Author Topic: Padre Pio accepted Paul VI as a valid pope. (Read 4745 times)

Matto · « **Reply #30 on:** July 25, 2016, 01:53:42 PM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: Amakusa
Padre Pio wrote this letter because he knew that Paul VI was to become the Martyr Pope of the end times and one of the greatest saints of the New Covenant.

https://gloria.tv/text/QuVfDe6RARabLo4cR4pUgZ8hr

You must be a troll. That is blasphemy.

He is not a troll. He is a strange breed of traditional Catholic. He believes Pope Paul VI was replaced with a double and the double did all the bad things we think Paul VI did. Then the real Paul VI went into exile and suffered greatly. Now he thinks Pope Paul VI is still alive in exile, and is the true Pope. I think he even wrote a book about his theory. I don't believe it but he is not a troll.

roscoe · « **Reply #31 on:** July 25, 2016, 01:55:13 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis

What IS relevant is that these popes hold the papal office, whether we like it or not.

Wrong as there is No way the election of the v2 anti-popes can be construed as legal....

Gregory XVII is the true( legally elected) Pope until 1989 and Catholics are bound to recognise him as such.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #32 on:** July 25, 2016, 01:56:00 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis

St Padre Pio's opinion on who is or isn't pope is irrelevant, as he is not infallible. Just as our opinions are also irrelevant. What IS relevant is that these popes hold the papal office, whether we like it or not. They are NOT good popes, as anyone can see. So, whether the post V2 guys are/were popes is irrelevant because a bad leader has the same effect (or worse) as no leader.

I understand your point. But in the objective realm whether the men who purport to be the Vicars of Christ are is indeed relevant.

But your point is a good one as far as it goes.

A bad Pope can sin in scandalous ways, be imprudent and cowardly but will not bind on the Church what cannot be bound in Heaven or engage in heretical acts or teach heresy. People can the Sacraments and Mass in place under him and the Saints he canonizes and the code of canon law he enforces and any council he approves. They do not have to worry about him being a public heretic, worshiping in false religions or inventing new ones or teaching heresy.

A non-Pope if mistaken for a true Pope will lead many into Hell with him such as those who follow him, those who resist him and those who disobey him.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #33 on:** July 25, 2016, 01:57:19 PM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: Lover of Truth
Quote from: Amakusa
Padre Pio wrote this letter because he knew that Paul VI was to become the Martyr Pope of the end times and one of the greatest saints of the New Covenant.

https://gloria.tv/text/QuVfDe6RARabLo4cR4pUgZ8hr

You must be a troll. That is blasphemy.

He is not a troll. He is a strange breed of traditional Catholic. He believes Pope Paul VI was replaced with a double and the double did all the bad things we think Paul VI did. Then the real Paul VI went into exile and suffered greatly. Now he thinks Pope Paul VI is still alive in exile, and is the true Pope. I think he even wrote a book about his theory. I don't believe it but he is not a troll.

Thank you. He is not aware of how Montini was labeled before he became Pope?

Wasn't he suspected of modernism under one of the Pius'?

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #34 on:** July 25, 2016, 02:10:27 PM »

Quote

Pax Vobis said:
What IS relevant is that these popes hold the papal office, whether we like it or not.

Roscoe:
Wrong as there is No way the election of the v2 anti-popes can be construed as legal....
Gregory XVII is the true( legally elected) Pope until 1989 and Catholics are bound to recognise him as such.

I believe in the possibility of the Siri thesis. But, we are far past 1989. We have to deal with "what is". The reality is that there is a guy sitting in Rome who 99% of the world thinks is the pope. This is dangerous, of course. But, whether or not he is actually the pope isn't going to change the danger the Church is in.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #35 on:** July 25, 2016, 02:15:37 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis

Quote
Pax Vobis said:
What IS relevant is that these popes hold the papal office, whether we like it or not.

Roscoe:
Wrong as there is No way the election of the v2 anti-popes can be construed as legal....
Gregory XVII is the true( legally elected) Pope until 1989 and Catholics are bound to recognise him as such.

I believe in the possibility of the Siri thesis. But, we are far past 1989. We have to deal with "what is". The reality is that there is a guy sitting in Rome who 99% of the world thinks is the pope. This is dangerous, of course. But, whether or not he is actually the pope isn't going to change the danger the Church is in.

Your point is well taken. Though if he is Pope we can accept the canonized Saints and pray to them and the new Sacrament etc. If he is not we cannot.

Think of the potential converts lost. "But your vicar of Christ worships with heretics" and does this and says that. They will believe the Catholic Church cannot possibly be the Church Christ founded and will never believe in the Papacy because of good-willed Catholics who insist these guys are Popes.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #36 on:** July 25, 2016, 02:33:45 PM »

What do you mean by the 'new sacrament'?

Even if JPII was the pope, his praying with other faiths is a heretical and already condemned act. If he's not the pope, then he's just some catholic who did the same heretical act. Either way, it requires an explanation to non-catholics of why this act is wrong. The # of converts lost is the same.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #37 on:** July 25, 2016, 02:39:07 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis

What do you mean by the 'new sacrament'?

Even if JPII was the pope, his praying with other faiths is a heretical and already condemned act. If he's not the pope, then he's just some catholic who did the same heretical act. Either way, it requires an explanation to non-catholics of why this act is wrong. The # of converts lost is the same.

The new Sacraments. People won't convert because they think the Vicar of Christ is a heretic. "That just can't be the Church" They will say. And they are right. This is why some go Orthodox rather than Novus Ordo because they know that can't be the Church. That can't be the Rock Christ built His Church upon.

Matto · « **Reply #38 on:** July 25, 2016, 02:49:57 PM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

People won't convert because they think the Vicar of Christ is a heretic. "That just can't be the Church" They will say. And they are right. This is why some go Orthodox rather than Novus Ordo because they know that can't be the Church. That can't be the Rock Christ built His Church upon.

Rod Dreher is a case of this. He is a somewhat conservative writer who converted first to the Novus Ordo and then to Orthodoxy because Orthodoxy is more traditional than the Novus Ordo and seems more likely to be tthe true Church. If I only knew about the Novus Ordo and the Orthodox and had no knowledge of traditional Catholicism I would probably become Orthodox also.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #39 on:** July 25, 2016, 03:11:24 PM »

If a person won't convert because of the heretical actions of the pope (or the guy pretending to be one), it shows a superficial understanding of catholicism. The pope is supposed to guard, teach and defend the Faith. When he doesn't, he is ignored, because the Faith is what's important. The pope has never been the 'end all, be all' of our Faith, except in modern times. This pope-centric idealism is an excess like many of the excesses of modernism.

Matto · « **Reply #40 on:** July 25, 2016, 03:17:21 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis

If a person won't convert because of the heretical actions of the pope (or the guy pretending to be one), it shows a superficial understanding of catholicism. The pope is supposed to guard, teach and defend the Faith. When he doesn't, he is ignored, because the Faith is what's important. The pope has never been the 'end all, be all' of our Faith, except in modern times. This pope-centric idealism is an excess like many of the excesses of modernism.

It's not just the Pope. It is everything the Church does. The holy sacrifice of the Mass has been replaced by a fraudulent service and all the sacraments have been changed. There is nothing at all traditional about the Novus Ordo. Who would want to convert to that?

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #41 on:** July 25, 2016, 03:25:10 PM »

That's my point. Whether or not the pope is the pope, or some pretender, does not change the fact that the Church is in chaos. Sedevecantism is irrelevant!

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #42 on:** July 26, 2016, 11:03:30 AM »

My point is either ignored or not understood. An example was when JP2 was the reigning apostate vicar of Satan. I was trying to convince someone about the Catholic Faith and he said but your pope teaches that evolution is more than just a theory. Just one of countless examples that can be brought it as claiming an apostate is the Vicar of Christ undermines the possibility of conversions.

That is a simple fact.

You can do with it what you want.

Preferably you will show me something of substance to the contrary. I can show you any number of sources for the SV finding as has been done repeatedly here.

Who can show me that a public heretic can be Pope and that Catholics do not have to submit to what a valid Pope binds on the Church?

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #43 on:** July 26, 2016, 11:24:05 AM »

Playing devil's advocate but none of the V2 popes have been formerly declared heretics, per canon law process. At this point, most of their errors, though public, are not considered 'teachings' of the papacy but errors of their 'personal life'.

Related to this, name one error that is 'binding' on anyone, under pain of sin. V2 and the new mass are not binding as are none of the other anti-catholic verbiage being spewed from Rome. It doesn't change the fact that the errors are wrong, but as they are not binding, they are not from the official church, they only appear so. As Our Lady of LaSalette said: "The Church will be in eclipse".

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #44 on:** July 26, 2016, 11:35:09 AM »

Claiming that those who insist SV is right based upon Dogma and Divine Law are wrong because the Church has not officially boUnd it on us (who would bind it?) shows a lack of understanding of the subject matter. It has NOTHING TO DO with binding it on the faithful.

I have no authority to bind you to say that 2+2=4. But then I don't need any authority to do that. It is binding of itself, because it is a necessary truth and must be accepted by anyone who understands what 2 means, what 4 means, what plus means, and what equal means. So to that a public heretic cannot be Pope and automatically loses his office (if he ever held it in the first place) without the need of declaration. This must be accepted by all who know what "public heretic" means, what "Pope" means, what "automatically" means, what "without the need of declaration" means.