Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Pope Sifting - Difficulties with Sedevacantism from Angelus 1995.  (Read 51405 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Pope Sifting - Difficulties with Sedevacantism from Angelus 1995.
« Reply #40 on: November 14, 2024, 12:18:32 PM »
But what happens to the Siri thesis beginning with Popes elected after Cardinal Siri died?

John XXIII was not a formal heretic before the election, so the Siri thesis says that his election was null and Siri was the real Pope. 

When Ratzinger was elected, the first Pope to be elected after Cardinal Siri died in 1989, you use the regular Cassiciacuм thesis logic and say that he was only a material Pope since he had been a formal heretic for decades before his election. 

Is that how it works for you?

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Pope Sifting - Difficulties with Sedevacantism from Angelus 1995.
« Reply #41 on: November 14, 2024, 03:53:37 PM »
Well, for the very reason that he was "suspect of heresy" could that not have acted as an impediment to his election?

I don't see how.  Only manifest heresy removes from membership in the Church, not suspicion of heresy.  Evidently he was not suspect enough that Rome ever did anything about him.  In addition, the bigger problem is Montini, and I've seen nothing on him prior to his election.  Some SVs actually think Roncalli might have been legitimate, but Montini is the problem in terms of the V2 revolution.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Pope Sifting - Difficulties with Sedevacantism from Angelus 1995.
« Reply #42 on: November 14, 2024, 04:05:32 PM »
But what happens to the Siri thesis beginning with Popes elected after Cardinal Siri died?

John XXIII was not a formal heretic before the election, so the Siri thesis says that his election was null and Siri was the real Pope.

Not quite.  Siri thesis has to do with the election itself, not the imputation of heresy to anyone.  So, the way it goes, Siri was elected, accepted the papacy, even picked the name Gregory XVII.  THEN the infiltrator Cardinals threaten him somehow to step down, and he complies.  That resignation would be invalid since it happened under duress.  At that point they install Roncalli, who's illegitimate not because of any heresy, but because Siri was still the rightful pope.

Interestingly, there's a prophecy from St. Francis that refers to an "uncanonically elected pope" that would become a destroyer.

So, this makes a lot of sense.  I agree with Gary Giuffre that they deliberately engineered it this way because a validly elected pope would be prevented by the Holy Ghost from wrecking the Church ... where God would strike him down or else convert him.  Pius IX was arguably THE MOST LIBERAL Cardinal in the Church when he was elected ... and there are some not-altogether-unsubstantiated allegations that he had actually become a Freemason ... but then God converted him into a strong anti-Modernist Pope.  But God's protection over the Papacy would not apply to an Antipope ... which is why they waited for Siri to accept.  They could just as easily have contacted him BEFORE the conclave, threatened him then to just not accept.  There's no notion there that refusal to accept under duress makes you the rightful Pope.

So the most common SV explanation, that Montini never became pope due to manifest heresy simply fails ... since there's no evidence of manifest heresy before his election.  Father Cekada, in addressing Salza's book, stated that nearly all SVs have abandoned the argument that Montini FELL from the papacy, but hold that he never had it in the first place.  OK, well, where's evidence for manifest heresy before Montini's election.  I've never seen anything.  Now, people claim he ratted out clergy behind the Iron Curtain and was a sodomite ... but neither of those are heresy where he'd cease to be a Catholic, and they're not proven at this time, just various rumors out there.

Re: Pope Sifting - Difficulties with Sedevacantism from Angelus 1995.
« Reply #43 on: November 14, 2024, 04:29:31 PM »
Not quite.  Siri thesis has to do with the election itself, not the imputation of heresy to anyone.  So, the way it goes, Siri was elected, accepted the papacy, even picked the name Gregory XVII.  THEN the infiltrator Cardinals threaten him somehow to step down, and he complies.  That resignation would be invalid since it happened under duress.  At that point they install Roncalli, who's illegitimate not because of any heresy, but because Siri was still the rightful pope.

Interestingly, there's a prophecy from St. Francis that refers to an "uncanonically elected pope" that would become a destroyer.

So, this makes a lot of sense.  I agree with Gary Giuffre that they deliberately engineered it this way because a validly elected pope would be prevented by the Holy Ghost from wrecking the Church ... where God would strike him down or else convert him.  Pius IX was arguably THE MOST LIBERAL Cardinal in the Church when he was elected ... and there are some not-altogether-unsubstantiated allegations that he had actually become a Freemason ... but then God converted him into a strong anti-Modernist Pope.  But God's protection over the Papacy would not apply to an Antipope ... which is why they waited for Siri to accept.  They could just as easily have contacted him BEFORE the conclave, threatened him then to just not accept.  There's no notion there that refusal to accept under duress makes you the rightful Pope.

So the most common SV explanation, that Montini never became pope due to manifest heresy simply fails ... since there's no evidence of manifest heresy before his election.  Father Cekada, in addressing Salza's book, stated that nearly all SVs have abandoned the argument that Montini FELL from the papacy, but hold that he never had it in the first place.  OK, well, where's evidence for manifest heresy before Montini's election.  I've never seen anything.  Now, people claim he ratted out clergy behind the Iron Curtain and was a sodomite ... but neither of those are heresy where he'd cease to be a Catholic, and they're not proven at this time, just various rumors out there.

Sure, but what about after Siri's death?

You say that there's not manifest heresy from Roncalli or Montini. Ok, but what about Ratzinger and Bergoglio? How do you explain Ratinzer's election and "papacy", since it happened after Siri died?

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Pope Sifting - Difficulties with Sedevacantism from Angelus 1995.
« Reply #44 on: November 14, 2024, 04:31:41 PM »
Agreed. He is the one who "ratified" VII.

If the Council contained condemned errors, then both the pope and bishops who approved of it would be manifesting heresy no?

That happened after his election to the papacy.  My point was, given Fr. Cekada's assertion that most SVs have rejected the notion that Montini et al. FELL from the papacy, but instead hold that they were never popes to begin with, on account of manifest heresy ... where's the evidence of heresy before his election?

Or was Fr. Cekada wrong?