bernard Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 (edited) [quote name='peach_cube' timestamp='1313188400' post='2286654'] Then you are a fool. There is no evidence, the two sources that are cited for your idea one of them (Martin) does not support it at all, and Williams has been shown false on other assertions in his book, therefore making his "insider" knowledge questionable at best. [/quote] But other people said the same thing, there is a well respected priest named Father Charles Roux who said Siri accepted the papal office and was cast aside AND that a fight ensued at the stove! And that other fellow Paul Scor..something. He also said Siri was elected and they found the guy's burned corpse in his own bed. So were all these people colluding with each other to make a conspiracy theory? Anyway we had the signal, a pope was elected that night, the only question was who was it. The claim is not based on one persons testimony but by taking everything into account. Edited August 12, 2011 by bernard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I give these claims about the same level of consideration I gave the claims people made about President Obama's birth certificate. Wait, nope, these are dumber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1313190652' post='2286668'] I give these claims about the same level of consideration I gave the claims people made about President Obama's birth certificate. Wait, nope, these are dumber. [/quote] So you believe the official version of everything. If its not on CNN ABC CBS or NBC you will never give it the slightest consideration. OK, thanks for your imput. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313191113' post='2286673'] OK, thanks for your imput. [/quote] Input. And to respond to the topic: no, I am not a sedevacantist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 (edited) [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313191113' post='2286673'] So you believe the official version of everything. If its not on CNN ABC CBS or NBC you will never give it the slightest consideration. OK, thanks for your imput. [/quote] Nope, i tend not to believe conspiracies. Especially in this sort of context. Actually, I think this is actually pretty similar to the whole "Birther" controversy. A way to go back and invalidate something that you disagree with (in one case the election of Obama, in the other Vatican II) edited for redundancy. Edited August 12, 2011 by Amppax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 Believing this would not make you a sedevacantist, if there is such a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313191960' post='2286681'] Believing this would not make you a sedevacantist, if there is such a thing. [/quote] There is such a thing, and believing something like this would lead to being such a thing rather easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 (edited) [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313191960' post='2286681'] Believing this would not make you a sedevacantist, if there is such a thing. [/quote] yes it would [quote][b]Sedevacantism[/b] is the position held by a minority of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_Catholic"]Traditionalist Catholics[/url] who claim that the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_See"]Papal See[/url] has been vacant since the death of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_XII"]Pope Pius XII[/url] in 1958 [/quote] although in fairness it also says or since the death of John XXIII. Either way... then again, i probably shouldn't trust wikipedia Edited August 12, 2011 by Amppax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peach_cube Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313189646' post='2286663'] But other people said the same thing, there is a well respected priest named Father Charles Roux who said Siri accepted the papal office and was cast aside AND that a fight ensued at the stove! And that other fellow Paul Scor..something. He also said Siri was elected and they found the guy's burned corpse in his own bed. So were all these people colluding with each other to make a conspiracy theory? Anyway we had the signal, a pope was elected that night, the only question was who was it. The claim is not based on one persons testimony but by taking everything into account. [/quote] Forgive me if I am dubious of your sources, but your amusing video did only cite the two that I have already shown to be questionable at best. The claim is not based on taking everything into account, the claim is an after the fact assertion by a particular group who need the evidence to say something to fit their agenda. As you should well know a signal does not mean a Pope has been elected, it can mean just as well that we do not have a Pope. The ballots are burned regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 Well if we want to make up terms, sedeimpedist is what you would be if you thought that the true papal candidate was impeded from taking office. Obviously the papal throne is not vacant, there is someone there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peach_cube Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313191960' post='2286681'] Believing this would not make you a sedevacantist, if there is such a thing. [/quote] It is either that or sedeimpeditist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 (edited) [quote name='peach_cube' timestamp='1313192655' post='2286692'] Forgive me if I am dubious of your sources, but your amusing video did only cite the two that I have already shown to be questionable at best. The claim is not based on taking everything into account, the claim is an after the fact assertion by a particular group who need the evidence to say something to fit their agenda. As you should well know a signal does not mean a Pope has been elected, it can mean just as well that we do not have a Pope. The ballots are burned regardless. [/quote] An unambiguous white signal means a pope has been elected. Plus there was lots of time to change the signal after the people in St. Peter's square started cheering. But no, they just keep stuffing the stove with dry straw. Edited August 12, 2011 by bernard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313192718' post='2286694'] Well if we want to make up terms, sedeimpedist is what you would be if you thought that the true papal candidate was impeded from taking office. Obviously the papal throne is not vacant, there is someone there. [/quote] I have a term I made up: conspiradupe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313193019' post='2286697'] An unambiguous white signal means a pope has been elected. Plus there was lots of time to change the signal after the people in St. Peter's square started cheering. But no, they just keep stuffing the stove with dry straw. [/quote] So, could you please just state plainly your intentions here? If you are advocating belief that the last several popes are illegitimate, please say so so we can tag you. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 I'll add that the the exact same scenario happened around 1130AD. Pope Innocent the II was elected and then cast aside and another guy took office, the other guy reigned until his death and then innocent took office 8 or 9 years after his initial election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts