It is currently Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:57 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 
 Beati Taigi prophecies a new pope will be"appointed&quo 
Author Message

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 11:04 pm
Posts: 57
New post Beati Taigi prophecies a new pope will be"appointed&quo
FROM: http://www.opusdeialert.com/footnotes.htm

:arrow: Prophecy of Blessed Anna Maria Taigi (1769-1837 A.D.) who was Beatified by Pope Bendedict XV in 1920

"After the three days of darkness, St. Peter and St. Paul, having come down from Heaven, will preach in the whole world and designate a new Pope. A great light will flash from their bodies and will settle upon the cardinal who is to become Pope. Christianity, then, will spread throughout the world. He is the Holy Pontiff, chosen by God to withstand the storm. At the end, he will have the gift of miracles, and his name shall be praised over the whole earth. Whole nations will come back to the Church and the face of the earth will be renewed. Russia, England, and China will come into the Church." -


I made this a separate topic from "Jurisdiction" because I did not want a seeming non sequitur to interrupt the flow of that important correspondence. However, because there is the possibility of a lack of valid Cardinals to validly elect a new pope, might Beati Taigi, in approved apparitions, have given us the answer to the dilemma?

I know we must all totally trust God's Providence for what happens "next," but it is heartening to read what this holy Beati saw in her globe! May she pray for us now in our own time of painful purification. All to Jesus, through the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Amen.

Pax et Bonum!

_________________
Our Immaculate Queen give you every grace and blessing,
Ardith (Abba)


Sat May 20, 2006 9:23 pm
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4333
New post Re: Beati Taigi prophecies a new pope will be"appointed
Abba wrote:
However, because there is the possibility of a lack of valid Cardinals to validly elect a new pope, might Beati Taigi, in approved apparitions, have given us the answer to the dilemma?

I know we must all totally trust God's Providence for what happens "next," but it is heartening to read what this holy Beati saw in her globe! May she pray for us now in our own time of painful purification. All to Jesus, through the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Amen.

Pax et Bonum!


Yes, she might have the answer in one aspect, but we must keep in mind that the Church will not end and begin again - the Church continues uninterrupted, and therefore she will provide herself with a new visible head. This is one of the powers of a perfect society and therefore if Holy Mother Church required a divine intervention which "bypassed" her own powers then she would be said to have failed, which is impossible.

So, how are we to understand divine intervention such as a dove hovering over a particular man (which happened on occasion in history)? We are to see in such extraordinary events only that God in His goodness assists the Church by designating directly His choice, whom the Church then elects. Thus such an election is valid not because of the divine intervention but because of the election by Holy Mother Church.

It is also important to note that those who imagine that the Novus sect is the Church have no advantage over us in this point - they too await a miraculous intervention by which God will bring forth a (good) pope from the midst of the Modernists. Frankly, I think their miracle needs to be greater than ours. :)

Yours in Christ our Risen King,
John Lane.


Sat May 20, 2006 11:27 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:26 am
Posts: 7
New post 
Personally, I do not much much stock on private revelations, even if approved by the Holy See. Unfortunately, I have observed that there is a tendency amongst some of the faithful who recognize the vacancy of the Holy See to exaggerate the importance of such revelations. I have known some people who become sedevacantists after they read these private revelations only to become mercurial and apostatize to a rabid anti-sedevacantism, because they do not realize that the sedevacantist fact is not merely substantiated by private revelations, but by the Gospels and the Fathers.

It is of utmost importance to acquiant oneself with Holy Writ, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, Canon Law, and the Councils, and subordinate these approved revelations to them.

I am not saying that one should not study approved revelations and prophecies, but these are merely peripheral.

When and exactly how will Holy Mother Church have again a Supreme Pontiff to govern and guide her? We do not really know. All we know is that it will happen, and that it shall take prayer, and lots of it, to get to that point.


Sun May 21, 2006 2:37 am
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 11:04 pm
Posts: 57
New post 
Super flumina Babylonis wrote:
. . . Personally, I do not much much stock on private revelations, even if approved by the Holy See. . . .

It is of utmost importance to acquiant oneself with Holy Writ, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, Canon Law, and the Councils, and subordinate these approved revelations to them.

I am not saying that one should not study approved revelations and prophecies, but these are merely peripheral.


Dear "Super," Pax et Bonum.

Yes, it is true that Sacred Scripture, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, Canon Law, and the Councils are all important for one to read/study in order to be a well-formed Catholic. However, it is also true that approved apparitions must be in agreement with all of these, or they would not have been approved.

Also, I realize that as a sedevacantist, one might not want to consider post Vatican II approved apparitions. (This alone could be a big discussion!)

However, and importantly: :arrow: How do you view the apparitions and messages of Our Lady of Fatima?
Are you well acquainted with these? If so, do you include Fatima in your cautionary statement that "these are merely peripheral?" Many do not think so, including myself.

I am most interested in your view on this apparition and its place in the formation of Catholic thinking.

_________________
Our Immaculate Queen give you every grace and blessing,
Ardith (Abba)


Sun May 21, 2006 2:51 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:26 am
Posts: 7
New post 
Abba wrote:
However, and importantly: :arrow: How do you view the apparitions and messages of Our Lady of Fatima?
Are you well acquainted with these? If so, do you include Fatima in your cautionary statement that "these are merely peripheral?" Many do not think so, including myself.

I am most interested in your view on this apparition and its place in the formation of Catholic thinking.[/b]


I certianly do think the apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima, Portugal, to the three shepherd children is very important. The whole of Our Lady's message at Fatima is a wonderful synthesis of the dogmas and morals that the anti-Popes and their sect would deny and blaspheme. The Holy Fathers fortunately approved of it, though it is unfortunate that Pope Pius died before he instituted a feast to commemorate it in the Kalendar (as was the case with Lourdes, the Mass and Office of which is amongst the most beautiful in the Roman Missal and Breviary respectively).

And, Our Lady first appeared on the day which was to later become the feast of Saint Robert Bellarmine! Is this a coincidence? I think not, I think Our Lady, the Seat of Wisdom, knew very well that May 13th would be the feast of the great Saint and Doctor whose teaching has so clearly demonstrated why Roncalli and the rest have never been Supreme Pontiffs.

I am weary, however, of such people as Nicholas Gruner saying Fatima is a special public revelation. That is not true, it is still a private revelation, and a Catholic is not bound to believe in the apparitions at Fatima. Of course the message is of Fatima is binding on Catholics insofar as it is really the message of the Gospels and of our Holy Mother Church, and the Message that Our Lady gave is thus not at all in the periphery, since Our Lady is so central in the economy of salvation.

But when you have Gruner ostentatiously showing such devotion for Fatima while blaspheming Holy Mother Church by being in communion with an anti-Pope and attacking the faithful who reject Ratzinger and his sect, that is not right at all. Our Lady is offended by such people, who say "Ave Maria" yet refuse to stand up in defense for the Church that her Divine Son founded.

As for apparitions that have occured after the death of Pope Pius XII and have been approved by apostate Rome, these must be eschewed by the faithful and avoided at all costs. Such appiritions are evidenty false as they at times promote heresy and have nothing but praise for the anti-Popes. If Our Lady had really appeared to the people who have recently claimed she was appeared to them, would not Our Lady warn them of the vacancy of the Holy See? Or of the abomination of the Novus Ordo Missae? It does not make sense.

If people seek miracles, let them go to the Altars of our Churches, and let them see the miracle that the Prophets and Patriarchs of yore yearned to see: Our Lord present there physically and trully in the sacred species transubstatiated into His Sacred Body and Blood. There is to be found the most stupendous miracle, adored by countless angels.


Sun May 21, 2006 6:31 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 3:46 am
Posts: 9
New post Our Lady of Fatima
My Calendar has October 13th as the Feast of Our Lady of Fatima... The day of the Miracle of the sun.

JMJ

Laura


Mon May 22, 2006 1:52 am
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 11:04 pm
Posts: 57
New post 
Image

This photo was reportedly taken just after these seers, Jacinta, Francisco, and Lucia, were shown the vision of Hell and Our Lady of Fatima told them that souls fall into Hell like snowflakes - and why so many? Because there is no one to pray and offer sacrifices for them.

Let us pray and offer sacrifices for souls who can yet be converted to the true Faith, for which we have received such great graces of conversion ourselves! Let us be good stewards so Our Lord will not call us worthless servants.

Let us pray for one another to remain faithful to Christ.

_________________
Our Immaculate Queen give you every grace and blessing,
Ardith (Abba)


Mon May 22, 2006 1:04 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 12
Location: Philly
New post the crisis
there are a number of possible resolutions to this situation, and one could be the theory that Cardinal Siri who was elected pope in 1958 could have appointed successor cardnals and they in turn elected his successors. At some point the truth will come out. And the prophecies that point to a holy pope and great monarch to restore Christianity will certainly come to pass.


Mon May 22, 2006 3:31 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 11:04 pm
Posts: 57
New post Re: the crisis
xcordeeclesiae wrote:
there are a number of possible resolutions to this situation, and one could be the theory that Cardinal Siri who was elected pope in 1958 could have appointed successor cardnals and they in turn elected his successors. At some point the truth will come out. And the prophecies that point to a holy pope and great monarch to restore Christianity will certainly come to pass.


Dear "From the heart of the church" (Did I translate that correctly? :roll: )

Now, that's an interesting supposition! My husband and I are very interested in the Cardinal Siri expose' and have read much on it. The most prominent thing I remember is that he was said to have "declined the office of pope" after being validly elected, because of Masonic threats. This would not be at all hard to believe. And that he reportedly admitted that he has a grave secret he must keep (which he apparently did keep, dying without revealing it.) Poor man. Poor us if he was indeed intimidated into declining the papacy due to duress.

_________________
Our Immaculate Queen give you every grace and blessing,
Ardith (Abba)


Mon May 22, 2006 7:16 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:18 pm
Posts: 12
Location: London, England
New post revelations
Super flumina Babylonis wrote:
Personally, I do not much (sic) much stock on private revelations, even if approved by the Holy See.
One wonders if the holy see is therefore wasting its time! There must be some significance to such approval.


Tue May 23, 2006 10:14 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 9:04 pm
Posts: 39
New post 
Katoliczka wrote:
My priest told me that if Cardinal Siri was elected by left Rome not claiming the Papacy, he declined to accept by his actions.


This is true. For what kind of a pope would present himself as if he was in communion with a false pope?

Here are two photos of Cardinal Siri and John Paul II together:

Image Image


Thu May 25, 2006 8:04 pm
Profile
New post 
What kind of pope would present himself....very good question. One possibility would be in order to stay alive and be the Pope in exile, a long dry martyrdom for the sake of sinners...This Cardinal Siri is a huge mystery and we have so little to go on. Still, it offers a glimmer of hope, for some odd, desperate reason.


Fri May 26, 2006 2:16 am

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:26 am
Posts: 7
New post Re: revelations
Paul Danon wrote:
Super flumina Babylonis wrote:
Personally, I do not much (sic) much stock on private revelations, even if approved by the Holy See.
One wonders if the holy see is therefore wasting its time! There must be some significance to such approval.


I am not denying that approved private revelations do not have significance. But to say that private revelations are somehow binding, like Gruner seems to say Fatima is when says it is a public revelation, is not right.

You have unfortunately taken that phrase out of context.


Fri May 26, 2006 4:48 am
Profile

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 8:51 pm
Posts: 5
Location: Oklahoma
New post 
Miguel Oren wrote:
Katoliczka wrote:
My priest told me that if Cardinal Siri was elected by left Rome not claiming the Papacy, he declined to accept by his actions.


This is true. For what kind of a pope would present himself as if he was in communion with a false pope?

Here are two photos of Cardinal Siri and John Paul II together:



Actually, It looks like the two gentlemen in the picture, Wojtyla and Siri, are straining to hide their cordial dislike of one another. Notice the body language of the men. It is confrontational-and in the second photo, Wojtyla is clearly angry.

_________________
Hello, I'm what you might call a Roman Catholic 'feeneyite', 'Sede-Impedita', Monarchist. My favorite lay thinkers are Joseph de Maistre, Juan Donoso y Cortes, and Leon Bloy.


Tue May 30, 2006 6:36 am
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4333
New post 
annatar wrote:
Actually, It looks like the two gentlemen in the picture, Wojtyla and Siri, are straining to hide their cordial dislike of one another. Notice the body language of the men. It is confrontational-and in the second photo, Wojtyla is clearly angry.


That's exactly right. Here's a transcript.

Wojtyla: "Why do they keep saying you're the real pope?"
Siri: "I don't know. I guess they are desperate for a pope who is against V2."
Wojtyla: "But that's not fair! You did all the V2 stuff that everybody else did, including the New Mass."
Siri: "Sigh. I know, but I said women shouldn't wear pants."
Wojtyla (rising to his feet and poking his finger sharply towards Siri): "That's outrageous! Women can wear anything they like! Why, you reactionary, you!"

See? A picture is worth a thousand words.

Of course, this is all entirely unjust. Cardinal Siri only introduced the New mass into Genoa as Cardinal-Archbishop of Genoa, not as crypto-pope. As crypto-pope he was busy appointing crypto-cardinals and being crypto-against the New Mass and the rest of the V2 "reforms."

Or maybe not.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Tue May 30, 2006 6:58 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 8:51 pm
Posts: 5
Location: Oklahoma
New post 
John Lane wrote:
annatar wrote:
Actually, It looks like the two gentlemen in the picture, Wojtyla and Siri, are straining to hide their cordial dislike of one another. Notice the body language of the men. It is confrontational-and in the second photo, Wojtyla is clearly angry.


That's exactly right. Here's a transcript.

Wojtyla: "Why do they keep saying you're the real pope?"
Siri: "I don't know. I guess they are desperate for a pope who is against V2."
Wojtyla: "But that's not fair! You did all the V2 stuff that everybody else did, including the New Mass."
Siri: "Sigh. I know, but I said women shouldn't wear pants."
Wojtyla (rising to his feet and poking his finger sharply towards Siri): "That's outrageous! Women can wear anything they like! Why, you reactionary, you!"

See? A picture is worth a thousand words.

Of course, this is all entirely unjust. Cardinal Siri only introduced the New mass into Genoa as Cardinal-Archbishop of Genoa, not as crypto-pope. As crypto-pope he was busy appointing crypto-cardinals and being crypto-against the New Mass and the rest of the V2 "reforms."

Or maybe not.


That's actually pretty funny :D But seriously-that's what it looks like to me, i don't know. But I might add that my views (mentioned on my individual personal post) are sufficiently 'liberal' if you will, to allow for such errors in judgement, if they were so. Siri certainly was orthodox when you look at the theology of Montini, Wojtyla, and company....My holding to the 'Siri Thesis' has little to do with the personal errors in judgement of men like Siri but the actual mechanics of Revolutionary 'Coup-de-Etat' within the Church as such.

_________________
Hello, I'm what you might call a Roman Catholic 'feeneyite', 'Sede-Impedita', Monarchist. My favorite lay thinkers are Joseph de Maistre, Juan Donoso y Cortes, and Leon Bloy.


Tue May 30, 2006 7:28 am
Profile
New post Beati Taigi Prophesies New Pope
I don't know what members of this group think of Malachi Martin or his writings, but I read his book KEYS OF THIS BLOOD a year or so ago, and in it he said that Siri did have sufficient votes to be elected pope, but declined because of concern for the safety of his family. Malachi Martin said it was spoken of "the little brutality" that changed the election, and Paul VI came out of the Conclave as "pope". I would be curious to know what the "little brutality" was! It has been said that a cardinal broke the seal of the Conclave and communicated with a member of a secret society, so wouldn't that invalidate the Conclave? There are continuing articles in THE FOUR MARKS that talk about Garry Guiffre not being totally revealing about there being a mix up in reporting the white smoke - that it was from the 1939 election (Pius XII) and not the 1958 election. There is so much confusion that it is hard to discern what is true and what is rumor. My husband and I believed the Siri Theory until we read the article in THE FOUR MARKS recently.

Pat Beck


Wed May 31, 2006 11:18 pm

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 10:53 pm
Posts: 156
Location: Ohio, USA
New post 
Quote:
don't know what members of this group think of Malachi Martin or his writings,


If anybody needs me I'll be down hiding in the storm cellar! :wink: Knock twice when the "all-clear" has been sounded.


Wed May 31, 2006 11:42 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 3:46 am
Posts: 9
New post 
Quote:
If anybody needs me I'll be down hiding in the storm cellar! Knock twice when the "all-clear" has been sounded.


I'm coming with you...LOL


Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:27 am
Profile

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 11:46 pm
Posts: 728
Location: Western Washington, USA
New post 
Pax Christi !

I would like to put in perspective " private " revelation from one of the Church's mystics;

St John of the Cross on "private revelation"

From his writings titled `ASCENT OF MT. CARMEL'

"if certain things be told us supernaturally, whether at our desire or no, we must receive only that which is in clear conformity with reason and Gospel law. And then we must receive it, not because it is revelation, but because it is reason, and not allow ourselves to be influenced by the fact that it has been revealed. Indeed, it is well in such a case to look at that reason and examine it very much more closely than if there had been no revelation concerning it; inasmuch as the devil utters many things that are true, and that will come to pass, and that are in conformity with reason, in order that he may deceive."

"7. It is not fitting, then, to enquire of God by supernatural means, nor is it necessary that He should answer; since all the faith has been given us in Christ, and there is therefore no more of it to be revealed, nor will there ever be. And he that now desires to receive anything in a supernatural manner, as we have said, is, as it were, finding fault with God for not having given us a complete sufficiency in His Son. For, although such a person may be assuming the faith, and believing it, nevertheless he is showing a curiosity which belongs to faithlessness. We must not expect, then, to receive instruction, or aught else, in a supernatural manner. For, at the moment when Christ gave up the ghost upon the Cross, saying, Consummatum est, which signifies, 'It is finished,' an end was made, not only of all these forms, but also of all those other ceremonies and rites of the Old Law. And so we must now be guided in all things by the law of Christ made man, and by that of His Church, and of His ministers, in a human and a visible manner, and by these means we must remedy our spiritual weaknesses and ignorances, since in these means we shall find abundant medicine for them all. If we leave this path, we are guilty not only of curiosity, but of great audacity: nothing is to be believed in a supernatural way, save only that which is the teaching of Christ made man, as I say, and of His ministers, who are men. So much so that Saint Paul says these words: Quod si Angelus de coelo evengelizaverit, praterquam quod evangelizavimus vobis, anathema sit.407 That is to say: If any angel from Heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we men preach unto you, let him be accursed and excommunicate."

" But now that the faith is founded in Christ, and in this era of grace, the law of the Gospel has been made manifest, there is no reason to enquire of Him in that manner, nor for Him to speak or to answer as He did then. For, in giving us, as He did, His Son, which is His Word -- and He has no other -- He spake to us all together, once and for all, in this single Word, and He has no occasion to speak further".

2. As to these revelations which are included under our second head, God grants them still in our time to whom He will. He is wont, for example, to reveal to some persons how many days they still have to live, or what trials they are to suffer, or what is to befall such and such a person, or such and such a kingdom, etc. And even as regards the mysteries of our faith, He will reveal and expound to the spirit the truths concerning them, although, since this has already been revealed once, it is not properly to be termed revelation, but is more correctly a manifestation or explanation of what has been revealed already.

3. In this kind of revelation the devil may meddle freely. For, as revelations of this nature come ordinarily through words, figures and similitudes, etc., the devil may very readily counterfeit others like them, much more so than when the revelations are in spirit alone. Wherefore, if with regard to the first and the second kind of revelation which we are here describing, as touching our faith, there be revealed to us anything new, or different, we must in no wise give our consent to it, even though we had evidence that it was spoken by an angel from Heaven. For even so says Saint Paul, in these words: Licet nos, gut Angelus de coelo evangelizet vobis praeterquam quod evangelizavimus vobis, anathema sit.452 Which signifies: Even though an angel from Heaven declare or preach unto you aught else than that which we have preached unto you, let him be anathema.

4. Since, then, there are no more articles to be revealed concerning the substance of our faith than those which have already been revealed to the Church, not only must anything new which may be revealed to the soul concerning this be rejected, but it behoves the soul to be cautious and pay no heed to any novelties implied therein, and for the sake of the purity of the soul it behoves it to rely on faith alone. Even though the truths already revealed to it be revealed again, it will believe them, not because they are now revealed anew, but because they have already been sufficiently revealed to the Church: indeed, it must close its understanding to them, holding simply to the doctrine of the Church and to its faith, which, as Saint Paul says, enters through hearing.[453] And let not its credence and intellectual assent be given to these matters of the faith which have been revealed anew, however fitting and true they may seem to it, if it desire not to be deceived. For, in order to deceive the soul and to instil falsehoods into it, the devil first feeds it with truths and things that are probable in order to give it assurance and afterwards to deceive it. He resembles one that sews leather with a bristle, first piercing the leather with the sharp bristle, after which enters the soft thread; the thread could not enter unless the bristle guided it.

5. And let this be considered carefully; for, even were it true that there was no peril in such deception, yet it greatly behoves the soul not to desire to understand clearly things that have respect to the faith, so that it may preserve the merit of faith, in its purity and entirety, and likewise that it may come, in this night of the understanding, to the Divine light of Divine union. And it is equally necessary to consider any new revelation with ones eyes closed, and holding fast the prophecies of old, for the Apostle Saint Peter, though he had seen the glory of the Son of God after some manner on Mount Tabor, wrote, in his canonical epistle, these words: Et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem; cui bene factitis attendentes, etc.454 Which is as though he had said: Although the vision that we have seen of Christ on the Mount is true, the word of the prophecy that is revealed to us is firmer and surer, and, if ye rest your soul upon it, ye do well.

6. And if it is true that, for the reasons already described, it behoves the soul to close its eyes to the aforementioned revelations which come to it, and which concern the propositions of the faith, how much more necessary will it be neither to receive nor to give credit to other revelations relating to different things, wherein the devil habitually meddles so freely that I believe it impossible for a man not to be deceived in many of them unless he strive to reject them, such an appearance of truth and security does the devil give them? For he brings together so many appearances and probabilities, in order that they may be believed, and plants them so firmly in the sense and the imagination, that it seems to the person affected that what he says will certainly happen; and in such a way does he cause the soul to grasp and hold them, that, if it have not humility, it will hardly be persuaded to reject them and made to believe the contrary. Wherefore, the soul that is pure, cautious, simple and humble must resist revelations and other visions with as much effort and care as though they were very perilous temptations. For there is no need to desire them; on the contrary, there is need not too desire them, if we are to reach the union of love. It is this that Solomon meant when he said: 'What need has a man to desire and seek things that are above his natural capacity?'[455] As though we were to say: He has no necessity, in order to be perfect, to desire supernatural things by supernatural means, which are above his capacity.


Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:07 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 8:51 pm
Posts: 5
Location: Oklahoma
New post Re: Beati Taigi Prophesies New Pope
Pat Beck wrote:
I don't know what members of this group think of Malachi Martin or his writings, but I read his book KEYS OF THIS BLOOD a year or so ago, and in it he said that Siri did have sufficient votes to be elected pope, but declined because of concern for the safety of his family. Malachi Martin said it was spoken of "the little brutality" that changed the election, and Paul VI came out of the Conclave as "pope". I would be curious to know what the "little brutality" was! It has been said that a cardinal broke the seal of the Conclave and communicated with a member of a secret society, so wouldn't that invalidate the Conclave? There are continuing articles in THE FOUR MARKS that talk about Garry Guiffre not being totally revealing about there being a mix up in reporting the white smoke - that it was from the 1939 election (Pius XII) and not the 1958 election. There is so much confusion that it is hard to discern what is true and what is rumor. My husband and I believed the Siri Theory until we read the article in THE FOUR MARKS recently.

Pat Beck


The mix up was not with Gary, nor does the Siri Thesis rest on just one bit of information. And I think that Fr. Martin claiming to be a bishop and making a certain fellow a married latin-rite priest gives the late Fr. Martin credibility concerns that he unfortunately can't reply to.

_________________
Hello, I'm what you might call a Roman Catholic 'feeneyite', 'Sede-Impedita', Monarchist. My favorite lay thinkers are Joseph de Maistre, Juan Donoso y Cortes, and Leon Bloy.


Tue Jun 06, 2006 5:47 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.