Author Topic: Holy Ghost and the Conclave (Read 3909 times)

Marlelar · « **on:** March 10, 2013, 01:16:36 PM »

Holy Ghost and the Conclave

A commentary worth reading.

Marsha

Emerentiana · « **Reply #1 on:** March 10, 2013, 02:00:37 PM »

Quote

Was it the Holy Ghost Who prompted the election of Alexander VI, a Pope who conducted a profoundly immoral life before and after his election? No theologian, nor any Catholic for that matter, would be able to sustain that the 23 cardinals who elected the Borgia Pope were illuminated by the Holy Ghost. And if it did not happen in that election, you can envision that it did not happen in other elections and conclaves, which saw the election of weak Popes, unworthy and inadequate to their lofty mission, all this without prejudicing in any way the greatness of the Papacy.

The issue is, not that the new "Pope" is weak or immoral, but will he be VALID?
A group of men calling themselves "bishops," in the magesyterium, who in fact are not, because they were consecrated by the NEW RITE have no power to elect a pope. They are excommunicated, IPSO FACTO.
The election will be as valid as if a group of Episcopalian Bishops tried to elect the pope.

Anthony Benedict · « **Reply #2 on:** March 10, 2013, 02:23:40 PM »

Quote from: Emerentiana

Quote
Was it the Holy Ghost Who prompted the election of Alexander VI, a Pope who conducted a profoundly immoral life before and after his election? No theologian, nor any Catholic for that matter, would be able to sustain that the 23 cardinals who elected the Borgia Pope were illuminated by the Holy Ghost. And if it did not happen in that election, you can envision that it did not happen in other elections and conclaves, which saw the election of weak Popes, unworthy and inadequate to their lofty mission, all this without prejudicing in any way the greatness of the Papacy.

The issue is, not that the new "Pope" is weak or immoral, but will he be VALID?
A group of men calling themselves "bishops," in the magesyterium, who in fact are not, because they were consecrated by the NEW RITE have no power to elect a pope. Tyhey are excommunicated, IPSO FACTO.
The election will be as valid as if a group of Episcopalian Bishops tried to elect the pope.

I actually do know better than to even waste time on the sede treadmill but this particular post really got my Irish up.

So, Em, what do you propose since your premise negates any possibility for the continuance of both a papacy and a magisterium? Perhaps you think that the Great Beyond will send down a new management team, flown in via a few squadrons of cherubic putti, whose voices, the minute their silk slippered tootsies hit terra firma, will roar like 155mm canons while thunderbolts are loosed from their nether regions against Catholics so unfortunate as to not share your impossible views?

Matto · « **Reply #3 on:** March 10, 2013, 02:33:22 PM »

Quote from: Anthony Benedict

So, Em, what do you propose since your premise negates any possibility for the continuance of both a papacy and a magisterium?

The form of Sedevacantism that makes sense to me is that of those who believe that somewhere there is a true pope who is in hiding and someday will be revealed.

I also like the conclavists. I like that they do something to try to improve the crisis. Is "Pope Michael" still reigning in Kansas?

As a non-sedevacantist, I do not know what to think about the upcoming conclave.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #4 on:** March 10, 2013, 02:45:04 PM »

Quote from: Matto

I also like the conclavists. I like that they do something to try to improve the crisis. Is "Pope Michael" still reigning in Kansas?

The conclavists only make the situation worse. A group of laymen can't elect a Pope.

"Pope" Michael isn't a valid Pope because he wasn't validly elected. His "papacy" is a joke.

brainglitch · « **Reply #5 on:** March 10, 2013, 02:51:33 PM »

Quote from: ServusSpiritusSancti

Quote from: Matto
I also like the conclavists. I like that they do something to try to improve the crisis. Is "Pope Michael" still reigning in Kansas?

The conclavists only make the situation worse. A group of laymen can't elect a Pope.

"Pope" Michael isn't a valid Pope because he wasn't validly elected. His "papacy" is a joke.

Well his "papacy" is a joke, especially considering that he doesn't even have Holy Orders, but at least he recognizes the absurdity that God would leave his Church headless and hierarchy-less for 50+ years.

Matto · « **Reply #6 on:** March 10, 2013, 02:51:49 PM »

Quote from: ServusSpiritusSancti

"Pope" Michael isn't a valid Pope because he wasn't validly elected.

I know he isn't a valid Pope but he is interesting to me because he believes he is Pope. Does he write encyclicals? Has he spoken Ex Cathedra?

One might even say that Pope Michael is better than the recent real Popes because he doesn't spread and condone heresies, at least not that I am aware of.

Also, if is Papacy is indeed a joke, at least it is a funny joke.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #7 on:** March 10, 2013, 02:56:21 PM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: ServusSpiritusSancti

"Pope" Michael isn't a valid Pope because he wasn't validly elected.

I know he isn't a valid pope but he is interesting to me because he believes he is pope. Does he write encyclicals? Has he spoken Ex Cathedra?

I know he writes sermons.

brainglitch · « **Reply #8 on:** March 10, 2013, 03:01:59 PM »

Well, among other things he decreed that clerical celibacy was optional:

http://cjonline.com/blog-post/phil-anderson/2012-02-15/new-decree-pope-michael

Lighthouse · « **Reply #9 on:** March 10, 2013, 03:12:58 PM »

Michael Benedicta:

Quote

So, Em, what do you propose since your premise negates any possibility for the continuance of both a papacy and a magisterium? Perhaps you think that the Great Beyond will send down a new management team, flown in via a few squadrons of cherubic putti, whose voices, the minute their silk slippered tootsies hit terra firma, will roar like 155mm canons while thunderbolts are loosed from their nether regions against Catholics so unfortunate as to not share your impossible views?

I'm glad your weren't there to advise Moses as he stood with his back to the Red Sea.

I'm sure Judas ran from house to house on Good Friday evening shouting the same message.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #10 on:** March 10, 2013, 04:07:34 PM »

Quote from: Lighthouse

Michael Benedicta:
Quote
So, Em, what do you propose since your premise negates any possibility for the continuance of both a papacy and a magisterium? Perhaps you think that the Great Beyond will send down a new management team, flown in via a few squadrons of cherubic putti, whose voices, the minute their silk slippered tootsies hit terra firma, will roar like 155mm canons while thunderbolts are loosed from their nether regions against Catholics so unfortunate as to not share your impossible views?

I'm glad your weren't there to advise Moses as he stood with his back to the Red Sea.

I'm sure Judas ran from house to house on Good Friday evening shouting the same message.

Anthony Benedict said that, not michaela benedicta.

Stubborn · « **Reply #11 on:** March 10, 2013, 05:11:57 PM »

Quote from: Emerentiana

Quote
Was it the Holy Ghost Who prompted the election of Alexander VI, a Pope who conducted a profoundly immoral life before and after his election? No theologian, nor any Catholic for that matter, would be able to sustain that the 23 cardinals who elected the Borgia Pope were illuminated by the Holy Ghost. And if it did not happen in that election, you can envision that it did not happen in other elections and conclaves, which saw the election of weak Popes, unworthy and inadequate to their lofty mission, all this without prejudicing in any way the greatness of the Papacy.

The issue is, not that the new "Pope" is weak or immoral, but will he be VALID?
A group of men calling themselves "bishops," in the magesyterium, who in fact are not, because they were consecrated by the NEW RITE have no power to elect a pope. They are excommunicated, IPSO FACTO.
The election will be as valid as if a group of Episcopalian Bishops tried to elect the pope.

Sincere question . . . . . . . if an invalid pope can create and promulgate the mess the Church is in, then why can't another invalid pope correct it?

Further, if the next pope is presumed invalid due to the reasons listed from Emerentiana's post yet starts cleaning house, mandates that the NO be abolished, traditional sacraments, Mass and faith restored, NO books burned, and so on, would he still be presumed invalid?

And no, I do not think it'll happen but it's worth questioning.

Sigismund · « **Reply #12 on:** March 10, 2013, 09:15:54 PM »

Quote from: brainglitch

Well, among other things he decreed that clerical celibacy was optional:

http://cjonline.com/blog-post/phil-anderson/2012-02-15/new-decree-pope-michael

To have married priests, one must first be able to have priests. Doesn't His Holiness believe there are no Catholic priests left on earth?

Lighthouse · « **Reply #13 on:** March 11, 2013, 10:06:25 AM »

Servus:

Quote

Anthony Benedict said that, not michaela benedicta.

Aha, you are, of course, correct.

Olive · « **Reply #14 on:** March 11, 2013, 11:00:42 AM »

It seems possible that, should someone be elected who completely embraces the TRUE Faith (as was held and maintained prior to V2), and that person tries with all his might to reverse the current situation in the Conciliar church (i.e., make it wholly Catholic again - not just the buildings!), then God can 'make' him a true pope.

Does not the above hypothetical situation mean that once this 'type' of pope arrives, his renunciation of modernism/liberalism/heresy permits him to be a true Catholic pope? And then, that those in the magisterium who follow his path, also become truly Catholic again? Just a thought.