Author Topic: Gregory XVII (Read 5266 times)

DeMaistre · « **on:** June 22, 2009, 08:45:48 PM »

Quote

I believe that there may be evidence to support that Gregory XVII was the elected pope in 1958, but I haven't found concrete evidence to support it. I am looking into it to the best of my ability, but I can't say for sure. Whatever I do find, however, I will be sure to share if I find anything concrete to support it.

Right now, I'm a sede impedetist, meaning, I believe the throne of Peter has been usurped by someone that is a pretender in the place of the person that should rightfully be sitting there, whoever it is, but that is not a sede vacantist, who believes that there is no pope.

I hope that clarifies my position.

Hello parentsfortruth,

If you believe that Card. Siri was elected pope, don't you have to believe that he apostasized? He denied it, and even gave the sermon at John Paul II's funeral.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #1 on:** June 22, 2009, 08:47:08 PM »

Um what? He died in 1989. There is no way he could have spoken at JPII's funeral!

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #2 on:** June 22, 2009, 08:49:52 PM »

roscoe · « **Reply #3 on:** June 22, 2009, 08:52:22 PM »

I have considered De Maistre a shill for quite some time.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #4 on:** June 22, 2009, 08:54:54 PM »

I'd like to think he's just misinformed.

TheD · « **Reply #5 on:** June 22, 2009, 09:17:38 PM »

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Siri

Although claimed by one sedevacantist group that he had actually been elected to the papacy in 1958 and 1963, only to be displaced by Angelo Roncalli (Pope John XXIII) and then Giovanni Battista Montini (Pope Paul VI)[9], Siri entirely submitted to the authority of the official popes and remained in full communion with the Church, refusing to support any sedevacantist organization. One small sedevacantist group, centered in Houston, Texas still claims him to have been the actual pope, despite Siri's own silence as to this claim. This small group, known as "Sirianists", have yet to offer any reasonable explanation[10] for the fact that Siri failed to support the Traditionalist Catholic movement, that he recognized John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II as legitimate popes, that despite his conservatism he used the Mass according to the reformed 1970 Roman Missal and the other revised sacraments, and that he signed all of the docuмents of the Second Vatican Council. The Cardinal even somewhat defended the Council, as long as it was interpreted in the light of Tradition, though he did remark that, "If the Church were not divine, this Council would have buried it".[11]. To explain Siri's silence as to what happened in the conclaves, supporters of the Siri Thesis have suggested that Siri was silenced by the conspirators' use of the Seal of the Confessional,[12] a method of silencing prelates suggested in other literature.

TheD · « **Reply #6 on:** June 22, 2009, 09:18:56 PM »

The fact remains that he recognized the post V2 Popes as valid.

DeMaistre · « **Reply #7 on:** June 22, 2009, 09:56:04 PM »

Quote from: parentsfortruth

Um what? He died in 1989. There is no way he could have spoken at JPII's funeral!

LOL

Sorry, I think that I meant JPI

roscoe · « **Reply #8 on:** June 22, 2009, 10:36:45 PM »

Quote from: TheD

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Siri

Although claimed by one sedevacantist group that he had actually been elected to the papacy in 1958 and 1963, only to be displaced by Angelo Roncalli (Pope John XXIII) and then Giovanni Battista Montini (Pope Paul VI)[9], Siri entirely submitted to the authority of the official popes and remained in full communion with the Church, refusing to support any sedevacantist organization. One small sedevacantist group, centered in Houston, Texas still claims him to have been the actual pope, despite Siri's own silence as to this claim. This small group, known as "Sirianists", have yet to offer any reasonable explanation[10] for the fact that Siri failed to support the Traditionalist Catholic movement, that he recognized John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II as legitimate popes, that despite his conservatism he used the Mass according to the reformed 1970 Roman Missal and the other revised sacraments, and that he signed all of the docuмents of the Second Vatican Council. The Cardinal even somewhat defended the Council, as long as it was interpreted in the light of Tradition, though he did remark that, "If the Church were not divine, this Council would have buried it".[11]. To explain Siri's silence as to what happened in the conclaves, supporters of the Siri Thesis have suggested that Siri was silenced by the conspirators' use of the Seal of the Confessional,[12] a method of silencing prelates suggested in other literature.

If you want to believe the Jєωιѕн Wikipedia re: the business of the RC Church and Greg XVII, then you have been given the free will to do so. That is with the poss exception that you may be a victim of MK Ultra.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #9 on:** June 22, 2009, 10:57:29 PM »

I only cited Wikipedia for reference to the day he died.

roscoe · « **Reply #10 on:** June 22, 2009, 11:05:00 PM »

I was referring to D

Raoul76 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 23, 2009, 12:38:07 AM »

Go ahead, keep avoiding my question.

How did Siri create a College of Cardinals to elect a Pope while under surveillance? I'm going to follow you like a bad shadow until you give me an answer to this question.

You are just too scared to call yourselves sedevacantists. That's all that this is.

I cannot stand this dishonesty anymore, especially with Roscoe bleating every two seconds about how he isn't a sedevacantist. Yes, you actually are. Do you think conjuring up a Pope out of thin air makes you better than a sedevacantist? Do you think sedevacantists don't want a Pope? Do you think sedevacantist is a dirty word?

We are without a Pope. Whether he is in hiding or whether he doesn't exist. The Catholic of today has no Pope who can teach us or guide us. You can quibble with words all you want. Go ahead, say you're "sedeprivationist" or "sede-impedist." You know what I smell? Fear. Also: Misunderstanding of Vatican I.

It was NOT PROPHECY when they wrote about the "visible succession of Popes." CHURCH COUNCILS HAVE NOT EVER, NOR WILL THEY EVER DEAL IN PROPHECY. It said "Let those who say there SHOULD NOT be a visible succession of Popes be anathema."

In other words, let those who question the office of the Papacy itself, the democrats of the day, the advocates of collegiality, and all of the modernists who think the idea of the Vicar of Christ outmoded -- because there were many who thought this way -- be anathema.

When Siri's successor shows himself, I will acknowledge him as Pope just as you do. Until then, do you have any information about him? No? Then what exactly do you think you're accomplishing with all of this? I'm not being sarcastic, I really want to know.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #12 on:** June 23, 2009, 12:41:47 AM »

Also, what did Christ say? "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church." And "This is my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it." He did not say "The gates of hell will not prevail against Peter." He said "it." As in "the Church."

Peter is the rock upon which the Church is built, yes. But the failure of this rock does not mean the failure of the Church. It simply means the biggest crisis in world history.

Christ does not quibble with words. And right here, in the way Jesus phrases things, you see that he was leaving the possibility open that Peter would fall. But the Church never will.

This is because, as we know from Daniel, THE MAN OF SIN SITS IN THE TEMPLE OF GOD. THE TEMPLE OF GOD IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

DeMaistre · « **Reply #13 on:** June 23, 2009, 12:43:20 AM »

I think that its just another variation on the religion of man, some people just can't believe that there is no pope, they need a pope to follow, its just not enough for them to say "Sede Vacante!"and just follow the dogmas of the Catholic faith, etc.

And the entire Siri thesis pretty much relies on the testimony of one Vietnamese priest.

DeMaistre · « **Reply #14 on:** June 23, 2009, 12:44:30 AM »

Quote from: roscoe

Quote from: TheD
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Siri

Although claimed by one sedevacantist group that he had actually been elected to the papacy in 1958 and 1963, only to be displaced by Angelo Roncalli (Pope John XXIII) and then Giovanni Battista Montini (Pope Paul VI)[9], Siri entirely submitted to the authority of the official popes and remained in full communion with the Church, refusing to support any sedevacantist organization. One small sedevacantist group, centered in Houston, Texas still claims him to have been the actual pope, despite Siri's own silence as to this claim. This small group, known as "Sirianists", have yet to offer any reasonable explanation[10] for the fact that Siri failed to support the Traditionalist Catholic movement, that he recognized John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II as legitimate popes, that despite his conservatism he used the Mass according to the reformed 1970 Roman Missal and the other revised sacraments, and that he signed all of the docuмents of the Second Vatican Council. The Cardinal even somewhat defended the Council, as long as it was interpreted in the light of Tradition, though he did remark that, "If the Church were not divine, this Council would have buried it".[11]. To explain Siri's silence as to what happened in the conclaves, supporters of the Siri Thesis have suggested that Siri was silenced by the conspirators' use of the Seal of the Confessional,[12] a method of silencing prelates suggested in other literature.

If you want to believe the Jєωιѕн Wikipedia re: the business of the RC Church and Greg XVII, then you have been given the free will to do so. That is with the poss exception that you may be a victim of MK Ultra.

I've noticed Wikipedia getting more and more inaccurate when it comes to traditional Catholicism.