Author Topic: Cardinal Rampolla Reprise II (Read 3969 times)

roscoe · « **on:** August 05, 2011, 08:52:52 PM »

God has willed it that I come into possesion of this docuмent-- enjoy.

roscoe · « **Reply #1 on:** August 06, 2011, 11:50:34 AM »

If anyone has read this yet, take note of Don Ricossa's thoughts-- the libels against Card Rampolla are nothing less than an attack on the Church itself.

Pyrrhos · « **Reply #2 on:** August 06, 2011, 12:16:11 PM »

What are you saying?

Cardinal Rampolla, freemason or not, was one of the greatest perils of the Church, a devoted liberalist and leader of the diplomatic clique which assumed leadership in the Vatican till its complete destruction.

As usual, Don Ricossa has an excellent view and insight, which you can maybe only have as an Italian in these matters.

roscoe · « **Reply #3 on:** August 06, 2011, 12:20:17 PM »

I am Italian on my fathers side and U are either a lunatic or cannot read.

Pyrrhos · « **Reply #4 on:** August 06, 2011, 01:15:50 PM »

Obviously you don´t live in Italy, have the education or insight of a Don Ricossa (neither do I) - even though I have a very big problem with this priest, I cannot deny these facts.

So what exactly is the problem now with this docuмent?

roscoe · « **Reply #5 on:** August 06, 2011, 01:25:31 PM »

:confused1:

Pyrrhos · « **Reply #6 on:** August 06, 2011, 01:31:43 PM »

Seriously, I don´t understand what you are saying. How is the Rev. Fr. Francesco Ricossa attacking the Church?
Or rather: Which of the facts stated are false? Which conclusions erroneous?

Actually I am very happy that you uploaded this docuмent, since I did not see it before. Ricossa really always has the best stuff on pre-V2 internal Church affairs.

roscoe · « **Reply #7 on:** August 06, 2011, 04:41:17 PM »

Quote from: Pyrrhos

Seriously, I don´t understand what you are saying. How is the Rev. Fr. Francesco Ricossa attacking the Church?
Or rather: Which of the facts stated are false? Which conclusions erroneous?

Actually I am very happy that you uploaded this docuмent, since I did not see it before. Ricossa really always has the best stuff on pre-V2 internal Church affairs.

Pls post where I have said that don( not Fr) Ricossa is attacking the Church.

roscoe · « **Reply #8 on:** August 06, 2011, 04:52:30 PM »

The article defends Card Rampolla and speculates that anyone attacking him is attacking the Church as a whole.

Pyrrhos · « **Reply #9 on:** August 06, 2011, 05:58:57 PM »

I don´t think that saying Rampolla was not a freemason is a defense of him. As a matter of fact I think this makes the whole matter even more serious.

PS: Ah, I see. Somehow your posts were confusing me in these regards.
Even though "Don" and "Fr" just represent the different styles of address in Italian and English, the latter is usually used in English to address priests, afaik.

roscoe · « **Reply #10 on:** August 06, 2011, 06:19:39 PM »

So if Cardinal Rampolla WAS a freemason then that is a defense of him?? :confused1: What exactly Are U saying? I did not see any mention in the article that Ricossa was a priest.

Was Don Corleone a priest then?

Pyrrhos · « **Reply #11 on:** August 06, 2011, 06:24:57 PM »

From Wikipedia "Don":

Quote

Today in Italy, the title is widely given everywhere only to Diocesan Catholic priests, (never for prelates, who bear higher honorifics such as monsignore, eminenza and so on). Outside of the priesthood or old nobility, usage is now fairly uncommon in the south and rarely if ever used in central or northern Italy. It can be used satirically or ironically to lampoon a person's sense of self-importance.

Don Ricossa is a very well known priest, being the leader of the split of a sedevacantist/sedeprivationist group from the SSPX.

As I see it, Ricossa states that Rampolla was not a freemason. Traditionalists usually make themselves ridiculous in more serious circles with asserting such things without sufficient proofs.

Obviously, Rampolla still was not a great prelate and Ricossa is in no wise approving his doings (even though he takes a too strong "Papalist" opinion, I think).

roscoe · « **Reply #12 on:** August 06, 2011, 06:31:53 PM »

This is of course fine if Ricossa was a priest but others use the title Don as well.

Card Rampolla was indeed a great man of the Church.

1--GM Knights of Malta
2-- Chmn Pontifical Commission of Biblical Studies
3-- Arch-priest Vatican Cathedral
4-- Prefect Vatican Library.
5-- Almost elected Pope-- with the support of Merry Del Val and Card Sarto
Re-read the article-- Ricossa is indeed defending Rampolla. His claim is that an attack on The Cardinal is an attack on Popes Leo, St Pius and the Church itself.

roscoe · « **Reply #13 on:** August 06, 2011, 07:15:04 PM »

How could I forget the big one-- he was also Card Sec of State to Pope Leo for 16yrs.

Pyrrhos · « **Reply #14 on:** August 06, 2011, 07:34:09 PM »

I can see now what you mean. Please excuse my own lack of comprehension and reading abilities, and I certainly did not want to be offensive.

The facts you stated are certainly right (besides the comment on point 5, I would think). If this makes him a great Saint I do not know -some actually say that- but certainly a great statesman.

Personally I strongly disagree with the "Rampollian policy" during the Pontificate of Papa´s Pecci, della Chiesa and the following Pontiffs, and certainly much more so than Don Ricossa, who is also not a exactly a Cardinal Rampolla fan.
Still, I think it is a legitimate opinion to think otherwise.

My main point is, though, that a personal attack on Rampolla is not necessary to argue about the policies of the Holy See during those years. It just brings it down to a level, on which civilized and Christian people should not argue.
Therefore, I am glad that Ricossa brought this subject up - despite the internal "anti-freemasonic" secret police of traditionalism.