Siri: I'm no schismatic, so I asked an honest question

[foolishmortal]

I’m not sure why it was closed down without their having become a flame war. I wasn’t sure if everyone knew the story. Better get it out before someone stumbles upon it. I did find something on wikipedia (not that it’s the ultimate authority I know, but i don’t think this part was made up) that he was critical of Lefebvre–so guess what he thought about sedevacantists. The latter groups should have waited out the difficult times as they may all have been unified for a Pope they all might have liked. It’s not very traditional to have little faith in God in such a way.
My point was, however…what happened to Cardinal Siri? Of course, I found out anyway.

 

[ProVobis]

The question is whether he was critical of Lefebvre before or after Lefebvre started questioning the wisdom of the Vatican II documents. Don’t forget Lefebvre had signed many of those documents before he started reflecting on what he had done.

As far as Cardinal Siri goes, it is reported that he received enough votes for Papacy but, because of some technicalities, was not elected Pope. But before you accuse me of harboring conspiracy theories, don’t forget that Christ never specified exactly how Peter’s successors would be chosen. The fact is that John XXIII and Paul VI were accepted by the world as leaders of the Catholic Church and that was sufficient for “election.”

 

[GerardP]

Cardinal Siri wrote a very powerful critique of the “new theology” in his book “Gethsemane.” He takes on Rahner, du Lubac and a few others.

It’s a very difficult read, but worthwhile.

 

[NetNuncio]

Why we continue to speculate about this is truly beyond me.

First of all, if any of this is remotely true, it comes from a cardinal who took part in the conclave and took an oath of secrecy under pain of excommunication. Any cardinal who is fine with abandoning salvation to share a story like this, when Siri himself said nothing and did nothing to correct the matter, has dubious credibility.

Second of all, if Siri DID receive more votes than Roncalli or Montini, he could have well turned down the papacy. We simply don’t know and we’re not supposed to know. The simple fact is that John XXIII and Paul VI were both elected and Siri pledged obedience to both of them and NEVER left the Church.

Let’s not worry about things like this and focus our attention on the things that matter.

 

[bpbasilphx]

**
As far as Cardinal Siri goes, it is reported that he received enough votes for Papacy but, because of some technicalities, was not elected Pope.**

Could it be maybe becuas he said, “Non accepto”?

 

[foolishmortal]

I was just curious NetNuncio. I mean, with all the fuss sedevacantists have made over him, I wondered what he thought about his not being Pope and about what went on afterwards. There’s another writer, Michael Davies, who has criticized all the Vatican 2 stuff, I think, but wrote “I Am With You Always” in response to those who would break away from the Church just because we had some popes who did unnecessary and dangerous changes to the Church [which, I believe the ‘spirit’ of Vatican 2, Satan (or one of his minions), used to open the doors for what people called the spirit of Vatican 2 to spread the errors of Russia to millions of Catholic souls] which could not result in its ruination because of its divine protection as the Bride of Christ. Indirectly, in originating as graces from Christ, EWTN saved me from the first (though it still plays with ecumenism too much) and Michael Davies saved me from the latter.

I think the rebellion of Archbishop Lefebvre was unintentionally just such a rebellion Russia wanted to see within the Church. Did he not remember the “Old Catholics” who did not like Vatican 1 (which took place in the beginning of Soviet times)? They wouldn’t accept the SSPXs favorite, Pope Pius X. The fruits of his rebellion spawned groups that wanted to go beyond what he thought prudent and s on and so forth, till there was a new breed of sedevacantists. We now have sedevacantists and liberation theologians, with more siding with the latter, but both thinking they are just fine, despite bucking church laws in the name of Faith alone or Charity alone. Well, at least they haven’t lost Hope. God be praised, despite my problems, I did not end up one or the other, though sorely tempted to one or the other at 2 different time periods of my life (the first, because we were taught something closer to diddly-squat in Catholic school and later fell away) and the second, when I learned too many things at once and got angry for not having been told)!.

How can God speak to so many independent groups? Well, I think here’s the easy way (see yourself and your beliefs objectively, without emotions) and the hard way a shake-up of heavenly proportions ( hopefully the prophesied “Great Awakening”, where God shows us the state of our souls, will actually happen and do it.

 

[GerardP]

First of all, if any of this is remotely true, it comes from a cardinal who took part in the conclave and took an oath of secrecy under pain of excommunication. Any cardinal who is fine with abandoning salvation to share a story like this, when Siri himself said nothing and did nothing to correct the matter, has dubious credibility.

I’d be curious to know what the oath of secrecy actually entails since Cardinals are speaking all of the time about what happened in various conclaves.

Second of all, if Siri DID receive more votes than Roncalli or Montini, he could have well turned down the papacy. We simply don’t know and we’re not supposed to know. The simple fact is that John XXIII and Paul VI were both elected and Siri pledged obedience to both of them and NEVER left the Church.

Fr. Malachi Martin was a secretary at the conclave that elected Paul VI, he said that Siri won the number of votes in at least two and possibly three conclaves (including the 1978 election in which JPII took office)

But he said that Siri did not accept the papacy. He said that Siri was part of a large and powerful family and that Siri hinted to them that he was fearful of what would happen to them if he accepted the papacy. That opens up a whole load of possibilities but sedevacantism is not one of them if Siri did not accept the papacy.

Siri was a powerful and interesting character as well as a devout and loyal Catholic. Paul VI was very intimidated by him when they would meet. It would be out of character for him to have been a secret pope who was sidelined.

 

[catharina]

I’m not sure why it was closed down without their having become a flame war. I wasn’t sure if everyone knew the story. Better get it out before someone stumbles upon it. I did find something on wikipedia (not that it’s the ultimate authority I know, but i don’t think this part was made up) that he was critical of Lefebvre–so guess what he thought about sedevacantists. **The latter groups should have waited out the difficult times as they may all have been unified for a Pope they all might have liked. It’s not very traditional to have little faith in God in such a way. **
My point was, however…what happened to Cardinal Siri? Of course, I found out anyway.

Bottom line is that Cathoolics are not given the option of waiting it out 'til they find a Pope more “likeable.” Obedience to the Pope and acceptance of the Pope are very high on the lists of “givens” in the Church. There is no option that allows “I’ll simply ignore this Pope.”

 

[GerardP]

Bottom line is that Cathoolics are not given the option of waiting it out 'til they find a Pope more “likeable.” Obedience to the Pope and acceptance of the Pope are very high on the lists of “givens” in the Church. There is no option that allows “I’ll simply ignore this Pope.”

What do you think of St. Vincent Ferrer’s support of an anti-Pope during the Great Schism? Generations of Catholics came and went during that time period and no one was sure who the real Pope was.

Obedience to a Pope is very important, but it is contingent on the Pope’s behavior and what is commanded. Absolute Obedience only is given to God Himself.

 

[catharina]

What do you think of St. Vincent Ferrer’s support of an anti-Pope during the Great Schism? Generations of Catholics came and went during that time period and no one was sure who the real Pope was.

Obedience to a Pope is very important, but it is contingent on the Pope’s behavior and what is commanded. Absolute Obedience only is given to God Himself.

I think Vincent Ferrer rejected his error and that’s part of the reason he became St. Vincent Ferrer. As for “no one was sure who the real Pope was,” that’s absolutely untrue. Among many others, Catherine of Siena knew by responding to God’s grace - and with great certainty.

 

[childofmary1143]

I’d be curious to know what the oath of secrecy actually entails since Cardinals are speaking all of the time about what happened in various conclaves.

Could you provide a few sources as I have not heard of any Cardinal speaking about what happened in a Conclave?

Fr. Malachi Martin was a secretary at the conclave that elected Paul VI, he said that Siri won the number of votes in at least two and possibly three conclaves (including the 1978 election in which JPII took office)

But he said that Siri did not accept the papacy. He said that Siri was part of a large and powerful family and that Siri hinted to them that he was fearful of what would happen to them if he accepted the papacy. That opens up a whole load of possibilities but sedevacantism is not one of them if Siri did not accept the papacy.

Siri was a powerful and interesting character as well as a devout and loyal Catholic. Paul VI was very intimidated by him when they would meet. It would be out of character for him to have been a secret pope who was sidelined.

How would Father Malachi Martin know what happened during a Conclave? It’s my understanding that the whole voting process is done is complete isolation with only the Cardinals.

If a Cardinal did tell Father Malachi Martin what happened that is terrible. Just as you said that absolute obedience is required to God a Vow is a Solemn Promise (for lack of a better word) to God.

 

[jfallaw]

I’d be curious to know what the oath of secrecy actually entails since Cardinals are speaking all of the time about what happened in various conclaves.

Fr. Malachi Martin was a secretary at the conclave that elected Paul VI, he said that Siri won the number of votes in at least two and possibly three conclaves (including the 1978 election in which JPII took office)

But he said that Siri did not accept the papacy. He said that Siri was part of a large and powerful family and that Siri hinted to them that he was fearful of what would happen to them if he accepted the papacy. That opens up a whole load of possibilities but sedevacantism is not one of them if Siri did not accept the papacy.

Siri was a powerful and interesting character as well as a devout and loyal Catholic. Paul VI was very intimidated by him when they would meet. It would be out of character for him to have been a secret pope who was sidelined.

Things and events surprise me all the time, but people never do. Especially religious people. Even if Siri had won and accepted, he would not have been made Pope. The spirit of V2 is change, and what better way than to break the monopoly that Italians had over the Papacy for four hundred years?

 

[GerardP]

Could you provide a few sources as I have not heard of any Cardinal speaking about what happened in a Conclave?

One of the reasons I want to find out what the actual oath is, is because we know so much about so many conclaves. The election of St. Pius X is one of the most well known with the veto of the Prussian King and Pius X spending 2 days begging the Cardinals not to elect him, his tears and another cardinal telling him to accept his cross. It’s very well known.

Here’s an article on the election of Pope Benedict:

cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/22/pope.ascension/index.html

How would Father Malachi Martin know what happened during a Conclave? It’s my understanding that the whole voting process is done is complete isolation with only the Cardinals.

I think there are assistants particularly since in those days many Cardinals were over 80.

If a Cardinal did tell Father Malachi Martin what happened that is terrible. Just as you said that absolute obedience is required to God a Vow is a Solemn Promise (for lack of a better word) to God

Fr. Martin knew of the secrecy and he knew that there were leaks in some of the conclaves. But I’d like to find out what the rules actually are. Is it silence on the conclave forever or just during the conclave or after the death of the Pope? I don’t know. I’ve never researched it.

 

[GerardP]

Things and events surprise me all the time, but people never do. Especially religious people. Even if Siri had won and accepted, he would not have been made Pope. The spirit of V2 is change, and what better way than to break the monopoly that Italians had over the Papacy for four hundred years?

One of the conspiracy theories is that Siri was virulently anti-communist and anti-homosexual. Somehow the Soviets got wind that he was going to win and threatened war in Europe if he accepted.

Supporting that would be the fact that according to Bella Dodd after her conversion due to Bishop Sheen, she said the Soviets planted thousands of spies in seminaries in the 30’s. They could only get homosexuals to do this because they promised them the Church would eventually change it’s position once they gained power.

So a possibility would have been that Siri would have removed the homosexuals from the priesthood and that would have undermined the Soviet plan.

(Again except for the Bella Dodd testimony, the rest is just rumor and speculation. )

 

[davidc2]

The Secretary of the College of Cardinals is admitted after the election in order to be present for the Pope-Elect to accept (or not) the post. No other Secretary is permitted.

Fr. Martin has never been the Secretary of the College of Cardinals.

 

[davidc2]

Things and events surprise me all the time, but people never do. Especially religious people. Even if Siri had won and accepted, he would not have been made Pope. The spirit of V2 is change, and what better way than to break the monopoly that Italians had over the Papacy for four hundred years?

If Siri had won and accepted, he would have been Pope. Period.

 

[GerardP]

I think Vincent Ferrer rejected his error and that’s part of the reason he became St. Vincent Ferrer. As for “no one was sure who the real Pope was,” that’s absolutely untrue. Among many others, Catherine of Siena knew by responding to God’s grace - and with great certainty.

How do you know she was responding to God’s grace and just didn’t make the best decision by her reason? Did she respond to God’s grace when she made eggs in the morning?

I don’t know of St. Vincent “rejecting his error” but rather accepting and submitting to Martin V when the Church straightened out the mess. Do you know whether or not he had to make a public retraction or was considered a schismatic until he made amends? I don’t know, I’m just asking.

 

[GerardP]

The Secretary of the College of Cardinals is admitted after the election in order to be present for the Pope-Elect to accept (or not) the post. No other Secretary is permitted.

Which conclave rules are you appealing to? Did the Cardinals make their own meals, take their medications and carry the physically weak around?

Fr. Martin has never been the Secretary of the College of Cardinals.

I never said he had that title. I’ll have to go back and look at my source. I had thought he was “a secretary” as in someone who delivers messages and runs errands.

 

[GerardP]

If Siri had won and accepted, he would have been Pope. Period.

Hence the so-called “Siri thesis” and the belief that he chose the name Gregory. Are there any sources for that one that you are aware of?

 

[catharina]

How do you know she was responding to God’s grace and just didn’t make the best decision by her reason? Did she respond to God’s grace when she made eggs in the morning?

I don’t know of St. Vincent “rejecting his error” but rather accepting and submitting to Martin V when the Church straightened out the mess. Do you know whether or not he had to make a public retraction or was considered a schismatic until he made amends? I don’t know, I’m just asking.

Since St. Catherine of Siena has been declared a Doctor of the Church (that is, a recognized and esteemed, teaching theologian) while I can’t venture a guess as to what she was thinking IF she ever made eggs in the morning, I’m willing to say that she DID respond to grace in considering the divisons within the Church during her lifetime. Regarding Catherine and Vincent Ferrer, I’ll suggest you check with Dominican theologians/historians for more details since both Saints were members of the Dominican Order.