Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]

Author Topic: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"  (Read 2661 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15060
  • Reputation: +10006/-3163
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
« Reply #60 on: August 06, 2020, 06:04:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Yeti on August 06, 2020, 05:40:52 PM
    .
    This is turning into a different discussion, but the very nature of the papacy as the rule of faith means that, if a man is pope, then by definition his rule is orthodox. The two are inextricably linked by Our Lord, Who prayed for Peter that his faith would not fail.
    .
    Cardinal Billot, the one who made the idea of Universal Peaceful Acceptance famous, explained the doctrine of the pope being the rule of faith by saying, "For it would be the same thing for the Church to adhere to a false pope, as it would be to adhere to a false rule of faith, since the pope is the living rule which the Church must follow in believing and always in fact follows."

    Nobody disputes the pope is the rule of faith, but it is a different issue than whether or not his election has received UPA (which is antecedent to whether or not he is acting as the rule of faith).

    Regarding the latter, he acts as the rule of faith when his teachings are magisterial (ie., universality one both time and space); when he teaches at the level of the authentic magisterium (which is not actually magisterial at all, for lack of temporal universality, or contradiction of same), he is not acting as a rule of faith, but as a private doctor (even when he cloaks his errors under the guise of council, encyclical, more proprietary, etc).
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #61 on: August 06, 2020, 06:26:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 06, 2020, 06:04:10 PM
    Nobody disputes the pope is the rule of faith, but it is a different issue than whether or not his election has received UPA (which is antecedent to whether or not he is acting as the rule of faith).

    Regarding the latter, he acts as the rule of faith when his teachings are magisterial (ie., universality one both time and space); when he teaches at the level of the authentic magisterium (which is not actually magisterial at all, for lack of temporal universality, or contradiction of same), he is not acting as a rule of faith, but as a private doctor (even when he cloaks his errors under the guise of council, encyclical, more proprietary, etc).
    ...council, encyclical, motu proprio, etc.).
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9644
    • Reputation: +9364/-1016
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #62 on: August 06, 2020, 07:24:48 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Yeti on August 06, 2020, 04:18:24 PM
    The Siri articles posted in this thread have been fascinating. Sort of like what you would get if Tom Clancy sat down with Cardinal Billot and they both collaborated on an ecclesiology thriller. I really wish the author had spent more time giving us Cardinal Siri's alleged statements and less time telling us how we have to interpret them in such a way that it results in his theory. I got a strong "tail wagging the dog" sense as I read it. The author clearly started out with what he believes and wrote the article in such a way as to create the same belief in the reader.
    .
    Honestly, I had never heard of the Siri: Rebooted! scenario, that supposedly the exact same thing happened in 1978 that happened in 1958, with Cardinal Siri being elected and then somehow forced out. You would think he would be already mentally prepared for that scenario, having been through it once already. Also, there was no question about the smoke that I know of in 1978. The whole thing seems a little detached from reality and common sense.
    .
    He still gives no explanation for why Cardinal Siri didn't contact one or more (or all?) of the traditional Catholic organizations and periodicals that were existing in the world by the end of the 1980s and telling them his story.

    Father Peter Khoat Van Tran claims Card, Siri, when asked why he surrendered his Seat,..
    kept repeating that he was under an oath not to speak.



    It would seem that he was a hostage suffering from the Stockholm syndrome.
    Logged
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline Yeti

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4260
    • Reputation: +2485/-537
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #63 on: August 07, 2020, 04:54:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 06, 2020, 06:04:10 PM
    Nobody disputes the pope is the rule of faith, but it is a different issue than whether or not his election has received UPA (which is antecedent to whether or not he is acting as the rule of faith).
    .
    It's not really a different issue if being the rule of faith is an inherent part of being pope, and Cardinal Billot says that it is. To separate the two would be like saying, "I accept that that shape is a triangle, but I don't accept that it has three sides." Since a lot of people didn't accept Paul VI as their rule of faith in 1962, they didn't peacefully accept him as the pope. And certainly he wasn't accepted peacefully in the way that John XXIII was accepted peacefully by the whole Church, who had no clue what lay in store for them in 1958. :(
    .
    I'm not saying that's a clear slam-dunk argument. I'm not 100% behind it myself. I'm more offering it as a possible answer to the question of whether Paul VI received UPA. It's certainly an interesting fact that John XXIII apparently received UPA and did not come out openly as a heretic the way Paul VI did, who did not receive the same acceptance that John XXIII had. It looks like there may have been some supernatural force restraining John XXIII from going too far, which did not restrain Paul VI. But these are probably things we won't know until the last day.
    .

    Quote
    Regarding the latter, he acts as the rule of faith when his teachings are magisterial (ie., universality one both time and space); when he teaches at the level of the authentic magisterium (which is not actually magisterial at all, for lack of temporal universality, or contradiction of same), he is not acting as a rule of faith, but as a private doctor (even when he cloaks his errors under the guise of council, encyclical, more proprietary, etc).

    .
    This is yet another discussion :laugh1: but my short answer is that a real pope is always acting as the rule of faith when he teaches the whole Church, no matter through what medium or in what format, and does not (and cannot) lead the Church astray in those circuмstances. Cf. Cardinal Billot: "For it would be the same thing for the Church to adhere to a false pope, as it would be to adhere to a false rule of faith, since the pope is the living rule which the Church must follow in believing and always in fact follows."
    Logged

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2530
    • Reputation: +1041/-1108
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #64 on: August 07, 2020, 05:30:40 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Yeti on August 07, 2020, 04:54:35 PM
    Since a lot of people didn't accept Paul VI as their rule of faith in 1962, they didn't peacefully accept him as the pope.
     [citation needed]
    Logged

    Offline Yeti

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4260
    • Reputation: +2485/-537
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #65 on: August 07, 2020, 05:40:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on August 07, 2020, 05:30:40 PM
    [citation needed]
    Yeah, I was thinking mainly about the bishops in the council, mainly the conservatives. They knew Paul VI was a liberal and had serious concerns about what direction he would take the Council in. I wasn't so much referring to the typical layman in the pew.
    Logged

    Offline forlorn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2530
    • Reputation: +1041/-1108
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #66 on: August 07, 2020, 08:12:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Yeti on August 07, 2020, 05:40:10 PM
    Yeah, I was thinking mainly about the bishops in the council, mainly the conservatives. They knew Paul VI was a liberal and had serious concerns about what direction he would take the Council in. I wasn't so much referring to the typical layman in the pew.
    Every council had its critics. Did any of those bishops deny he was pope? 
    Logged

    Offline Nishant Xavier

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2873
    • Reputation: +1894/-1751
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #67 on: August 07, 2020, 08:51:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Cardinal Siri could have been elected. From the moment Pope John XXIII or Pope Paul VI took over, universal acceptance would apply. Cardinal Billot's principle is simple: from the time in which a particular candidate is universally accepted, we cannot raise any possible doubt about a defective election. But a doubt about an earlier completed election that still remains in effect would be such a doubt. Hence, such a doubt cannot exist and the acceptance would either heal it in the root or show infallibly the required condition (i.e. the vacancy of the See) prior to the elevation of the now universally accepted candidate. Granted that the Popes were accepted by Cardinal Siri himself (as many of his public statements make evident), it is obvious that their elections could not have been invalid on that count.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 48465
    • Reputation: +28595/-5352
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #68 on: August 07, 2020, 09:21:15 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: XavierSem on August 07, 2020, 08:51:14 PM
    Cardinal Siri could have been elected. From the moment Pope John XXIII or Pope Paul VI took over, universal acceptance would apply.

    I don’t buy it.  As soon as the duly-elected candidate accepts, he becomes pope.  If a subsequent acceptance could effectively create a new pope, it would mean deposing the first one ... which only God can do.  Universal Acceptance is criteriological and not ontological.
    Logged

    Offline claudel

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1776
    • Reputation: +1335/-419
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #69 on: August 07, 2020, 11:13:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on August 07, 2020, 08:12:54 PM

    Every council had its critics. Did any of those bishops deny he was pope?

    Yeti won't answer your question because he dislikes its essential unanswerability, at least in the affirmative.

    He would have us all believe, evidently as he does, that in its visible dimension, the Catholic Church is an edifice where nothing is necessarily what it seems. Its public administration is a charade concealing governance by a succession of winks and nods between prelates whose true beliefs are known to none but the Select Few—Yeti being one, n'est-ce pas?—precisely as if it were a simulacrum of the way the United States is governed.

    Surely this is the destination toward which sedevacantism tends.
    Logged

    Offline Yeti

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4260
    • Reputation: +2485/-537
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Williamson saying that the Siri Theory is "very possible"
    « Reply #70 on: August 08, 2020, 08:37:16 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: forlorn on August 07, 2020, 08:12:54 PM
    Every council had its critics. Did any of those bishops deny he was pope?
    .
    I disagree that every council has had its critics. Catholics accept the teachings of general councils as part of the magisterium. The problem with Vatican II is that its teachings are heretical. The people who accept and embrace Vatican II are the ones who believe in ecuмenism, religious liberty, freedom of conscience, moral relativism, and universal salvation. The people who have reservations about Vatican II are the ones who teach their children the Baltimore Catechism, who pray the rosary, go to confession frequently, fear Hell, and want to convert all non-Catholics.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]
    « previous next »