Gregory XVII

[tme]

Has anyone ever heard of this guy. His real name is - was, cardinal siri, and he claimed to be the true suceesor to Pius in 1958.

Had a friend tell me about this and i want to get back to him with some accurate info.

Thanks eh!

 

[LilyM]

Unless his name was announced from the balcony of the Vatican after the conclave following Pius’ death (and it wasn’t, the name of Angelo Roncalli, John XXIII, was), then no way no how is he any Pope’s successor.

How many cardinals were there voting in that conclave? You think they’d stand for the successor they properly voted for being shoved aside for someone else?

 

[thistle]

Has anyone ever heard of this guy. His real name is - was, cardinal siri, and he claimed to be the true suceesor to Pius in 1958.

Had a friend tell me about this and i want to get back to him with some accurate info.

Thanks eh!

If your friend is making the claim then its up to him/her to provide the source of his/her information. Its not up to us to refute baseless assertions.

 

[tme]

If your friend is making the claim then its up to him/her to provide the source of his/her information. Its not up to us to refute baseless assertions.

Thanks guys/gals.

This is the info he directed me to…

thepopeinred.com/

I have not researched yet to see if these claims are even true(the news stories etc.). Just wanted to see if anyone here ever heard this claim before.

 

[Brian_Crane]

I’ve heard it before. It doesn’t pass the kook test, which is why I’ve never looked into it. The proponents of this theory claim that he was drugged and threatened for 10 years (if I recall correctly,) which is why he never publicly claimed the papacy for himself, nor hinted that John XXIII or Paul VI were antipopes.

It strains credulity to think that such a conspiracy could be carried out for such a long time by so many cardinals and bishops. He was close with Archbishop Lefebvre, Cardinal Ottaviani and other “conservative” Council Fathers. He probably received votes from Cdl. Ottaviani and others who preferred Siri to Cdl. Roncalli (John XXIII) at the conclave. So its inconceivable to me that they could either be part of such a conspiracy or ignorant of it for all those years.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Thanks guys/gals.

This is the info he directed me to…

thepopeinred.com/

I have not researched yet to see if these claims are even true(the news stories etc.). Just wanted to see if anyone here ever heard this claim before.

this looks to me more like a protestant view of the CC. apostasy? wrong popes?

:bowdown: :byzsoc:

 

[Joe_Kelley]

this looks to me more like a protestant view of the CC. apostasy? wrong popes?

:bowdown: :byzsoc:

I think the Protestants are innocent of this one. It sounds more like some of our ultra-traditionalist brothers.

 

[Saintvitus]

If your friend is making the claim then its up to him/her to provide the source of his/her information. Its not up to us to refute baseless assertions.

Actually it is sensible for us to refute error, and even the Church, which I presume, in her great wisdom teaches us to challenge error, heresy, and all other ‘intellectual ills’ of that kind.

Here’s a poor analogy, suppose some stranger walks up to you and says your house is on fire, and they appear serious and seem to know of ‘some’ sort of trouble - surely you would give your home a ring to check whether or not it’s true just in case that person may be right and you risk losing your home!

Likewise, for us good Catholics, whenever we come across a particular notion that seems to challenge our perceptions of things, it’s better we find out what the truth of the matter is, as we may lose more than our perceptions - perhaps our salvation in some case where one remains in material heresy.

 

[Saintvitus]

I’ve heard it before. It doesn’t pass the kook test, which is why I’ve never looked into it. The proponents of this theory claim that he was drugged and threatened for 10 years (if I recall correctly,) which is why he never publicly claimed the papacy for himself, nor hinted that John XXIII or Paul VI were antipopes.

It strains credulity to think that such a conspiracy could be carried out for such a long time by so many cardinals and bishops. He was close with Archbishop Lefebvre, Cardinal Ottaviani and other “conservative” Council Fathers. He probably received votes from Cdl. Ottaviani and others who preferred Siri to Cdl. Roncalli (John XXIII) at the conclave. So its inconceivable to me that they could either be part of such a conspiracy or ignorant of it for all those years.

The notion that such a conspiracy could be true is seemingly ‘inconceivable’ and completely unreasonable too, I agree. I am however awaiting for a solid refutation of this notion as I haven’t found one yet that actually refutes this using a substantial case with proper reference to Canon Law and the Dogmatic Teachings of the Church - as they use it so profusely.
I’m just a simple lay Catholic. This issue needs to be referred to a Canon Lawyer or someone who knows their Church doctrine and law inside out, so that all error in this can be stamped out for good. Until then, I’m honestly scandalized by this.

Keep praying the Rosary people. Our Blessed Mother will help clear this up.
God bless!

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Some years back Charles Colson was asked what he thought the chief lesson of Watergate was. He said he wanted to tell them that it proved Jesus Christ really rose from the dead, but they would never understand him.

He said he remembered the morning at a breakfast where they agreed on their story and how to handle ithe problem. In less than a month each was trying to make a deal with prosecutors to get himself off the hook.

He asks, if these powerful men couldn’t hold to a story for more than a month, how did twelve ignorant fishermen hold to a story for the rest of their lives, and die rather than reject it?