Author Topic: Universal acceptance of a Pope (Read 40136 times)

Amakusa · « **Reply #95 on:** May 04, 2015, 08:58:24 AM »

In this topic, Ambrose has perfectly demonstrated that Wojtyla and Ratzinger have not been accepted by the universal Church - on the contrary, he has well understood that John XXIII and Paul VI have been acknowledged. Now, he did not wonder why there was such a difference...

To the best of my knowledge, there are basicly only three things which can prevent the elected man from being accepted by the universal Church: he is not an able person (not baptized, a woman, a notorious heretic...), or a legitimate pope is still alive. Well, since we know that Wojtyla was not really a notorious heretic nor an unfit person, the reason why he was not accepted is that Pope Paul VI was still in life, as I have demonstrated in my books.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #96 on:** May 04, 2015, 09:03:46 AM »

Quote from: Amakusa

In this topic, Ambrose has perfectly demonstrated that Wojtyla and Ratzinger have not been accepted by the universal Church - on the contrary, he has well understood that John XXIII and Paul VI have been acknowledged. Now, he did not wonder why there was such a difference...

To the best of my knowledge, there are basicly only three things which can prevent the elected man from being accepted by the universal Church: he is not an able person (not baptized, a woman, a notorious heretic...), or a legitimate pope is still alive. Well, since we know that Wojtyla was not really a notorious heretic nor an unfit person, the reason why he was not accepted is that Pope Paul VI was still in life, as I have demonstrated in my books.

Or because the Holy See was "impeded" due to the election of Cardinal Siri.

Your theories solve absolutely nothing, since according to you the REAL Paul VI was the one who promulgated Vatican II and the New Mass.

Amakusa · « **Reply #97 on:** May 04, 2015, 10:04:19 AM »

Firstly Vatican II was not infallible, secondly the Novus Ordo has not been promulgated by Paul VI, I have already answered to that.

As for Cardinal Siri, the mere fact that John XXIII and Paul VI have been accepted by the universal Church proves that he has not been elected, because the canonical election of a pope prevents the pacific acceptance of another person.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #98 on:** May 04, 2015, 11:54:54 AM »

Quote from: Amakusa

Firstly Vatican II was not infallible, secondly the Novus Ordo has not been promulgated by Paul VI, I have already answered to that.

As for Cardinal Siri, the mere fact that John XXIII and Paul VI have been accepted by the universal Church proves that he has not been elected, because the canonical election of a pope prevents the pacific acceptance of another person.

So a stupid mixture of R&R with Imposter Paul VI and, to top it off with a big red cherry, the real Paul VI is still alive at 120+ years old.

Malleus · « **Reply #99 on:** May 04, 2015, 11:35:12 PM »

"But all of this is beside the main point, which is that people like Nishant argue that a pope is necessary for the concrete existence of the Church, all the while utterly refusing to share the religion of the concrete "pope" of which they purport to establish the necessity. Hence, they have a purely abstract relation to their concrete pope, whilst getting all hot and bothered by sedevacantists who insist on a perfectly concrete papacy to which all Catholics are bound to have a real and permanent relation - and that relation being perfect subjection."

Hey Nishant, do you still go to the Novus Ordo Mess? :shocked:

!