The whole story of the white smoke makes no sense.  It has a diabolical touch to it, that tinge of mockery that I've noticed always surrounds demonic lies.  Just think about it for two seconds. They elect a conservative Pope, send out the white smoke, and then five minutes later think "Oops, we made a boo-boo" and then they cancel the smoke?  

I have a friend (who goes to our church) who saw the white smoke on television during the 1958 papal election.  She then saw the black smoke.

Yes, there was an abundance of white smoke as you can see in the video on youtube but the smoke did eventually turn black. Father Charles-Roux who was inside the Conclave reported that there was a fight (shoving match) at the stove.

The first section covers the morning fumeta and around the the 3:30 mark it cuts to the evening smoke signal.



Here is the excerpt from the article with Father Charles-Roux's testimony.
The whole article can be found here.
http://www.realnews247.com/giuffre_on_oct_26_1958.htm

"One may wonder what was made of all this white smoke and how much, if at all, did these developments perplex and disturb the Italian faithful? For instance, a number of people have anecdotally told Mr. Giuffre, the author of this article, as well as others who are supporters of this investigation, that the "word on the street" after Roncalli emerged as John XXIII was that "they switched popes on us." In fact, a veteran Italian news reporter adds her considerable credibility to this popular perception.

In her still unpublished memoirs, Vatican news correspondent, and long time reporter for the Associated Press wire service, Gabriella Montemayor (1912-2005), whose career spanned 50 years, summarized the rumors that circulated among informed journalists in October 1958:

“Siri was alleged to have been elected at the conclave of 1958, from which, instead, came out Roncalli. The three well-known smoke signals, white, black, and then, finally, white, had aroused not a little perplexity and the same comment throughout the whole of the Italian peninsula: Who had been elected at the first white smoke?

"Everyone in Genoa insisted, even from the first day: ‘It most certainly was Siri.’ Could he have abdicated? Had he been forced out? Was it politics or the Holy Ghost? The mystery remains yet today. However, the [new] Vatican which burst unexpectedly before our eyes was a totally different Vatican from that of Pius XII, who had condemned Communism, excommunicating whoever had collaborated in any way with the atheists. The excommunication was surely still legitimate when the new pontificate opened its arms to the Soviets, even as Roncalli was hailed, in a shameless manner, as the “good Pope.” (Gabriella Montemayor, I’ll Tell My Cat, 1993, unpublished manuscript, Rome, chapter 4: “Conclave,” page 28.)

* * * * * * *

A second testimony in this regard was obtained by Mr. Gary Giuffré during an interview conducted in London, England in July,1993 with Father Jean-Marie Charles-Roux, a former Vatican official and intelligence officer. The aged priest claimed that Joseph Cardinal Siri of Genoa had been elected and also accepted the Papal office, but was then immediately shoved aside, without his actually abdicating. According to Fr. Charles-Roux, a very serious threat was delivered to Siri and the assembled Cardinals through Cardinal Tisserant, the Dean of the Sacred College of Cardinals, shortly after the acceptance of office by the new Pope. Conclave ministers had already begun to burn the ballots with dry straw in the Sistine Chapel stove, sending up white smoke to announce the election of the Pope. Even as the thunderous cheers of the crowd outside could be heard by those inside the conclave, a group of cardinals in league with Tisserant commanded the ministers to change the mixture in the stove to wet straw in order to produce black smoke. When the conclave officials refused the order to send out a false signal that would indicate no electoral results, a group of Cardinals brushed the monsignors aside and began to dump wet straw into the stove. Thereafter, a “shoving match” ensued over control of the stove, and the alternating mixtures of dry and wet straw that were being put into it, caused the smoke to vary from white, to black, to white again, and finally to gray, he said.

* * * * * * *

It might be of interest that Fr. Charles-Roux first came to the attention of those spearheading this investigation when Mrs. Deidre Manifold, author of Fatima and the Great Conspiracy and other books, mentioned to this webmaster that a certain priest would be able to relate what had happened within the 1958 conclave. Mrs. Manifold asserted that he was Fr. Charles-Roux, and that he was actually inside the conclave. (This conversation took place in the early 1990s during the Saturday evening dinner at a weekend conference organized by Holy Family Monastery in Berlin, New Jersey; Deidre. Manifold was an invited speaker, and had traveled all the way from Ireland for the occasion.) However, while granting interviews about this subject on several occasions, Fr. Charles-Roux has never confirmed to date that he was, indeed, inside that conclave."

No, according to sedevacantist theory Roncalli was elected by the Conclave, but there is no way that the Conclave guided by the Holy Ghost would choose a heretical Mason as pope. I have some notes to support this that I'll look up later. Therefore we must look somewhere else for the answer.

The most plausible explanation in light of this is that the the papal office was transferred two days before Roncalli appeared on the balcony at St. Peter's square and was indicated by the very clear emission of white smoke from atop the Sistine Chapel.

This is in some way what happened with Anecletus II and Innoceent II. Innocent was elected first and a few hours later another group of Cardinals elected Anacletus, Anacletus proceeded to destroy the Church allegedly even melting down gold chalices because he was free from the effect of the Holy Ghost.  

A group of cardinals can elect an antipope. It has happened on various occasions.

Yes many anti-popes were elected by Cardinals, it was Cardinals who elected Anacletus II after Innocent II was elected.  If the Cardinals elect do elect an anti-pope then we have to assume that they were not guided by the Holy Ghost and there was something shady happening.

Since I can't find my arguments though I'll back off the statement until I can provide some support.

This statement from Cardinal Tisserant published in an Italian periodical should be noted.

"The election of Cardinal Roncalli was illegitimate because it was willed and planned for by forces alien to the Holy Spirit."

The source is the French book L'Eglise Eclipsee written by the Louis Hubert Remy who visited Cardinal Siri in 1985 and asked him if he was elected Pope. They used to have the book online but I wasn't able to find it, I did find some excerpts however, the quote is at the end. They give the periodical where it originally appeared and I tried to track it down to no avail. This is kinda long but goes to show how long Roncalli's election had been planned for a long time.

page 82

 

5.     A Planned Event:  John XXIII, the man who convened the Council

 

A programmed election

           

The Masonic bulletin, Les échos du Surnaturel, December 1961-January 1962, published evidence by a well published author:  “Concerning the Council, on August 14, 1954, I wrote to Cardinal Roncalli (longtime Nuncio in Paris with whom I have conferred) to announce to him his future election (to the Papacy) and to ask him to meet with me during his vacation in his native country for the purpose of studying his first project----the Council.

           

Specifically, I wrote: Would that you would reflect on everything about that, because there will be no time to waiver; once you ascend the Pontifical throne, the plan shall be immediately carried out and so surprise all of the politicos. In this same vein, from 1954, the Freemasons had told Msgr. Roncalli to learn some languages because he would be the next pope elected by then and thus, it was necessary that he be prepared for the papacy.” (B.O.C., p.9, No. 52,Mai 1980)

 

That same year, 1954, in August, Jean-Gaston Bardet “a noted Freemason of the esoteric Christian persuasion, wrote to Patriarch Roncalli who was then on holiday in his native village of Sotto il Monte:

 

Not only he did tell (Bardet) that he would be Pope, but (he) also knew the name he would choose when he would be elected. (Hebblethwaite, John XXIII, Pope of the Council, See American publisher).

 

Bardet came to Venice where he met Roncalli, repeating his predictions to him, and telling him, according to Capovilla (Secretary of John XXIII) that his Pontificate would be marked by “doctrinal innovations and some disciplinary reforms.” (Sodalitium, no. 33, “Le Pape du Concile”, 1954-1958, 10th part, p. 37)

 

Why was 1954 the year in which Masonry began its plan?

           

At the end of 1953, Pius XII was very tired and his spiritual affairs were in the hands of Father Bea,[2] his confessor, a very knowledgeable man, but an unbridled ecuмenist. As is attested to in the following, it can be clearly said that Pius XII was delivered body and soul from evildoers; this point was made by Carlo Pacelli, his nephew, who wondered if his uncle had been the victim of an attempt to poison him. (Antonio Spinosa: Pie XII, l’ultimo Papa, [“Pius XII, the Last Pope”] Mondadori, Milan, 1992, p. 342.)

 

But the Lord miraculously protected Pius XII’s body and soul. This respite permitted him to carry out two extremely important acts: the canonization of Pius X, and the distancing of Montini. From January 26 to February 16, 1954, Pius XII was not able to be fed by natural means. In the Fall, he suffered a relapse and his condition became quite desperate.

 

On December 2, Pius XII told Msgr. Tardini, “I tell you, the others can think that its because of hallucinations caused by illness. Yesterday morning, I clearly heard a voice (very clearly so) who said, ‘A vision is going to appear to you now.’ In fact nothing appeared. This morning, when I attended Mass, for an instant I saw the Lord. It was only for an instant, but I did see…” (Chélini: L’Eglise sous Pie XII, [“The Church Under Pius XII”] Editions Fayard, 1989, Vol. II, pp. 513, 514)

 

Pius XII thought that the Lord had come to take him, in answer to his prayer: “In hora mortis meae, voca me” (“At the hour of my death, call m.”) (Prayer: Anima Christi, found at the beginning of the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius). Jesus cured him, giving the Church four more years of respite. (Sodalitium, no. 33: “Le Pape du Concile” Part 10, 1954-1958, p.37.)

 

Pius XII then wrote his letter of August 13, 1954, in which he said:

 

In the world today, full of snares and perils, there are many who boldly struggle to spread error among the faithful. An audacious propaganda campaign, either openly or surreptitiously, insinuates itself among the Catholics, with the goal of estranging their fidelity which is due to Christ and the true Church, and at the same time, to cut out the faith from their souls. Unfortunately, for as many as there are who courageously defend their beliefs, there are many who abandon them

 

Roncalli was quite detached regarding the Pope’s illness, and had prophesied his death four years in advance. ….He wrote that the Pope

 

…often seems at death’s door, and pulls back and then relapses. I have little confidence that the Holy Father will be successfully cured, despite all the doctors, medicine and care. His life is a miracle, but miracles, as you know, only last a little while. (Hebblethwaite, op. cit. p. 281)

 

Msgr. Roncalli would thus await his Conclave at the end of 1958.[3]

 

Let us pause a few moments here to treat a key person: Dom Lambert Beauduin. He was a Belgian monk, who on the eve of the First World War, at a time when the humanist movement within the Catholic Church was more and more rearing its head, actively worked to advance the Masonic plan for a “future” liturgical reform through the “creation” of a “new mass”, a synthesis of modernist heresy. He was also one of the “prophets” of the ecuмenism that triumphed at the Council.

 

The wild initiatives of Dom Lambert Beauduin resulted in offending Pius XI, who, in 1928, reacted by condemning his theses in the encyclical, Mortalium Animo.  Afterward, Beauduin worked in secret, from the shadows.  In 1924, he struck up a friendship with Msgr. Roncalli.

 

How did this friendship come about? One cannot ignore that Roncalli was given back his teaching Chair at the Atheneum of the Lateran through his “modernist” promoters.

 

The two men were fast friends, and at the news of Pius XII’s death, the following was written:

 

…the aged Dom Lambert Beauduin, 85 years old, told [this writer]: “If they elect Roncalli, everything will be salvaged: he will be able to convene a Council and to install Ecuмenism.” He fell silent again, and then the old malice resurfaced, when he frankly said: “I am sure we will have our chance: the Cardinals for the most part, don’t know what they are doing. They are capable of voting for him.” (Louis Bouyer, “Dom Lambert Beauduin, un homme d’église, [“Dom Lambert Beauduin, Man of the Church], 1964, pp. 180, 181)

 

In 1977, Franco Bellegrandi, ex-Chamberlain of the Cape and the Sword of His Holiness and contributor to L’Osservatore Romano, wrote a book titled, NikitaRoncalli, which was published in 1994, accompanied by quite a commotion in the national press at its release because, among the persons present was Cardinal Silvio Oddi.

 

In this book, he told what he had seen and heard at the Vatican. It was in September 1958, just before the Conclave, the author was privy to some confidential information:

 

I was in a car with a person whom I knew to be a highly placed Mason who was in contact with the Vatican. He said to me: “The next Pope will not be Siri, as the gossip has it in certain Roman circles, because he is too authoritarian a cardinal. A conciliating Pope will be elected. He has already been chosen, and is the Patriarch of Venice, Roncalli,” To this I replied: “Are there Masons in the Conclave?” “Certainly,” he said. “The Church is in our hands.” After a brief silence, my interlocutor said, “No one can say where the leader can be found. The leader is hidden.”

 

The following day, Count Stella (of a well known Italian family---ED) wrote in an official docuмent, which today is in a notary’s safety deposit box, the first and last name of this person as well as his stupefying declaration, compete with the month, year, day, and time of day.” (Nichitaroncalli [NikitaRoncalli], Ediziones Eiles, Rome, p. 62)

 

On the eve of the Conclave which elected Msgr. Roncalli, Roncalli didn’t cross his fingers, as he was already almost certain of his victory. On Friday, October 24, on the eve of the closing of the Conclave, he summoned none other than Giulio Andreotti, the Italian politico who was identified by the widow Calvi as the true head of P2 Lodge, to tell him in diplomatic language, of his forthcoming election. (Ibid, p.395) (Professor Carlo Alberto Agnoli, op. cit.)

 

When Roncalli spoke with Andreotti, the Patriarch clearly told him that he knew from the first morning of the Conclave, a few hours before the Cardinal went from the Domus Mariae to the Vatican, that he would be the new Pope. Said Andreotti: “That evening, Msgr. Capovilla telephoned me that the Patriarch wanted to see me.”

The Italian politico then told of his longtime relations with Roncallli and Roncalli’s friendship with the modernist, Buonaiuti. Then he returned to his conversation with the Patriarch, who wanted to talk about the Conclave: “It is true that we always say: not I, not I. But the arrows of the Holy Spirit must fall on someone…I received a message of congratulations from General DeGaulle, but that doesn’t mean that in fact the French Cardinals will vote this way. I know that they would like to elect Montini and this would certainly be excellent: but it isn’t possible to go outside the tradition which is that the choice be made among the Cardinals…” Here is Andreotti’s commentary: “I listened stupefied and embarrassed. I thus knew that Roncalli was sure of being elected by the Conclave.” (Giulio Andreotti, A ogni morte di Papa. I papi che ho conosciuto, Biblioteca-universale Rizzoli, 1982, pp. 65-66) (Sodalitium, no. 33, “Le Pape du Concile, [“The Pope of the Council”, 1954-1958, p. 39.)

 

Before his talk with Andreotti, Msgr. Roncalli had written two letters, one to the Bishop of Bergamo, Msgr. Piazzi, dated October 23, and the other to the Bishop of Faenza, Giuseppe Battaglia, dated the 24th of the same month.

 

In the first he announced the “new Pentecost” which would come “with the renewal of the head.” It added, “It is of little importance that the new pope be or not be originally from Bergamo (as was he---Ed). You follow me, Your Excellency.” (P. Hebblethwaite, op. cit. p. 308)

 

As to the letter to the Bishop of Faenza, its specific object was to expressly forbid his nephew, Don Battista Roncalli, incardinated in that diocese, to come to Rome at this time! This would give the disagreeable impression of nepotism! But after the election, “When you learn that I succuмbed to the arrows of the Holy Spirit, imposed by the consensus of all those meeting here…’ the nephew could come to Rome…Congratulations Uncle. For the moment, Roncalli recommended: “Naturally, not a word of any of this to anyone.” (P. Hebbletheaite, op. cit. p. 308)

 

This plan was also revealed in a letter by Cardinal Tisserant, March 12, 1970, in which he made a pointed allusion to the “planned” election of John XXIII:

 

The election of the current Sovereign Pontiff was done quickly. It is the election of Jean XXIII, that was discussed at numerous meetings. I do not know of any information on the process was able to be given by anyone after the conclave. Secrecy was imposed even more strictly than ever.  It is completely ridiculous to say that any cardinal would have been elected. You understand that I can say no more. My best regards….(Photocopy of the letter published Franco Bellegrandi’s book, op. cit. p. 30)

 

In another letter, Cardinal Tisserant told a priest teaching canon law that the election of John XXIII was illegitimate because it was willed and planed for by forces alien to the Holy Spirit. (“Vita” 18 September, 1977, p.4: “Le profezie sui papi nell’elenco di San Malachia”)-[“Prophecies on the popes by Saint Malachy”] These letters confirm that the election of John XXIII really was “programmed.”

 

There is always a true claimant( Gregory XVII) to the Chair of St Peter when an anti-pope is present.

Quote from: Raoul76

The whole story of the white smoke makes no sense. It has a diabolical touch to it, that tinge of mockery that I've noticed always surrounds demonic lies. Just think about it for two seconds. They elect a conservative Pope, send out the white smoke, and then five minutes later think "Oops, we made a boo-boo" and then they cancel the smoke?

Yes that is exactly what the plan was, elect a true pope, shove him aside and then elect an anti-pope who would be free from the effects of the Holy Ghost.

Do you know why they did what they did? Apparently not. These men and the Devil know Catholic Theology, they know that a True Pope would be protected by the third person of the Bleesed Trinity, the Holy Ghost, The Paraclete from implementing anti-Catholic reforms on the Church.

What's really disturbing about this 'theory/ thesis' is that no one has a way of proving anything, yet no one admits this. Secondly, you remove the humanity from a pope. Even with the papacy, the free will of a man who holds this office in the Church remains; so disregarding the sedevecantist question and whether he then loses office, you ignore the fact that someone can reject graces and protection given to them because of our vary nature, and the nature of God.

Because they know God is real and his promises are real. That's how evil they are. They know the church is Divine and yet still destroy it because they're of their father and his fallen angels.

That's why they can bury the Third Secret which specifically condemns them and just go on.

What you don't get is they had to validly elect a True Pope and set him aside in order to than replace hin with an anti-pope to carry out their reforms. That's what Malichi meant when he said thew whole thing was planned. They let him accept, take a name, started the white smoke, which meant the election was official and Siri was the Valid Pope. Than they shoved the men at the stove aside, put up black smoke while making threats to siri and the traditional Catholic Cardinals, knowing full well that resignation from the Papacy by force of threats makes the resignmation invalid. Therefore they knew Siri would still be the true Pope and they could elect a fellow mason whom God would despise and would not protect with the promises to Peter.

Again, this entire summation begs the question. A pope still retains his free will and ability to sin against Faith as with any other type of sin; we're not speaking as to whether he loses office or not now, but his basic humanity- which gives us the ability, but not the right, to sin against God in this way.