Author Topic: John XXIII a True Pope?  (Read 3858 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Beaumont

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Reputation: +9/-1
  • Gender: Male
John XXIII a True Pope?
« on: September 09, 2018, 09:58:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The sedevacantists argument is that the Vatican II popes were public heretics before they claimed the papacy and therefore were unable to take office under divine law.

    However, Roncalli was a Cardinal in good standing up to his election.

    What then, is the argument as to why he is not a true pope?

    Offline Geremia

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3139
    • Reputation: +871/-181
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #1 on: September 09, 2018, 10:33:23 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • What then, is the argument as to why he is not a true pope?
    I think the primary argument is that he was a suspected Modernist prior to election; see also https://novusordowatch.org/john-xxiii/

    I've also heard some think it suspicious he named himself after an antipope.
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 20184
    • Reputation: +11022/-5302
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #2 on: September 10, 2018, 09:30:11 AM »
  • Thanks!5
  • No Thanks!0
  • I think that Siri was elected and that Roncalli was uncanonically (illegitimately) installed in his place.

    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15669
    • Reputation: +946/-3635
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #3 on: September 10, 2018, 10:38:50 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!3
  • I think that Siri was elected and that Roncalli was uncanonically (illegitimately) installed in his place.
    If Siri did not accept the papacy after being elected then he was not the Pope. The person elected has to accept the office for the election to be valid. 

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4966
    • Reputation: +2362/-1226
    • Gender: Female
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #4 on: September 10, 2018, 03:53:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The sedevacantists argument is that the Vatican II popes were public heretics before they claimed the papacy and therefore were unable to take office under divine law.

    However, Roncalli was a Cardinal in good standing up to his election.

    What then, is the argument as to why he is not a true pope?
    (1) This is not true of most sedevacantists.  Most sedevacantists believe the Vatican II popes were not true popes because they professed and taught a false religion (Vatican II) to the Universal Church.


    (2)  As for John XXIII, not all sedevacantists believe he was a certain anti-pope mostly because he did not promulgate Vatican II.  Paul VI did.
    "For there is not any thing secret that shall not be made manifest, nor hidden, that shall not be known and come abroad."- Luke 8:17


    Offline forlorn

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1766
    • Reputation: +693/-965
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #5 on: September 10, 2018, 05:09:21 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • If Siri did not accept the papacy after being elected then he was not the Pope. The person elected has to accept the office for the election to be valid.
    The suggestion is that Siri relinquished his Papacy under duress, making Roncalli's election invalid. Remember before Roncalli's white smoke, there was a previous bout of white smoke and an announcement of an election. And then suddenly they turned back on it. 

    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15669
    • Reputation: +946/-3635
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #6 on: September 11, 2018, 11:48:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • The suggestion is that Siri relinquished his Papacy under duress, making Roncalli's election invalid. Remember before Roncalli's white smoke, there was a previous bout of white smoke and an announcement of an election. And then suddenly they turned back on it.

    During the conclave, the one who gets the most votes is presumed to be the winner. However he is approached and asked if he accepts. If he says 'yes' then he is the next Pope. If he says 'no' then they have to start all over again.
    I really doubt that if Cardinal Siri had been elected that all of a sudden they would be bending his arm behind his back forcing him to relinquish the office that they had just elected him to.

    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7202
    • Reputation: +477/-246
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #7 on: September 12, 2018, 12:36:29 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I think that Siri was elected and that Roncalli was uncanonically (illegitimately) installed in his place.
    This is is Correct :cheers:
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'


    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15669
    • Reputation: +946/-3635
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #8 on: September 12, 2018, 01:40:06 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is is Correct :cheers:
    How could that happen without at least some of the cardinals complaining?

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10029
    • Reputation: +3920/-939
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #9 on: September 12, 2018, 06:39:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Brought to you by the sede who has documented proof (pdf attached) that there have been no popes since the year 1130....

    "Under pain of heresy and idolatry, a Catholic must believe there were no popes since Innocent II in 1130 and no Catholic theologians since 1250 once he sees the evidence against them and once he knows the deeper dogma that non-Catholics cannot hold offices in the Catholic Church." .....there is: Against the Siri Thesis.


    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man." - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 20184
    • Reputation: +11022/-5302
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #10 on: September 12, 2018, 08:43:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If Siri did not accept the papacy after being elected then he was not the Pope. The person elected has to accept the office for the election to be valid.

    Well, as forlorn pointed out, that's part of the narrative, that Siri DID in fact accept it but then rescinded it under duress ... and that would make his resignation canonically invalid.

    St. Francis of Assisi had a prophecy about an "uncanonically elected pope" who would damage the Church.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 20184
    • Reputation: +11022/-5302
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #11 on: September 12, 2018, 08:58:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Most sedevacantists believe the Vatican II popes were not true popes because they professed and taught a false religion (Vatican II) to the Universal Church.

    Those are SIGNS that they are not popes, yes, but it's not an explanation for how they happened to become non-popes.  Father Cekada in particular has gone down the path of considering them heretics before their election, which conveniently renders some anti-sedevacantist arguments null and void.  He would probably be correct too, since it's unlikely that these were orthodox Catholic men who suddenly at some point during their papacy became heretics.  If they were in fact heretics, it's most likely that they were heretics from the beginning and didn't just fall into heresy after their election.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 20184
    • Reputation: +11022/-5302
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #12 on: September 12, 2018, 09:05:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • And no pope can be judged guilty of a crime, for that would be for the Pope to be judged by the Church, so the separation from office must occur prior to any judgment on the part of the Church.  There can be no juridical judgment against the Pope by the Church.  But the Church can RECOGNIZE this separation.

    So what is the force of this recognition?  It's not juridical.  So then what it is?  It's simply the discernment of the Church regarding who her head is.  But the discernment has for its object the loss of membership in the Church and loss of office.  And this discernment does not EFFECT the deposition; it is not the CAUSE of the deposition, for that too would be for the Church to depose a pope, which is impossible.  Consequently, as St. Robert Bellarmine argues, the deposition occurs ipso facto by the heresy itself.

    Offline MyrnaM

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6013
    • Reputation: +3480/-328
    • Gender: Female
      • Myforever.blog/blog
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #13 on: September 12, 2018, 10:09:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The sedevacantists argument is that the Vatican II popes were public heretics before they claimed the papacy and therefore were unable to take office under divine law.

    However, Roncalli was a Cardinal in good standing up to his election.

    What then, is the argument as to why he is not a true pope?
    The argument is from a Church document below;  The men who elected him had their own agenda, therefore it was a simoniacal election.  No need for any future declaration to declare the election void.  
    +++

    Simony can be money, gift, profit or benefit etc.  
    Fifth Lateran Council 1512-17 A.D.
    SESSION 5
    16 February 1513
    [Bull renewing and confirming the Constitution against not committing the evil of simony when electing the Roman pontiff]
    Inserted constitution
    Julius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for an everlasting record. From a consideration that the detestable crime of simony is forbidden by both divine and human law, particularly in spiritual matters, and that it is especially heinous and destructive for the whole church in the election of the Roman pontiff, the vicar of our lord Jesus Christ, we therefore, placed by God in charge of the government of the same universal church, despite being of little merit, desire, so far as we are able with God’s help, to take effective measures for the future with regard to the aforesaid things, as we are bound to, in accordance with the necessity of such an important matter and the greatness of the danger. With the advice and unanimous consent of our brothers, cardinals of the holy Roman church, by means of this our constitution which will have permanent validity, we establish, ordain, decree and define, by apostolic authority and the fulness of our power, that if it happens (which may God avert in his mercy and goodness towards all), after God has released us or our successors from the government of the universal church, that by the efforts of the enemy of the human race and following the urge of ambition or greed, the election of the Roman pontiff is made or effected by the person who is elected, or by one or several members of the college of cardinals, giving their votes in a manner that in any way involves simony being committed — by the gift, promise or receipt of money, goods of any sort, castles, offices, benefices, promises or obligations — by the person elected or by one or several other persons, in any manner or form whatsoever, even if the election resulted in a majority of two-thirds or in the unanimous choice of all the cardinals, or even in a spontaneous agreement on the part of all, without a scrutiny being made, then not only is this election or choice itself null, and does not bestow on the person elected or chosen in this fashion any right of either spiritual or temporal administration, but also there can be alleged and presented, against the person elected or chosen in this manner, by any one of the cardinals who has taken part in the election, the charge of simony, as a true and unquestionable heresy, so that the one elected is not regarded by anyone as the Roman pontiff.
    A further consequence is that the person elected in this manner is automatically deprived, without the need of any other declaration, of his cardinal’s rank and of all other honours whatsoever as well as of cathedral churches, even metropolitan and patriarchical ones, monasteries, dignities and all other benefices and pensions of whatever kind which he was then holding by title or in commendam or otherwise; and that the elected person is to be regarded as, and is in fact, not a follower of the apostles but an apostate and, like Simon, a magicianl and a heresiarch, and perpetually debarred from each and all of the above-mentioned things. A simoniacal election of this kind is never at any time to be made valid by a subsequent enthronement or the passage of time, or even by the act of adoration or obedience of all the cardinals. It shall be lawful for each and all of the cardinals, even those who consented to the simoniacal election or promotion, even after the enthronement and adoration or obedience, as well as for all the clergy and the Roman people, together with those serving as prefects, castellans, captains and other officials at the Castel Sant’ Angelo in Rome and any other strongholds of the Roman church, notwithstanding any submission or oath or pledge given, to withdraw without penalty and at any time from obedience and loyalty to the person so elected even if he has been enthroned (while they themselves, notwithstanding this, remain fully committed to the faith of the Roman church and to obedience towards a future Roman pontiff entering office in accordance with the canons) and to avoid him as a magician, a heathen, a publican and a heresiarch. To discomfort him still further, if he uses the pretext of the election to interfere in the government of the universal church, the cardinals who wish to oppose the aforesaid election can ask for the help of the secular arm against him.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5298
    • Reputation: +3054/-1363
    • Gender: Male
    Re: John XXIII a True Pope?
    « Reply #14 on: September 12, 2018, 10:58:11 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!2
  • Quote
    The sedevacantists argument is that the Vatican II popes were public heretics before they claimed the papacy and therefore were unable to take office under divine law.
    That is one of their arguments and it FAILS because both Pope St Pius X and Pius XII changed the conclave laws so that even excommunicated clerics can vote.  All ecclesiastical penalties are suspended for the conclave, yet once the pope is elected, all penalties kick back in.  They don't like to admit this change in law, which both popes changed because they forsaw the future problems with having very few orthodox papal candidates amid the growing # of modernists in rome.

    This leads us to the conclusion that 1) it's possible for a heretic to be elected pope, based on the rule changes, 2) Pope St Pius X and Pius XII deemed it prudent to have a bad pope as a sign of visible unity in the Church, rather than have a vacant seat, 3) such a bad pope would, as sedeprivationism says, have the material office due to a valid election, but would be spiritually impaired due to his own heresy.

    Note, the idea of 'manifest heresy' is not relevant to the post-conciliar popes because no formal charges or rebukes have been served to them (except in the case of +Francis, who has been rebuked once through the "dubia").


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16