happens if they wait til Day 21 or Day 22.  There's no penalty indicated for waiting past 20 days.  It sounds to me more like "Wait at least 15 days but no more than 20 to start."  In other words, it's saying for them not to wait a month to allow stragglers among the Cardinals to get there.

UDG
Quote
37. I furthermore decree that, from the moment when the Apostolic See is lawfully vacant, the Cardinal electors who are present must wait fifteen full days for those who are absent; the College of Cardinals is also granted the faculty to defer, for serious reasons, the beginning of the election for a few days more. But when a maximum of twenty days have elapsed from the beginning of the vacancy of the See, all the Cardinal electors present are obliged to proceed to the election.

38. All the Cardinal electors, convoked for the election of the new Pope by the Cardinal Dean, or by another Cardinal in his name, are required, in virtue of holy obedience, to obey the announcement of convocation and to proceed to the place designated for this purpose, unless they are hindered by sickness or by some other grave impediment, which however must be recognized as such by the College of Cardinals.

39. However, should any Cardinal electors arrive re integra, that is, before the new Pastor of the Church has been elected, they shall be allowed to take part in the election at the stage which it has reached.

40. If a Cardinal with the right to vote should refuse to enter Vatican City in order to take part in the election, or subsequently, once the election has begun, should refuse to remain in order to discharge his office, without manifest reason of illness attested to under oath by doctors and confirmed by the majority of the electors, the other Cardinals shall proceed freely with the election, without waiting for him or readmitting him. If on the other hand a Cardinal elector is constrained to leave Vatican City because of illness, the election can proceed without asking for his vote; if however he desires to return to the place of the election, once his health is restored or even before, he must be readmitted.

Furthermore, if a Cardinal elector leaves Vatican City for some grave reason, acknowledged as such by the majority of the electors, he can return, in order once again to take part in the election.

So this says that the Cardinals who ARE PRESENT, i.e. the Cardinals who are in Rome, must wait at least 15 days.  So the intent here is clearly to prevent, say, 5 Cardinals who happened to be in Rome from going ahead with the election on Day 2 after the vacancy of the Holy See, before the other Cardinals had time to get to Rome, and making it so 5 Cardinals would elect the Pope.  But after 20 days, they should stop waiting for the stragglers and proceed with the election.  If any Cardinal shows up after the election had started, he can then join the Conclave already in progress.

This last piece here where it says a Cardinal can leave for some grave reason and return, that reminds me of the reports that Tisserant left the 1958 Conclave in order to consult with Bnai B'rith.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Yeti on January 17, 2023, 06:04:14 PM
This last piece here where it says a Cardinal can leave for some grave reason and return, that reminds me of the reports that Tisserant left the 1958 Conclave in order to consult with Bnai B'rith.
.

Not to derail the thread, but aren't cardinals traditionally locked inside the conclave and held incommunicado precisely for this reason, to prevent them from consulting with people who want to control the election from the outside? It seems to me that something like that would have to be prepared in advance, i.e., Cardinal Tisserant would have to go into the conclave with instructions in hand what to do if Cardinal Siri got elected, or anyone besides Roncalli.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Ladislaus on January 17, 2023, 09:38:15 PM
Not to derail the thread, but aren't cardinals traditionally locked inside the conclave and held incommunicado precisely for this reason, to prevent them from consulting with people who want to control the election from the outside? It seems to me that something like that would have to be prepared in advance, i.e., Cardinal Tisserant would have to go into the conclave with instructions in hand what to do if Cardinal Siri got elected, or anyone besides Roncalli.

We're not sure why Tisserant left, but there are witnesses in a position to know who testified to that effect.  We're not sure of all that transpired in those conclaves.  +Siri testified that very serious things had taken place, and Roncalli forced the Cardinals to stay for a post-conclave meeting under pain of excommunication.  In fact, when someone mistakenly entered the conclave thinking it was over, Tisserant immediately excommunicated him.  So there could have been various circuмstances that arose that had not been anticipated or planned for.  It may have depended on how much support they could get for one or another candidate.  Some reports state that after Siri was pressured to step down, they then elected Tedeschini ... as an old compromise candidate, possibly because they couldn't initially get enough votes to get Roncalli in.  So that might have been what Tisserant would have consulted about, "We forced Siri out, but we don't think we can get enough votes for Roncalli.  How about Tedeschini, who'll likely be dead within a year or two, and we can regroup to try again?

Tedeschini reportedly turned it down because he knew he wasn't long for the world (he ended up dying about a year after the Roncalli conclave).
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Yeti on January 17, 2023, 10:38:35 PM
We're not sure why Tisserant left, but there are witnesses in a position to know who testified to that effect.  We're not sure of all that transpired in those conclaves.  +Siri testified that very serious things had taken place, and Roncalli forced the Cardinals to stay for a post-conclave meeting under pain of excommunication.  In fact, when someone mistakenly entered the conclave thinking it was over, Tisserant immediately excommunicated him.  So there could have been various circuмstances that arose that had not been anticipated or planned for.  It may have depended on how much support they could get for one or another candidate.  Some reports state that after Siri was pressured to step down, they then elected Tedeschini ... as an old compromise candidate, possibly because they couldn't initially get enough votes to get Roncalli in.  So that might have been what Tisserant would have consulted about, "We forced Siri out, but we don't think we can get enough votes for Roncalli.  How about Tedeschini, who'll likely be dead within a year or two, and we can regroup to try again?

Tedeschini reportedly turned it down because he knew he wasn't long for the world (he ended up dying about a year after the Roncalli conclave).
.


Let me ask the question in a different way. During that conclave, those cardinals were supposed to be kept incommunicado by the Swiss Guard, according to the laws of the conclave, which are some of the strictest, most sacred laws of the Church.

A highly skilled, elite military unit of buffed out commandos armed with submachine guns and walkie talkies was asked to spend a few days doing just one thing ... to keep a few dozen octogenarian academics from getting out of an old stone building, and to keep anyone from getting in to talk to them. The Swiss Guard are dudes who drink death like water and have the highest and most noble ideals of any military unit in existence -- they have sworn to give their life for the vicar of Christ himself.

But we're saying they were incapable of doing this, and even the head of this most desperate, most honorable security force in the world openly admits without the slightest shame that one of these old geezers staggered out of the conclave past the machine guns to go out and talk to the ... the B'Nai B'Rith??! And this is accepted as a plausible and reasonable explanation of what happened?

Doesn't anyone else see anything wrong with this story?!
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Donachie on January 18, 2023, 12:14:15 AM
1 Mississippi ... 2 Mississippi ... 3 Mississippi ... 4 Mississippi ! There you go. Dude, you're in! have a sedevacantist cigar. Close enough for government work and V2 32 feet per second per second ...
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Ladislaus on January 18, 2023, 12:15:06 AM
Doesn't anyone else see anything wrong with this story?!

No.  It's nonsense that a Swiss Guard would physically obstruct a Cardinal from attempting to leave the conclave.  You see in Wojtyla's decree there that it's permitted for a Cardinal to leave for some grave reason as agreed to by the Cardnals.  No Swiss Guard is going to physically detain a Cardinal and subject him to questioning.  You've got some strange view of the Swiss Guards ... which are really just a ceremonial honor guard.

In addition to Tisserant leaving, we have the story of Tisserant excommunicating Father (later Bishop) Tardini for ENTERING the conclave before it was over (per Roncalli's edit).  And the Swiss Guard didn't stop him from going in either.

In fact, there's no mention here at all of Swiss Guard controlling access to the conclave:
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04192a.htm
Quote
Meanwhile a conclave, formerly a large room, now a large part of the Vatican palace, including two or three floors, is walled off, and the space divided into apartments, each with three or four small rooms or cells, in each of which are a crucifix, a bed, a table and a few chairs. Access to the conclave is free through one door only, locked from without by the Marshal of the Conclave (formerly a member of the Savelli, since 1721 of the Chigi, family), and from within by the cardinal camerlengo. There are four openings provided for the passage of food and other necessaries, guarded from within and without, on the exterior by the authority of the marshal and major-domo, on the interior by the prelate assigned to this duty by the three cardinals mentioned above, representative of the three cardinalitial orders.

AFAIK, the Swiss Guard stay outside and then line up when the White Smoke appears in anticipation of welcoming the new Pope.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: 2Vermont on January 18, 2023, 07:19:59 AM
Sounds like a bit of a money grab, honestly.

No, the most difficult part would be to have any kind of consensus or universal acceptance of such an election.

Now, in theory I don't think he's actually wrong.  I do believe that the clergy and faithful of Rome would be able to legitimately elect a Catholic pope ... under the right circuмstances.  But the weak point there is his allegation that the current Cardinals have lost their voting rights  Did any papal docuмent governing future conclaves make the stipulation that after a certain amount of time the Cardinals would lose their right to elect the Bishop of Rome?
Not just a "bit" of a money grab.  "Huge sums need to be raised":

This will take some planning, but the most difficult part will be the financial. As a member of the Roman Church in virtue of my ecclesiastical residence, am going to dedicate myself to that, since huge sums need to be raised to rent the space for such an Assembly and to pay for the publicity to get the message out to nearly 6000 clergy, numerous religious and 4 Million Catholics.

When I first read Bugnolo's post-Ratzinger death comments regarding a conclave, the part about end to a Voting Right sounded strange to me.  I just assumed it was some JPII nonsense. But it sounds like it's Bugnolo nonsense.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Yeti on January 18, 2023, 09:35:23 AM
No.  It's nonsense that a Swiss Guard would physically obstruct a Cardinal from attempting to leave the conclave.  You see in Wojtyla's decree there that it's permitted for a Cardinal to leave for some grave reason as agreed to by the Cardnals.  No Swiss Guard is going to physically detain a Cardinal and subject him to questioning.  You've got some strange view of the Swiss Guards ... which are really just a ceremonial honor guard.

In addition to Tisserant leaving, we have the story of Tisserant excommunicating Father (later Bishop) Tardini for ENTERING the conclave before it was over (per Roncalli's edit).  And the Swiss Guard didn't stop him from going in either.

In fact, there's no mention here at all of Swiss Guard controlling access to the conclave:
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04192a.htm
AFAIK, the Swiss Guard stay outside and then line up when the White Smoke appears in anticipation of welcoming the new Pope.
.

Okay, fair enough, so it's not the Swiss Guard who guard the conclave. But that wasn't my point. My point was that there are people who guard the conclave and prevent people from going in or out, for the very reason we are told about what happened in 1958 (and that was before the rules of JP2 that you mention).

The quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia is pretty informative, and it describes a high level of security -- security being defined as keeping the cardinals incommunicado. There is only one door to the conclave, and that door is locked both ways, and guarded both ways. In fact, even the concierge, the waiters, butlers, cleaning people, etc. are likewise kept incommunicado along with the cardinals, to judge from the fact that they don't even bring their food in for dinner. They pass it through a window, according to what you quoted.

What is the purpose of locking a door, if not to physically obstruct someone from walking through it? And who are the people being physically so blocked, if not the cardinals? And there are people assigned to stand guard on both sides of the door to ensure nobody goes through it. Doesn't that sound like being physically held incommunicado to you?

The guy that went in after the conclave and got "excommunicated" (it would be questionable whether any cardinal could validly excommunicate anybody at this point, but ...) was allowed to go in because the conclave security ceases after the pope is elected and announced, which is why the guards didn't prevent him from going in.

It's pretty obvious from this passage from the Encyclopedia that a cardinal can't just say, "Hey, I'm going out to Starbucks to get coffee, anybody want anything?" and then sail through the door. It's really weird to me that nobody sees the need to explain how Cardinal Tisserant talked his way out of that room. As far as them being able to leave for a grave reason, I don't know what the rules are for that, but wouldn't they be barred from coming back in once their security had been compromised? Or wouldn't they at least be escorted by security the entire time they are outside in order to ensure they are not compromised?

The type of attack that is the basis of the Siri story is not exactly original or unheard-of. On the contrary, it's exactly the type of attack that the Church has feared the conclave would be subjected to for centuries, of a hostile state actor sending in threats to the cardinals to force them to change their vote. That is the very nature and purpose of the extreme level of security surrounding the conclave. The door isn't locked and guarded both ways to prevent burglars from coming in and stealing the silverware. :laugh1:

Now, maybe the security was compromised; I'm not saying that's impossible. Maybe the guards were corrupted or threatened. That's possible. But it has to be addressed and explained why they failed to protect the conclave from exactly the type of threat that it was their job to protect it from. Instead we have the head of security saying, "Oh yeah, one of the cardinals went out and cooperated with terrorists to coerce the vote." Um, why didn't you stop him?

This would be like if someone pushed a shopping cart into Fort Knox and filled it up with a bunch of gold bricks and wheeled it out and disappeared, and the head of Fort Knox security said, "Oh yeah, this guy came in and took a bunch of gold today," and everybody just accepted this story as if it made perfect sense and didn't even have any questions for the head of security as to how such a thing happened. A papal conclave is not just an election of a head of state, it is the most important election in the world, and the people who were supposed to protect its integrity failed to do so and don't even seem to think they failed in their duty.

I'm also a little curious that there wasn't a panic button inside that the cardinals could press if their security were breached, such as if someone came in from the outside and started threatening them, to summon security. I mean, sheesh, it's not a complicated or difficult task to keep a bunch of guys esconced in a room for their own protection so they can do something extremely important inside without being interfered with from the outside. I don't understand why people don't seem to think the conclave had any real security around it.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Yeti on January 18, 2023, 10:03:47 AM
I tried to find out more detail about the security measures, and I couldn't find anything that helpful, but this quote from Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_conclave#Expelling_the_outsiders) sheds some light on this:


Quote
Cardinals who arrive after the conclave has begun are admitted nevertheless. A sick cardinal or a cardinal who has to use the lavatory may leave the conclave and later be readmitted; a cardinal who leaves for any reason other than illness may not return to the conclave.

...

Priests are available to hear confessions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrament_of_Penance) in different languages; two doctors are also admitted. Finally, a strictly limited number of servant staff are permitted for housekeeping and the preparing and serving of meals.

Secrecy is maintained during the conclave; the cardinals as well as the conclavists and staff are forbidden to disclose any information relating to the election. Cardinal electors may not correspond or converse with anyone outside the conclave, by post, radio, telephone, internet, social media or otherwise, and eavesdropping is an offense punishable by automatic excommunication (latae sententiae). Only three cardinal electors are permitted to communicate with the outside world under grave circuмstances, prior to approval of the college, to fulfill their duties: the Major Penitentiary (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_Penitentiary), the cardinal vicar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_Vicar) for the Diocese of Rome (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocese_of_Rome), and the vicar general for the Vatican City State (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicar_General_for_the_Vatican_City_State).[3] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_conclave#cite_note-UDG-3)

This sounds pretty elaborate and careful to me. So the only way Tisserant could have gotten out would have been if he had pretended to be sick; but he would have had to convince the two doctors that he was sick -- and not only sick, but so sick that they were not capable of treating him there in the conclave.

Unfortunately it doesn't give much detail as to how these regulations are enforced, but it makes sense to assume they are actually enforced and are not simply requests, i.e., that the cardinals are not just asked to observe these rules, but are physically prevented from breaking them.

I'm not saying this disproves the story about a cardinal leaving the 1958 conclave, but it certainly makes me wonder how such a thing could have happened, and why the people who claim this happened don't attempt to explain how it was possible, when according to the rules of the conclave it doesn't appear to be possible.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Yeti on January 18, 2023, 10:08:23 AM
I suppose it would be possible if Cardinal Tisserant had gone into the conclave with a threat already prepared, similar to what happened in the conclave of 1903 when the Polish cardinal went in with the imperial veto against Cardinal Rampolla all ready to go. I could believe this more easily if that were the claim about the 1958 conclave, since that type of hack is probably not possible to defend against. But to say that Cardinal Tisserant went out in order to bring in a threat from the outside contradicts everything we know about papal conclaves.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Ladislaus on January 18, 2023, 10:14:20 AM
Okay, fair enough, so it's not the Swiss Guard who guard the conclave. But that wasn't my point. My point was that there are people who guard the conclave and prevent people from going in or out, for the very reason we are told about what happened in 1958 (and that was before the rules of JP2 that you mention).

Sure, but it's just a couple of people, who could easily have been cooperators with Tisserant or somehow easily influenced / persuaded by him.  There were undoubtedly a great many conspirators in the conclave.  I'm honestly not sure how they got so many Cardinals to vote for a guy like Roncalli.  It could have been an orchestrated ruse.  Push Siri out, then claim you're going for a "compromise" candidate, so you grab Tedeschini (knowing he's too old and sick to function), and then roll out Roncalli as if he were a backup "compromise" candidate, an old guy who'd have a short reign (at least that's how you'd spin him).

That type of strategy might have in fact been what Tisserant conferred about.  "We pushed out Siri but we don't have enough votes for Roncalli."  Jew:  "Pretend then that you're going for an old compromise candidate, start with Tedeschini, who won't accept due to age, and then roll out Roncalli presenting him as a backup compromise candidate."
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Yeti on January 18, 2023, 10:34:50 AM
Sure, but it's just a couple of people, who could easily have been cooperators with Tisserant or somehow easily influenced / persuaded by him.  There were undoubtedly a great many conspirators in the conclave.
.

Okay, so you're saying the security guards were corrupt. Yes, if we claim that a cardinal left the conclave, I don't see any other explanation.

But the problem with this idea is that the very source of this claim is the head of security himself, and he also doesn't offer any explanation for how someone left the conclave, which it was his responsibility to prevent. It would make more sense if he had said, "The guy I posted at the door was on the take, and he allowed Cardinal Tisserant to leave, and I wish I had known that guy was bribed and I take responsibility for this breach of security."

But that's not what he says at all. Instead he just says Cardinal Tisserant went walking out of that conclave as if doing such a thing were as normal as walking out of some Roman cafe.
Title: Re: LaRosa's Countdown to Sedevacantism
Post by: Cornelius on January 18, 2023, 07:44:44 PM
The Swiss Guard are dudes who drink death like water

Which Swiss guard are you talking about???