All the answers are good except for making the SSPX bishops into cardinals. I would make my cardinals out of those who left SSPX for the sedevacantist position, and who have proven themselves through tough personal decisions that cost them their comfort and livelihoods within the ( in my opinion ) controlled opposition of FSSPX. I know who my Merry del Val would be already, and he is an obscure FSSPX-turned-sedevacantist priest who has proven his love of truth and rejection of all worldly honors.
The SSPX are also liars who want you to know VII is bad, but not just HOW bad it is. "Thus the SSPX refuses to 'accept the Council' for reasons that go way beyond a subjective preference for a particular form of liturgical expression. While acknowledging that there are no explicit denials of traditional doctrines in the Council docuмents..." What?! Saying "Together with us, Muslims worship the one true God" in Lumen Gentium is not an explicit denial of THE FIRST COMMANDMENT, and in a "dogmatic constitution" no less? Okay. Next... They have kept people frozen in place long enough. These are not the kind of watchdogs I'd need to protect the restored Church. And wanting the Tridentine Mass to be the only Mass offered in the Latin Church is not "subjective" but very objective; it objectively IS the Mass of the Church.
Bishop Fellay would be brought before a tribunal and made to account for his (in)actions. Unless he could absolve himself, he would have NO place within the Church, as I consider him about as trustworthy as Ratzinger, with his constantly aggrieved act: "Why are they so mean to us? We want to obey." Uh -- they're HERETICS, pal! That's like freeing a murderer from prison and then wondering why you get shivved in the back for your pocket change.
I would also ask FSSPX for all records of these so-called "dialogues" they have with Rome but that we rarely hear about in detail. The whole "dialogue" fiasco is like a badly-written play that has no internal logic, since FSSPX complains about Vatican II, but then when it comes to "dialogues" are always put on the defensive and in the position of the jilted lover. Notice how they have gotten their constituents to REJOICE at the prospect of "excommunications" being lifted when the same constituents should simply not care who a false Church excommunicates. This is not a healthy or Christ-like love of humiliation; it is like Athanasius grovelling at the feet of Arius. FSSPX have gotten people to wish for the wrong thing, to consider the wrong man as Pope, and to consider the wrong church as the Church.
Because of this unconscionable procedure of bowing and scraping to Modernists, I'd excommunicate them all as heretics who denied the dogmas of infallibility and indefectibility, unless they repented. I'd also set up an investigatory commission to determine if FSSPX are deliberate deceivers, as I suspect they are. So a lot of my papacy would be driven by retroactive wrath at FSSPX, you might say, because I smell a rat.
Better make the more level-headed Catholic Samurai the Pope, then, unless he is pro-SSPX at that time! His answer is the best, especially this part: "I would encourage the study of traditional cultures (according to ones ethnicity), Catholic art, chivalry, monarchy, distributism, agrarianism, and women to wear dresses instead of pants." Perfect, except for the part about the traditional cultures... That sounds mildly pagan, like the Spanish teaching the Aztecs to more closely study being Aztec, when they should fully embrace their new Catholic way of life. That is like a drop of poison that could lead to Indians wearing feathered headdresses in Church, saying it is their indigenous right, etc. And then we are right back where we started.
Also, I am gratified by the nod to Spanish royalty, but Prince Sixtus Henry is not the leader we need. He is about as close as we have on Earth at the moment but I am turned off by his support of Le Pen. I don't like royals, like Otto von Habsburg, who have to stay involved in politics even when it becomes democratic. They should prove themselves by taking ordinary jobs, refusing to have anything to do with the filth of ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic democracy.
If we are to have a king or Great Monarch, God may test him first, to see if he can stomach humiliation and obscurity. Some of the prophecies say this. After this trial by fire, he will have proven his worth to restore Europe. No one who is an enemy of the Cross, and a lover of comfort and power for its own sake, should have a high place in the restored Church.
Topic: What would you do if you were a pope? (Read 3216 times)