Author Topic: For all sedevacantists and conclavists (Read 5089 times)

roscoe · « **Reply #45 on:** June 30, 2009, 01:28:04 PM »

Quote from: Caraffa

Quote from: roscoe
Quote from: Raoul76
"However he comes up a winner with the idea that Ben 15 most likely is. Without even considering his doctrinal deficiencies and strange actions, the very election(???) of Della Chiesa is just about the most improbable thing I have ever heard of, moreso even than the abdication(?) of Celestine and the election(?) of the anti-pope Boniface."

Actually Boniface is not an anti-Pope because only the Church determines who is an anti-Pope ( not counting our time where the Church is in eclipse ).

I don't know what kind of sin it is to keep saying that an accepted Pope is an anti-Pope but it is a strange one. Especially since Boniface VIII was behind the drafting of Unam Sanctam and was a very strong Pope. Are you related to King Philip or something?

Here are the two prev posts on Ben and Boniface

http://www.cathinfo.com/bb/index.php?a=topic&t=4589

http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?a=topic&t=4268&f=4&min=75&num=15

Raoul is the one committing the strange sin of calling Popes anti-popes as he insists on perpetrating the myth that the French Popes of the GWS are such. The reasons for this have been explained numerous times and need no repititon here.

The one sentence of Unam Sanctam that is dogmatic was nothing new in 1303. The idea that one must remain loyal to the Roman Pope had been proclaimed already for about 1200 yrs. If a Pope is in actuality an anti-- pope, then no allegience is due as Caraffa is well aware.

Roscoe, it is not true that Benedict XV was a Zionist. From World Affairs, September 22, 1995:
Quote
The Zionist movement tried again to get papal support when Zionist envoy Nahum Sokolow met with Pope Benedict XV in 1917. Pope Benedict XV was not as negative as Pope Pius X had been, but he, too, refused to support the idea of a Jєωιѕн homeland...

Just because he, Leo XIII, and Pius XII worked with or for Rampolla doesn't make them "anti-popes," even though Rampolla's influence on all three was negative.

On Boniface VIII:
Roscoe, you do realize that Philip IV as well as Edward II of England had begun to tax the clergy which upset Boniface VIII. Philip IV was trying to increase his own Monarchial power over the Church.

It seems as if Carrafa has swallowed the BS story of Card Rampolla being either a liberal/modernist or 'secret occult mason in the OTO'. To Bad indeed.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #46 on:** June 30, 2009, 01:58:10 PM »

Why blow off the Palmar de Troya bishops?

And you are counting on some Internet rumor that Abp. Lefbvre is responsible for Abp. Thuc doing his Palmar thingie?

Are you kidding?

You can't accuse the SSPx of picking-and-choosing and then breezily blow off the hundreds of Thuc-line clergy.

Be fair, you can't have it both ways - you obey some of Thuc's consecrations but not others

roscoe · « **Reply #47 on:** July 02, 2009, 11:03:31 PM »

It's a good question as to why Raoul refers to me as a Feenyite and in the perjorative. Sorry to be repetative but will someone who is down on the Feenyites please provide some evidence of Pius XII taking action againt Fr Feeney and I will listen.

I am not a Feenyite but imo the alleged BoD controversy has been cooked up against Fr Feeney as a desperate attempt to discredit his championing of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.

Again Rauol -- please provide some evidence to support your ongoing crusade against him.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #48 on:** July 03, 2009, 01:00:42 PM »

I'd try googling Fr. Leonard Feeney excommunication decree

for starters-worked for me.

roscoe · « **Reply #49 on:** July 03, 2009, 01:14:00 PM »

Please link to specific evidence of Pius XII being at odds with Fr Feeney.