Vincent Vega Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313542482' post='2289507'] I'd try to stay in communion with all the faithful of the last 2000 years by worshiping as they worshiped. [/quote] Ohhh so you're a baptist? Cause that's the line they always feed me (including about how and why they aren't protestant, etc.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominicansoul Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313542482' post='2289507'] I'd try to stay in communion with all the faithful of the last 2000 years by worshiping as they worshiped. Do you think that if the pope came out in a devils mask and said we are going to worship Beelzebub that you would bound to obey him? Would you call anyone who opposed him a protestant? [/quote] I'm pretty sure the apostles didn't worship in Latin... as for your far-fetched scenario...It's impossible for the kingdom of God to be divided. You are pretty much calling the Church today what the Pharisees called Jesus, "He works through the power of Satan. He is a devil." It is impossible for the Pope to ever say, "worship Beelzebub" because the Spirit of Christ is in the Pope, and the Spirit of Christ is the authority of Holy Mother Church, regardless of men's puny opinions or their "tricks" or whatever else you believe can possibly be done to the Church. i'm sure your group thinx ur the last true remaining catholics on earth, but God begs to differ ...He doesn't abandon Her even if you and others do ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 17, 2011 Author Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) The tridentine Latin Mass can be traced back to the 3rd century and may be apostolic in origin. Pius V banned all other rites under threat of imprisonment. He obviously did this for a reason. (yes he did allow other rites that were over 200 years old) But that is another topic. You've heard the case. Overall it was a pretty civilized discussion, thanks for contributing. Edited August 17, 2011 by bernard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tab'le De'Bah-Rye Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Aye whomsoever is talkin conspiracy in the church as a whole better be fearing me, Sanctus Sanctus Sanctus, dominus deus saboath etc etc blessed is he whom comes in the name of the lord. JESUS IZ LORD JC "the devil and it's legions will never overcome the church[words to that effect]) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tally Marx Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1313508466' post='2289072'] If indeed it actually happened, the easy and most simple explanation is that they were testing the system, so simple a solution that the avowed conspiracy theorist would reject it out of hand... [/quote] Close. But not quite. See, the guy in charge of burning the ballots was extremely overworked. The poor man was so tired, he could hardly stand on his feet. When he threw the papers into the flames, he accidentally upset a basket of wet straw... voila. We couldn't expect him to pull the wet, smoldering grass out of the fire; he just let it burn off. It took five minutes to do so, but it was better than burning his fingers off, instead. And, afterward, he just issued an announcement that it was an accident and a flase alarm. (edited for spelling) Edited August 17, 2011 by Tally Marx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tab'le De'Bah-Rye Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 lets dance and romance and stop the man chedder greater than thou left wing right wing,and focus on christ. T "full stop no returns hahaha" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AudreyGrace Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 [img]http://static.tvfanatic.com/images/gallery/stupid-fry.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deus te Amat Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313543481' post='2289530']The tridentine Latin Mass can be traced back to the 3rd century and may be apostolic in origin. Pius V banned all other rites under threat of imprisonment. He obviously did this for a reason. (yes he did allow other rites that were over 200 years old) But that is another topic. You've heard the case. Overall it was a pretty civilized discussion, thanks for contributing.[/quote] Really? Because I didn't see a lot of discussion. Just a lot of biased YouTube videos and overlooked logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deus te Amat Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Also, Latin was only introduced as the language of the church because it was the Vulgar, or common, language of the time. Jesus prayed in Aramaic. The gospels were translated from their original Greek into Latin so that the people could understand Him. All Vatican II did when it allowed the Mass to be said in the Vulgar language was imitate what the first Popes did in the Roman Empire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 17, 2011 Author Share Posted August 17, 2011 [quote name='Deus_te_Amat' timestamp='1313546965' post='2289580'] Really? Because I didn't see a lot of discussion. Just a lot of biased YouTube videos and overlooked logic. [/quote] No, there was nothing biased about them. they stated facts. White smoke was a fact, so and so said he was elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deus te Amat Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Fact does not equal truth. Just so you know. People may have contradictory "facts", but there is only one Truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313552134' post='2289644']No, there was nothing biased about them. they stated facts. White smoke was a fact, so and so said he was elected.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deus te Amat Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) So, if we're all about posting youtube videos and random article links as evidence, here is my "factual" evidence. [url="http://www.cfnews.org/Siri.htm"]http://www.cfnews.org/Siri.htm[/url] [quote] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]A subscriber recently sent a letter asking CFN’s position on the “Cardinal Siri Thesis”. To answer: CFN does not subscribe to this thesis. I find it untenable for many reasons.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]The “Siri Thesis” purports that at the 1958 conclave, Cardinal Siri was elected Pope and took the name Pope Gregory XVII, but was displaced by Cardinal Roncalli who became the false Pope John XXIII. The same happened in 1963 with Siri being elected, and then displaced by the false Pope Paul VI.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Thus the true Pope since 1958 was Cardinal Siri the Secret “Red Pope”. All Popes from John XXIII on were impostors.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]From what can be gathered, it seems that Cardinal Siri was elected in 1958, but declined the election when it became known in the conclave that Catholics in Eastern Communist countries would face persecution because of Siri’s militant anti-Communist position. The fact that a Cardinal receives the necessary votes in a conclave does not in itself make him Pope. The Cardinal must accept the office in order to become Sovereign Pontiff.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Cardinal Tisserant reportedly admitted that irregularities did indeed occur at the 1958 conclave. These irregularities were also alluded to by Cardinal Siri in an oft-quoted 1985 interview:[/size][/font] [size=2][font=Book Antiqua][size=4]“Some moments later, when we asked him whether he had been elected pope, his reaction was completely different. He started by remaining silent for a long time, then raised his eyes to Heaven with a rictus of suffering and pain, joined his hands and said, weighing each word with gravity: [/size][/font][b][i][font=Book Antiqua][size=4]‘I am bound by the secret[/size][/font][/i][/b][font=Book Antiqua][size=4].’ Then, after a long silence, heavy for us all, he said again: ‘[/size][/font][b][i][font=Book Antiqua][size=4]I am bound by the secret.[/size][/font][/i][/b][font=Book Antiqua][size=4] This secret is horrible. I would have books to write about the different conclaves. Very serious things have taken place. But I can say nothing’.”[1][/size][/font][/size] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]While this indicates that “serious things have taken place” at recent conclaves, it also reveals that Cardinal Siri was certainly not the Vicar of Christ. As one astute priest observed, only the Sovereign Pontiff is not bound by conclave secrets, so the fact that Siri said, “I am bound by the Secret” demonstrates he was not Pope.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]After the 1958 election, Cardinal Siri gave public obeisance to Pope John XXIII and recognized him as Vicar of Christ. He did likewise with Popes Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II. If Cardinal Siri were truly a “Secret Pope”, what sort of scoundrel was he to give public obedience to men whom he knew to be impostors? This theory actually defames Cardinal Siri rather than honors him.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Cardinal Siri reportedly received the majority vote in 1963, but declined to accept because of what Malachi Martin called, “a little brutality”. Nonetheless, Cardinal Siri participated in all the post-1958 conclaves: 1963 and the two in 1978. Why would Pope Gregory XVII take part in false conclaves when he was already Pope? [/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Cardinal Siri participated in the Second Vatican Council, which was called, if the Siri Thesis is correct, by a Holy Father who was neither Holy nor the Church’s Father. Siri accepted the decisions of Vatican II if interpreted in the light of Tradition. He adopted the reforms, celebrated the Novus Ordo Mass, ordained priests in the New Rite, and consecrated bishops in the New Rite. Why would Pope Gregory XVII adopt sacraments and liturgical re-forms enacted by men whom he knew were false Popes? What sort of man does “our last true Pope” turn out to be?[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Cardinal Siri recognized Vatican II to be a disaster. He said, “If the Church were not Divine, the Council would have buried her.” Why would he in any way submit to this destructive Council if he knew it to be the work of papal impostors? Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer manfully resisted the destruction of Vatican II, with no personal claim to the papacy at all.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]In Cardinal Siri’s book [/size][/font][i][font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Gethsemane[/size][/font][/i][font=Book Antiqua][size=4], in which he was exceedingly critical of modern theologians such as Father Karl Rahner, Father Henri de Lubac and Jacques Maritain, Siri repeatedly refers to “Pope Paul VI”, something no honest man would do who knew himself to be the true Pope.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Only one event could have given credence to the Siri Thesis: if Cardinal Siri had resigned his office immediately after the 1958 election. The case of Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton at Vatican II comes to mind.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Throughout the 1950s, in the pages of the [/size][/font][i][font=Book Antiqua][size=4]American Ecclesiastical Review[/size][/font][/i][font=Book Antiqua][size=4], Msgr. Fenton opposed Father John Courtney Murray’s progressivist teaching on Religious Liberty. Both Fenton and Courtney Murray eventually became periti (expert advisors) at Vatican II.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]On November 11, 1963, a Vatican meeting took place between Cardinal Ottaviani and Msgr. Fenton, who represented the traditionalists’ position, and Cardinal Bea and Father John Courtney Murray, who represented the liberal position. Here Msgr. Fenton was told that Father John Courtney Murray’s position would become the teaching of Vatican II.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Msgr. Fenton immediately returned from Rome and resigned as Editor of the [/size][/font][i][font=Book Antiqua][size=4]American Ecclesiastical Review,[/size][/font][/i][font=Book Antiqua][size=4] allegedly for health reasons. Yesterday’s heresy had become today’s orthodoxy, and Msgr. Fenton resigned his post rather than promote a teaching he knew to be incorrect. He virtually disappeared and died in New England in 1969.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]If this is how Msgr. Fenton behaved when confronted with a grave crisis of conscience, what must we expect from Cardinal Siri when faced with a crisis of infinitely greater magnitude? Cardinal Siri did not resign; he remained in visible communion with the post-1958 popes until his death.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Lastly, if the “Siri Thesis” were true, then every Cardinal at the 1958 conclave is implemented in the swindle. None of them could be forced to go along with such a scandal, and none of them could be legitimately “bound by the Secret” of the Conclave, since they would have been well aware that a false Pope had usurped the throne. [/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]This would implicate outstanding prelates such as Cardinal Ottaviani. The Siri Thesis becomes even more untenable when we consider that Cardinal Ottaviani did not want modernist theologians present at Vatican II, but only allowed them because of John XXIII’s insistence.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]During the preparatory stages of the Council, Archbishop Lefebvre complained to Cardinal Ottaviani that there were certain progressivist theologians invited to the Council who should not have been invited: men such as Father Karl Rahner, Father Dominiqué Chenu, Father Henri de Lubac, Father Hans Küng. These men were considered theologically suspect in the 1940s and 50s. A theologian of dubious orthodoxy should not be allowed to take part in a Church Council as a theological advisor.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]In response to Archbishop Lefebvre, Cardinal Ottaviani shrugged his shoulders, pointed upwards and said, “the boss wants them”. Cardinal Ottaviani knew the work of these revolutionary theologians intimately. Under Pope Pius XII, it was his Holy Office that condemned or warned against their writings. [/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]It makes no sense for Cardinal Ottaviani to carry out an order so destructive to the Church unless he felt obliged to do so through obedience to the Pope. But if he knew that John XXIII was not Pope anyway, because of dirty dealings at the 1958 conclave, he would have no reason to tolerate these suspect theologians at the Council. In fact, Cardinal Ottaviani would have no reason to take part in the Council in the first place, since it was called by an anti-Pope. Countless similar objections to the Siri Thesis could be presented. [/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Cardinal Siri died in 1989. If the Siri Thesis is true, the papacy came to an end 17 years ago with no successor in sight.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]Frankly, I believe the Siri Thesis to be a kind of explanation from desperation that asks more questions than it answers. I place no stock in it whatsoever, nor do CFN writers.[/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4][/quote][/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]edit to add quote html[/size][/font] Edited August 17, 2011 by Deus_te_Amat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313152330' post='2286486'] Do you believe... JFK RFK MLK John Lennon Gandhi and Reagan were all shot by deranged loners. [/quote] No I think John Lennon was shot by a music lover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 17, 2011 Author Share Posted August 17, 2011 [quote name='Deus_te_Amat' timestamp='1313555977' post='2289706'] So, if we're all about posting youtube videos and random article links as evidence, here is my "factual" evidence. [url="http://www.cfnews.org/Siri.htm"]http://www.cfnews.org/Siri.htm[/url] [/size][/font] [font=Book Antiqua][size=4]edit to add quote html[/size][/font] [/quote] That article was a pretty superficial analysis of the Siri thesis. They mention Malachi Marin and none of the 3 others that said he was elected and pressed to abdicate, Father Charles Roux, Paul Scortesci, and Paul Williams. They only mention one of the instances where Siri was confronted about having been elected pope. They ignore the possiblity that when Siri said I am bound by the secret he was referring to the secret of the confessional (as he just answered several question about the conclave), or that he just didn't want to answer the question. It's true that Siri publically acknowledged John XXIII and Paul VI but various quotes of his reveal his true feelings were somewhat different. He said "it will take the church 50 years to recover from John XXIII pontificate" "Vatican II was the biggest mistake in history" etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts