Quote from: Memento

Your summation/compilation of Fr. Kramer's commentary on Apocalypse Ch.12 in relation to the crisis and long sedevacante is very helpful Geremia.

I posted it on some other forums and got quite a lot of heat for asking "Could this 'man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod' be Card. Siri?" If it is true that "Pope Siri" accepted the Vatican II anti-popes, then he would ipso facto cease being pope by being a public heretic for acknowledging anti-popes as true popes. Did he undoubtedly publicly acknowledge them as true popes?

He recognized the Vatican 2 Popes, signed all the docuмents of Vatican2,
and said the New Mass.

That's interesting, but I can't find "mysterious force" in Pacem in Terris

Sorry about that.  Had the wrong encyclical from memory.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/encyclicals/docuмents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_26091959_grata-recordatio_en.html

Then just do a Google search on the following phrase:

"mysterious force Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ"

Here's the relevant quote from the Encyclical:

19. Our thoughts turn to all the lands of this earth. We see all mankind striving for a better future; We see the awakening of a mysterious force, and this permits us to hope that men will be drawn by a right conscience and a sense of duty to advance the real interests of human society. That this goal may be realized in the fullest sense—that is, with the triumph of the kingdom of truth, justice, peace, and charity...

Bizarre terminology to say the least.

Quote from: Memento

Your summation/compilation of Fr. Kramer's commentary on Apocalypse Ch.12 in relation to the crisis and long sedevacante is very helpful Geremia.

I posted it on some other forums and got quite a lot of heat for asking "Could this 'man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod' be Card. Siri?" If it is true that "Pope Siri" accepted the Vatican II anti-popes, then he would ipso facto cease being pope by being a public heretic for acknowledging anti-popes as true popes. Did he undoubtedly publicly acknowledge them as true popes?

Geremia, maybe we do not know if it was specifically Cardinal Siri - who can pin
it down that he was definitely elected? Judith Gordon writes in this article
http://www.eclipseofthechurch.com/RebuttalArticle.htm that Rev. Jean-Marie
Charles-Roux reports the rumors which some point to other cardinals.

"...The truth is, men, not being automatons, do not always comply with a
prescribed agenda, especially if this is revealed suddenly when they are intent
on performing a specific duty.  If the clerics at the stove were not in on the
fix, but, after Siri’s election and acceptance, were ordered to fire up black
smoke instead of white, they might have stuck to their guns and tried to let out
the truth.  Such a concept should not be entirely foreign to those at ITV.  
Indeed, their very own September, 2004 issue features an interview with Rev.
Jean-Marie Charles-Roux, wherein he testifies that there were “certain
irregularities” at the 1958 conclave, “as Cardinal Tisserant has himself
acknowledged.”  He goes on to report that some say “Agagianian was elected,
others Siri, others some other cardinal, and that the camerlengo then annulled
the election.”  He concludes that, in any case, “I’m quite sure John XXIII chose his name, the name of an antipope, quite consciously, to show he had been irregularly elected.”"

The criteria for the prophecy of Apocalypse chapter 12  written by Fr. Kramer in
The Book of Destiny fits like a glove to these times. Which cardinal was elected
pope at the conclave is not as important to us yet as to the possibility that it
did actually happen. I can only surmise that God will reveal to us the name of
person if we need to know.

Quote from: Ladislaus

Here's the relevant quote from the Encyclical:

Quote

19. Our thoughts turn to all the lands of this earth. We see all mankind striving for a better future; We see the awakening of a mysterious force, and this permits us to hope that men will be drawn by a right conscience and a sense of duty to advance the real interests of human society. That this goal may be realized in the fullest sense—that is, with the triumph of the kingdom of truth, justice, peace, and charity...

Bizarre terminology to say the least.

"We see the awakening of a mysterious force, and this permits us to hope that men will be drawn by a right conscience and a sense of duty to advance the real interests of human society."
As if the Church hasn't been advancing "the real interests of human society" for millennia?

The anti-popes think of the "Church" as something human.  A human society which exists form the betterment of mankind.  It is in fact a free-masonic vessel of the devil to ruin the family, destroy the true Church and damn souls.  

Who is/was this uncanonically elected Pope? Pope John XXIII? Pope Francis? After all, St. Francis said this.

LoverofTradition,  the writers from the Novus Ordo Watch site apply Fr. Kramer's commentary to John XXIII as I would too. I was not paying attention in 1958 to the election but I can tell you that the world took a great big leap down in culture and customs during the early 1960s even before Vatican II had ended.  Catholic families suffered immensely.  Some realized it outright - those would be the folks who searched out the clergy who remained true to the faith. Other Catholics suffered but they did to know why their families were falling apart at the seams - disorder in the Church was rampant with the Mass changing constantly and then by 1969 the Mass no longer reigned supreme and all hell broke loose.  That's why I agree with NO Watch's assessment of Fr. Kramer's commentary. The spiritual chastisement is immense and Fr. kramer claims it could happen with the taking away of the true pope. The evidence points to the 1958 conclave with the white smoke and all of the other irregularities mentioned before on this thread.

Thank you. That makes sense. But, was he the only uncanonically-elected Pope? What about the other post-counciliar Popes? What are we to make of them?

Note: I'm not a Sedavacantist. I'm just asking questions, trying to figure this out.

Quote from: LoverOfTradition

One thing is for sure, this is what we're living in now:

“The Church will be punished because the majority of her members, high and low, will become so perverted. The Church will sink deeper and deeper until she will at last seem to be extinguished, and the succession of Peter and the other Apostles to have expired. But, after this, she will be victoriously exalted in the sight of all doubters….”
 
“An unhappy time is coming of revolt and dissension in the church. Oh my children, do not let yourselves be lead astray by innovations. Rally and hold fast. Stay on the same road, the same foot paths as your fathers trod. Preserve and maintain what they have taught you. It will be enough if you resist the attacks, the tempests, the hurricanes that will arise which such violence...”
~ St. Nicholas of Flue

Enough of private revelation. We're living Apocalypse 12. Look at Fr. Herman Kramer's commentary on it in his The Book of Destiny (1955) pp. 275 ff. Fr. Kramer spent 30 years working on this exegesis, completing it in 1955, a mere 6 years before Vatican II. I only present his probable conclusions, but if you want to see his logical reasons, backed up by Church Fathers, read his entire commentary on Chapter 12.

v. 1: "And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars:"

Quote from: Fr. Kramer, pp. 276-7

The woman of chapter twelve is not the Blessed Virgin Mary.
…
According to the ancient Fathers, the human nature or character of the Church is here delineated, while in chapters four and five her divine nature and prerogatives were depicted.
…
The twelve stars represent the twelve apostles; or they may be God’s mystical number symbolizing the Christian nations, that as a contrast to the ten crowned horns of the beast, shall be the glory of the Church when the days of Antichrist approach.
…
The moon under her feet has ever been understood to symbolize the unchanging and unchangeable character of the Church.

v. 2: "And being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered."

Quote from: Fr. Kramer, p. 278

In that travail, she gives birth to some definite “per­son” who is to RULE the Church with a rod of iron (verse 5). It then points to a conflict waged within the Church to elect one who was to “rule all nations” in the manner clearly stated. In accord with the text this is unmistakably a PAPAL ELECTION, for only Christ and His Vicar have the divine right to rule ALL NATIONS. Furthermore, the Church does not travail in anguish at EVERY papal election which can be held without trouble or danger. But at this time the great powers may take a menacing attitude to hinder the election of the logical and expected candidate by threats of a general apostasy, assassination or imprisonment of this candidate if elected. This would suppose an extremely hostile mind in the governments of Europe towards the Church and would cause intense anguish to the Church, because an extended interregnum in the papacy is always disastrous and more so in a time of universal persecution. If Satan would contrive to hinder a papal election, the Church would suffer great travail.

v. 3: "And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns: and on his head seven diadems:"

Quote from: Fr. Kramer, pg. 279

This red dragon it is that brings the Church into great distress at that time.
…
No fiercer enemy of God and man has appeared in Christian times than Communism, and strange to say, RED is its emblematic color. Communism may by that time have gained control of the governments of Europe, It would then erect almost insurmountable difficulties for the holding of a conclave to elect a pope.
…
Satan knows how exten­sively an interregnum in the papacy would favor his success in recovering his ancient lordship over the world. (See 2 Thess II. 7 ["For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way."]).

Card. Manning's 1862 argument for why the Antichrist will be within the Catholic Church is simple:

Quote from: Card. Manning

We have here [2 Thessalonians 2:3-11] a prophecy … of a [spiritual*] revolt, which shall precede the second coming of our Lord … The authority, then, from which the revolt is to take place is that of the kingdom of God on earth, prophesied by Daniel [cf. Daniel 2] as the kingdom which the God of heaven should set up … in other words, the one and universal Church, founded by our Divine Lord, and spread by His Apostles throughout the world. In this one only kingdom was deposited the true and supernatural pure theism, or knowledge of God, and the true and only faith of God incarnate, with the doctrines and laws of grace. This, then, is the authority from which the revolt is to be made, be that revolt what it may.
[*"St. Jerome, with some others, interprets this revolt to be the rebellion of the nations or provinces against the Roman Empire. … They have revolted, and no manifestation has appeared." Thus, the revolt is spiritual, not temporal.]

{Lect. 1 of Temporal Power of the Vicar of Christ's 2nd part (4 lectures), "The Perpetual Conflict of the Vicar of Christ", pp. 81-173}

v. 4: "And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered; that, when she should be delivered, he might devour her son."

Quote from: Fr. Kramer, p. 284

Some eminent cardinal may be particularly outstanding in his efforts to stem the tide of demoralization of bishops and priests. Satan will know, and the world-powers will know, that he is the likely choice for the papacy, and that if elected, he will convoke a general council and exercise his supreme jurisdiction to inaugurate measures of reform. Satan knows that his own hopes of a rich harvest of souls will then be dashed to the ground.  Hence he must avert the election or have the pope αssαssιnαtҽd when elected. The judgment is about to begin “at the house of God” (1 Peter IV. 17). The influence of the dragon will every­ where aim to subject the Church to the state. This persecution is thus a political subjugation, and one third of the bishops and priests will be ripe for apostasy. Satan’s intention is to subject the newly-elected pope also to the purposes of the World-powers or to plot his death. He may contrive an assurance of safety and immunity from harm for the cardinals to convene for the election the more easily to take the pope-elect prisoner. The dragon will want to intimidate the new pope into non-interference—to let affairs run and develop as heretofore. In that way would he “devour the son”, absorb the papacy and alone direct and rule the world.

"Subject[ing] the Church to the state" is exactly what Dignatitis Humanæ and Vatican II ecuмenism did, too.

v. 5: "And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne."

Quote from: Fr. Kramer, p. 285-6

A general council may decree the reforms, but the pope must enforce them. These decrees will be the “seven thunders” mentioned in chapter ten.
…
The clause, “that he might devour her son”, does not necessarily mean assassination. The dragon is a symbolic form of the evil world-powers, who will resent the existence of a spiritual empire among them and through them and independent of them in its essential functions and will attempt to subject this empire to their will and service. They will try to make the Church a “state church” everywhere. This is possible only if they can subject the pope to their wills and compel him to teach and rule as they direct. That would be literally devouring the papacy.  Since they are defeated in this, they have the pope αssαssιnαtҽd and “he is taken up to God and to His throne”, just as Christ by His death “was taken away from distress” (Is. LIII. 8).
…
this “son” will hardly have time to purify the Church, before he is persecuted, imprisoned and martyred. He is therefore surely not Christ.
…
This pope will be given the power to rule over the destiny of the Church immediately from Heaven. He carries out the will of God and loses his life in consequence; and immediately as part of his reward, he receives in Heaven patronage over the Church on earth.

Could this "man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod" be Card. Siri? If so, it's comforting that "he receives in Heaven patronage over the Church on earth."

The following verses show the triumph of St. Michael, a newly elected Pope, and cardinals who uphold and enforce the "Seven Thunders" of the orthodox council.

Keep reading. It's fascinating. And it's public revelation.

Wow! Thank you so much for this. Lots to dwell on here.

Lover of Tradition: Thank you. That makes sense. But, was he the only uncanonically-elected Pope? What about the other post-counciliar Popes? What are we to make of them?

Note: I'm not a Sedavacantist. I'm just asking questions, trying to figure this out.
___________________________________________________________


Welcome to the club! I have no idea if John XXIII was CERTAINLY un-canonically elected but something happened around the time of his election. I don't want to make it sound as if there weren't problems before John XXIII because we know that the popes for the 120 years prior to 1958 were writing encyclicals warning of all the dangers to the faith of "modern" times. The termites (the modernists) nosed their way into the woodwork and went into hiding after Pope St. Pius X flushed most of them out, but they were still there and once again multiplied.

The 1950s were not ideal in the least but it is the last time we can say that the Church was strong and vigorous. The visible structure went into a steep decline with Vatican II and thereafter.

For the sake of the argument, say all the Popes from Pope John XXIII are uncanonically elected and therefore Antipopes? HOW will the real Pope come on the scene and why hasn't he? Let's say Cardinal Siri appointed a successor. Why isn't he taking his rightful place, as Pope? Or would the Cardinals have to recognize him as such? Am I making sense?

For the sake of the argument, say all the Popes from Pope John XXIII are uncanonically elected and therefore Antipopes? HOW will the real Pope come on the scene and why hasn't he? Let's say Cardinal Siri appointed a successor. Why isn't he taking his rightful place, as Pope? Or would the Cardinals have to recognize him as such? Am I making sense?

As Fr. Kramer commentated on Apocalypse 12:5 ("And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne"):

This pope will be given the power to rule over the destiny of the Church immediately from Heaven. He carries out the will of God and loses his life in consequence; and immediately as part of his reward, he receives in Heaven patronage over the Church on earth.

(see here)