Well, this is lovely that you want to run with Cardinal Mueller, David. But will you agree with him in all things?
David, my issue, for one, is not Vatican II, but what was taken and done with it. This latter is the infamous 'spirit of Vatican II', which bears very little resemblance to what was written and intended by the Council in its reality. I referred to a hijacking by 'outsiders'-this correlates clearly with Cardinal Muller's assertion of liberals lying in wait for their opportunity since the nineteenth century, aided and abetted by a spirit of the times that was then in gestation. This latter needs to be teased out more in terms of cause and effect. The 'sixties' did not really begin until the second half of the decade. I don't think this toxic zeitgeist directly caused the hijacking of VII, nor did the latter directly spawn the 'sixties' counter-culture. It seems to me more likely that the two were born simultaneously, encouraging and feeding upon one another in an infernal double-whammy. We'd have a far healthier Church if Vatican II were now properly implemented. I think Popes John Paul II and Benedict tried but were impeded by the liberal faction. The size of the challenge may have been responsible for the premature death of the first John Paul. There is another problem now. The Council was a pastoral one, intended for the specific challenges of the society of its time. However, more than half a century has passed, accompanied by more rapid and radical social and institutional change than any previous society has experienced. Vatican II is obsolete, out of date. We need another Council, but we also need Divine Intervention to prevent another hijacking.
I have come to like Cardinal Muller very much ever since I saw the EWTN interview with him earlier this year. I don't agree with him on everything (as with Pope Francis! - I think Francis made a mistake in not keeping him although I understand maybe why his 'germanic' style would not fit easily with the Pope's approach). I like the above mentioned interview so much that I'll copy it again here. He's a good man!
I know many Catholics love Pope John XXIII. But there have always been certain 'issues' with him. He was the pope who was supposed to have revealed the 3rd secret of Fatima, but he boldly defied Mother Mary saying that the secret was not relevant to his pontificate. He was suspected to be a freemason, who was seen going out in civilian clothes to attend masonic meetings even while he was pope. There is also the whole controversy surrounding his election as pope. "Pope Pius XII had appointed Cardinal Guiseppe Siri as his desired successor.(7) Siri was rabidly anti-Communist, an intransigent traditionalist in matters of church doctrine, and a skilled bureaucrat who had been personally trained in the intricacies of Vatican finances by Bernardino Nogara. Moreover, Siri had the support of a group of cardinals known as "the Pentagon." The group included Cardinals Canali, Pizzardo, Mucara, Ottaviani, Mimmi, and Spellman. Few paid heed to the formation of a progressive or anti-Pentagon group composed of Polish primate Wyszynski, the Indian cardinal Garcias, the French cardinals, Cardinal Lercaro, and Roncalli. The progressives were concerned about the rigidly of Pius XII's regime, including the centralization of all power and authority in the person of the pope, the unwillingness to initiate reform, and the crusading anti-Communism that was creating a chasm between the east and the west. In 1958, when the cardinals were locked away in the Sistine Chapel to elect a new pope, a mysterious event began to unfold. On the third ballot, Siri, according to FBI sources, obtained the necessary votes and was elected Pope Gregory XVII.(8) White smoke poured from the chimney of the chapel to inform the faithful that a new pope had been chosen. The news was announced with joy at 6 P.M. on Vatican radio. The announcer said, "The smoke is white...There is absolutely no doubt. A pope has been elected.(9) The Palatine and Swiss Guards were alerted. The former were summoned from their barracks and ordered to report to St. Peter's Basilica for the announcement of the name of the Holy Father. Thousands gathered beneath the windows of the apostolic palace waiting to receive the blessing of the new pope. But the new pope failed to appear. Question began to arise whether the smoke was white or gray. To quell such doubts, Monsignor Santaro, secretary of the Conclave of Cardinals, informed the press that the smoke, indeed, had been white and that a new pope had been elected. The waiting continued. By evening Vatican radio announced that the results remained uncertain. On October 27, 1958, the Houston Post headlined: "Cardinals Fail to elect pope in 4 Ballots: Mix-Up in Smoke Signals Cause False Reports."(10) But the reports had been valid. On the fourth ballot, according to FBI sources, Siri again obtained the necessary votes and was elected supreme pontiff. But the French cardinals annulled the results, claiming that the election would cause widespread riots and the assassination of several prominent bishops behind the Iron Curtain.(11) The cardinals opted to elect Cardinal Frederico Tedischini as a "transitional pope," but Tedischini was too ill to accept the position. Finally, on the third day of balloting, Roncalli received the necessary support to become Pope John XXIII. The conservative cardinals believed that Roncalli, at the age of seventy-eight, was too old to wreak havoc within the Vatican and would only serve as a "guardian pope" until the next conclave. They were mistaken. John XXIII's first act as pope was to appoint Archbishop Giovanni Battista Montini, his fellow "progressive" who had been "exiled" to the North of Italy, as a cardinal. He next appointed twenty-three additional cardinals to ward off any attempt by the "ultras" (as the new pope called the old guard) to regain control of the Vatican. Many of the new cardinals were well known for their leftist sentiments; others were from Third World countries.(12) Returning to the United States from the conclave, Cardinal Spellman announced his disdain of the new pope by saying: "He's no Pope. He should be selling bananas."(13) [End of Quote from book "The Vatican Exposed", "The Pink Pope" chapter, pgs. 90-92]" 8. Department of State secret dispatch, "John XXIII." News of this bizarre event was leaked to foreign journalists, including Louis Remy, who later wrote an article entitled "The Pope: Could He Be Cardinal Siri?" The article appeared in Sous La Banniere 6 (July/August 1986). 9. The announcer's words appeared in the London Tablet, November 1, 1958, p. 387. 10. Houston Post, October 27, 1958, pp. 1 and 7. 11. Department of state secret file, "Cardinal Siri", issue date: April 10, 1961, declassified: February 28, 1994; see also Remy, "The Pope: Could He Be Cardinal Siri?" 12. Manhattan, Murder in the Vatican, p. 37; Richard P. McBrien, Lives of the Popes (San Francisco: Harper, 1997), pp. 371-72. 13. Cardinal Spellman, quoted in Cooney, American Pope, p. 261. This pope's death was publicly mourned by the Mexican Freemasons: John XXIII's Death Mourned by the Mexican Freemasonry On the occasion of the death of Pope John XXIII, June 3, 1963, the Mexican Freemasonry paid for an ad to be published in Mexican newspapers. At right, the original ad by The Mexican Western Grand Lodge published in the June 4, 1963 issue of El Informador. Below, our translation from Spanish. THE MEXICAN WESTERN GRAND LODGE of free and accepted Masons, at thedeath of POPE JOHN XXIII Publicly expresses its sorrow for the loss of this great man, who made a revolution in the ideas, thoughts and forms of the Roman Catholic liturgy. THE ENCYCLICALS "MOTHER AND TEACHER" and "PEACE ON EARTH" Made a revolution in concepts favoring THE RIGHTS OF MAN AND HIS LIBERTY Mankind has lost a great man, and we the Freemasons recognize his elevated principles, his humanitarianism and his condition as a GRAND LIBERAL. Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico, June 3, 1963 THE MEXICAN WESTERN GRAND LODGE Jose Guadalupe Zuno Hernandez, Esquire (Paid announcement)
I posted the following about Father Luigi Villa on another thread here: Almost sixty years ago, “Padre Pio first met Father Luigi Villa, whom he entreated to devote his entire life to fight Ecclesiastical Freemasonry. Padre Pio told Father Villa that Our Lord had designs upon him and had chosen him to be educated and trained to fight Freemasonry within the Church. The Saint spelled out this task in three meetings with Father Villa, which took place in the last fifteen years of life of Padre Pio. At the close of the second meeting [second half of 1963], Padre Pio embraced Father Villa three times, saying to him: ‘Be brave, now…for the Church has already been invaded by Freemasonry!’ and then stated: ‘Freemasonry has already made it into the loafers (shoes) of the Pope!’ At the time, the reigning Pope was Paul VI. http://padrepioandchiesaviva.com/Padre_Pio___Fr.html Father Luigi Villa wrote an open letter to the Episcopate when he heard that Pope John Paul II was intending to beatify Pope John XXIII. At the end of the letter, he wrote: "And I conclude: one can but be astounded in observing two concepts of sanctity which Rome maintains today: the “ Catholic” sanctity of Pius IX, and the “ ecumenical” one of John XXIII; that is, the “ sanctity” of a Pope who bravely struggled against the enemies of the Church, and the “ alleged sanctity” of the other Pope, who undermined the defense of the rights of Christ-God; who caused the faithful to dismantle their defense against the modern evils and failed to defend them against those very evils: freemasonry, communism, sects, and false religions. Hence to be willing to beatify Pope John XXIII together with Pius IX is a clear example of modernist action, for it is a willing to bless the Pope of the conciliar revision along with the Pope who defined the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception of Mary and of the Pontifical Infallibility, and who, with the “ Syllabus” and the encyclical “ Quanta Cura” , laid bare the pathogenic germs of the modern and contemporary social maladies directed to killing the Faith. This is why, Your Excellency, I intend to manifest to the Holy See my will and my plea that Pope John XXIII do not receive the honor of a “ beatification” for any legitimated reason."
He may have failed in his duty with respect to the propecies of Fatima. He wasn't the first or only pope guilty of this, as far as I know. The happenings of a conclave are meant to be sacrosanct. I believe that divulging in any leaking whatsoever of a papal vote incurs automatic excommunication. Can one take the word of someone prepared to do such a wickedly disobedient thing? A bunch of Freemasons publicly lavish the dead Pope John XXIII with praise when he is unable to respond-an excellent way to attack the character of one considered an enemy. The context of the time cannot be ignored, when one sympathetic to poorer people could very easily and unjustifiably be labelled a communist. That there was a scurrilous enemy during the Cold War was no guarantee of the West's veracity. We have the transparently annunciated words of Pope Francis when we critique him here. Most of us are very wary of statements attributed to PF by third parties, regardless of context. It is certainly mistaken to grant credibility to rumours from over half a century ago without the support of rock-solid evidence.
But it is Paul VI that Padre Pio accused. I don't doubt for one moment the integrity of Father Villa, and he may well have had grounds to doubt the worthiness for beatification of Pope John, but one needs more than even a very honest personal opinion to establish a case. It must also be remembered that well-intentioned mistakes are not the same as willful evil acts. I think that Pope John made mistakes, but hindsight was not available to him. I also think that too many modern popes are being canonised and far too hastily. It is only adding to our bewilderment.
Say it ain't so Alexa! PS- My husband got one from his boss last Christmas and it's still in the box. My friend wants it but I think I'm going to sell it! This is a huge way of letting "big brother" come right into your home.
But it was this pope who first refused to reveal the 3rd secret by the appointed year 1960. If what reportedly happened did indeed happen, I wouldn't blame the person(s) who leaked it for 'obedience to God comes before obedience to man'. Also, “John XXIII asked the cardinals to remain in the conclave another night instead of leaving immediately as was customary…to caution them again against revealing the secrets of his election to outsiders...” (Alden Hatch, A Man Named John, Hawthorn Books, 1963, p. 163.) I take very seriously the fact that it was Padre Pio who told Father Luigi that our Lord Jesus himself had chosen Father Luigi to fight Freemasonry in the Church. In other words, it is more than just 'a very honest personal opinion' that we are talking about.
SG, I understand your questions about Pope John XXIII, the Third Secret, the council, and all of that. Indeed if I make it to Heaven there are going to be a lot of questions that I would like the answers to The reason the post you cited was sedevacantist was because it takes upon itself the right to make judgments about these things. It is the same reason we as laity cannot declare Pope Francis invalid. It exceeds our authority. What you posted is called the "Siri Thesis". Which is a sedevacantist notion that in the 1958 conclave Cardinal Siri was elected, but was forced to step aside by threats and Pope John XXIII was installed. Their claim is then that Pope John XXIII's election was invalid and he was not a true Pope. Very similar in some ways to the argument made by many today that Pope Francis is not a valid Pope. This is not something the laity are empowered to decide and guess what? That is a good thing! Can you imagine if, after every conclave, the laity could not be sure if they were looking upon a real Pope or an imposter? That they would have to somehow mount an investigation of every election to make sure it was valid? An investigation that would be impossible to carry out, by the way, because conclaves are secret and we do not know for sure what happens in them. The idea that each lay person can decide for themselves if a Pope is valid smacks very much of the Protestant notion of individual decision on all matters spiritual. Stay away from this stuff. it is a hornet's nest.
Nobody should be surprised by this, it is one of many of the ways we are constantly surveiled. If your phone is sitting near you consider how well the voice commands work on it and then realize that it IS listening to and recording every word you say. A great movie to understand just how far this has gone is the movie Snowden. The plot is total garbage and a propaganda piece for the CIA but, it is realistic as to the governments capabilities and it has been happening for quite some time now. You simply can not be paranoid enough when it comes to these devices if you value your privacy. Stalin had nothing on us. One might think; but wait, I have nothing to hide from anyone! Right? Well, starting next month places like Twitter are going to be looking at each persons online history. That means that you will agree to allow them to have access to it on any device you use to access their site. Much like FB does now. If they see that you have been visiting a site which they consider to be extreme they will suspend and permanently ban your account thereby completely silencing any and all opposition to their globalist worldview. How will this affect people like Trump who are completely against the grain of the globalist cabal? This begins on Dec 19th. I am without a doubt convinced that Google, and all social media sites are simply fronts for the agencies. The agencies are tools of the cabal. The cabal is without a doubt an instrument of Satan. Plan accordingly.
It is comforting to know that I am not the only one who has these questions. This I cannot understand. When there is more than enough reason to doubt and question, why should the laity be quiet and accepting? Is this not how the terrible changes/ rotten fruits of Vatican II came about? Because the laity kept quiet? And we excuse ourselves by saying that 'the Modernists hijacked Vatican II, but the teachings of Vatican II itself were very good'. Who exactly were the Modernists? Why did the Pope not object at all? I believe this attitude of the laity also contributed greatly to the sexual abuse crisis in the Church spiralling out of hand. Because 'the laity had no right to question/ doubt the clergy'. Again, I honestly cannot understand why, even when there is substantial reason to believe this may be true, we cannot say so. In the Blessed Virgin Mary's many (approved) messages over the ages, we have been warned. LaSalette: "Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist." Akita: "The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops.The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres...churches and altars sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord." Quito: "How the Church will suffer on that occasion—the dark night of the lack of a Prelate and Father to watch over them with paternal love, gentleness, strength, discernment and prudence. Many priests will lose their spirit, placing their souls in great danger.Therefore, pray insistently without tiring and weep with bitter tears in the secrecy of your heart. Implore our Celestial Father that, for the love of the Eucharistic Heart of My Most Holy Son and His Precious Blood shed with such generosity… He might take pity on His ministers and bring to an end those ominous times, and send to the Church the Prelate who will restore the spirit of Her priests." etc., etc., While Giuseppe Siri may not have announced publicly that he had ever been elected pope, he did throw a few intriguing hints to that effect some months before he died in a taped interview with Italian journalist Benny Lai. This took place on September 18, 1988. Lai would later include a transcript of the recording as the final chapter (XVII) of his book about Siri, Il Papa non Eletto, or The Un-Elected Pope, which came out in 1993. An English translation of the originally Italian transcript is available: http://www.eclipseofthechurch.com/Chap17_1-Eng.pdf In reading this, do keep in mind that it is the transcript of a recording, not a carefully constructed essay. Cardinal Siri termed Vatican II "the greatest mistake in history". From the book, The Unelected Pope; Giuseppe Siri, Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church (1993), by Benny Lai, pp. 296-297, from the last recorded conversation with Cardinal Siri. Benny Lai had been dealing with Holy See affairs since the 50s, authored numerous essays and was considered an authority on specialist news and information the world over. See 'Benny Lai, the Dean of Vatican journalists dies' http://www.lastampa.it/2013/12/12/v...lists-dies-Lj5x4HQ0DrID4YKMMsGwlM/pagina.html On pages 607 to 609 of his book, "The Keys Of This Blood," Malachi Martin, perennial insider and eye-witness to the '63 Conclave, admits that Siri was elected Pope (again) in 1963, but that his election was "set aside" because of an outside "communication" (interference) by an "internationally based organization", regarding a "grave matter of [Vatican] state security." I don't know what to feel or say now. If bringing up these matters/ thoughts causes unease or even anger on this forum, I will respectfully cease to post such things.
It is not a problem to me to bring these matters up. I would just be concerned that the person bringing them up would understand their context and realise their own limitations in making private judgements, not to mention the standards required by the Church in evaluating them. This is a time of enormous confusion and deception. Only Our Lord and His Mother might be the only two human beings who know the Truth. It is probably prudent to be aware of all these allegations and rumours, but also to know that, until there are further genuine and corroborative revelations, that is the status they continue to possess. You are right to be uneasy about these rumours. They assist us in avoiding complacency and naivety.
This thought gives me great comfort. I feel myself being pulled one way and then the other in some of the issues in the church - a tug of war of the soul.
Please don’t cease to post. Your posts are articulate and honest and filled with faith and live for Christ and His Church. I am very sympathetic to these questions. I have wrangled with them for years(going back to 1980’s) and at one point wondered if this is a false Church since VII. I went into deep prayer and much anguish and without going into too much detail the Blessed Mother showed me that I should stay right where I was within the bark of Peter no matter how damaged it is and continue to Mass where I could attend regardless of it being Novus Ordo. That Jesus was truly there and needed my love and presence and desire to console since so many there were not even aware of HisPresence. I derivedgreatcomfort from TLM but Jesus was Consoled when I reverently attended the NO. It was a lot for me to digest but she brought me great peace and comfort. And I’ve never looked back since then or doubted the Church or the validity of the Popes. I am not thrilled with JXXIII or Paul VI but it was I see now the beginning of the purification. The time foretold at Quito and LaSalette. I don’t know if this helpsSG but this was my struggle and it was dreadful at the time. Now I have become more simple. I see these things as above my pay grade. I have a nose for deception—a discernment as we all do here which is why I groan inside at the perfidy and skullduggery in our Church. But I trust Our Mother and I pray theRosary and offercommunions of reparation and I live in hope. In spite of the ruination I see all around me. And I try not to add my sins to the camel’s load. In other words I do what can do within in the narrow confines of what I have been given to do and try not to lose my peace. But I have been where you are and I understand. Please please don’t stop posting.
