"The Church canonized a man precisely for rejecting the theology of every pope before him."
I think it would be more appropriate to say: "Bergoglio 'canonized' a man precisely for rejecting the theology of every pope before him." - which, btw., was completely expected and fully understandable from him, as he did the same for the other conciliar popes...
Was Bergoglio the Church? Did Bergoglio even represent the Catholic and Apostolic Church? At all? By any means?
There’s some interesting shuffling going on with calendar dates in all this.
John XXIII was celebrated yesterday in the new calendar instead of The Maternity of Our Lady, an important feast that is not ancient but that had been put there for a reason. It’s in a Marian month; it follows the Feast of the Rosary and the commemoration of Lepanto; it looks back to the 3rd Ecumenical Council and the rejection of the Nestorian heresy.
They said the Feast wasn’t needed, because of the new Marian Feast instituted on Jan 1st. However, while Our Lady has been honoured in the past on that day it’s always primarily been known as the Circumcision of Christ. (Incidentally, this is the day when the action of the medieval poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight opens, which is undoubtedly significant for the understanding of that poem.) This was a theologically significant Feast, because it emphasises that Christ fulfils the requirements of the old Law. It’s also the first time he bleeds, theologically looking forward to the crucifixion where he sheds his blood for the remission of sins. It’s gone missing.
Vatican II church hates Our Lady, although secretly. Roncalli did not accept Assumption, Wojtla said St John was only one Jesus referred to when He said, Behold your Mother , Mother behold Your son …. Ratz and Paul 6 disdained the Rosary. Jorge denied She was Immaculate Conception and Coredemptrix. I cannot judge their souls, but I sure would take bets and give good odds that they are all in hell with the Judeo Freemasons and Judeo Commies that put them, appearing to be popes.
The Motherhood of Mary is celebrated on the Octave of Christmas on January 1 despite it being known as the Feast of the Circumcision. Read the Office for that day. It is loaded from one end to the other with references to her Divine Maternity.
Jorge Bergoglio (stage name "Pope Francis") also "canonized" the unchaste homosexual Paul VI, the principal agent of destruction of all things Catholic, and John Paul II, who transformed the already heretical V2 ecumenism into religious indifferentism.
Fr Villa's opposition to their beatification as well can be seen in these articles:
JPII for ulterior motives eliminated the important "Devil's Advocate" from the canonization process, thus fast-tracking his own and others' false canonizations. Fr Villa would have been the perfect Devil's Advocate. The enemy colonizers of the Vatican and the Judeo-Masonic powers knew he was a threat to their nefarious plans and tried to assassinate him 7 times. An amazing short biography of him by his associate, Dr Franco Adessa, can be seen here:
And now Leo lives in the papal apartments with a man he met in '07 when Prevost was 52 and the lad was 17. They have had an 'intimate' mentor-protégé relationship ever since. They live with two other young men in the apartments. This is unprecedented. Even my Brave AI summary defends the novelty as 'Augustinian companionship'.
Prevost is flagrant, and gets away with it because even Sedes don't want to mention this.
Our respect, even for the desolate office, is too great to admit such depravity.
Yet, we see from Leo the same sense of moral superiority you get from Gnostic Sex Magic practitioners.
I subscribe to a website that every day id’s a saint of the day and gives a short bio. I employ the Saint’s assistance throughout the day in all my prayers. When I saw yesterday that it was Roncalli, my response was “nope”.
I research Pope John 23rd's life and it was shocking. Birds of a fellow flock together. He hung with modernist, freemasons and communists galore . Under his leadership the gaslighting of the Vatican began. The Catholic Church to be Catholic must condemn error. He never did. It must be noted that the masonic cabal entered the church much earlier than during pope john's reign. They were instrumental in letting John 23rd occupy the papal throne. He was under suspicion of heresy by Puis 10th vatican but the pope died before something substantial could be done.
I remember that conclave, it was the year I made my First Communion, and feeling grieved at Pius XII's passing. I didn't like Roncalli, he was not holy as was Pius XII (a child's initial thoughts). And when he later refused to proclaim the Third Secret of Fatima, I knew he was bad, otherwise how would he dare go against the Blessed Mother? The subsequent history of this pontiff speaks for itself in Vatican II and the attack on the True Church.
Frankly, this debate is beyond tiring however. It's beating a dead horse, and at this point, it's more the powder of the smashed bones that have become the consistency of silt.
Here's the thing. Let's say the sede-vacantists are right.
Let's look at the facts: Siri was a Cardinal. Cardinals wear red. Why? To symbolize their willingness to die for the Faith if necessary.
When a man is elected Pope, and he accepts the Office, he becomes Pope immediately, and thus acquires access to the graces attached to that office.
Let's assume for the moment that Siri was Pope. And that he abdicated because of some threat, even of a hydrogen bomb being detonated somewhere, then did he do the right thing? Siri knew that the heresy of modernism was an even greater threat. Even as a mere Cardinal, he knew that; as Pope, he should have seen the true scope of what could happen if modernism were allowed free reign. We all can see how that turned out. We see it every single day.
If Siri was Pope for real, then he turned into a coward, plain and simple. He ran from the wolves rather than trusting that God was (is) in control.
Whether or not he was aware of the story of the Jesuit priests who survived Hiroshima, he still should have trusted God. From a merely human standpoint, I get it, he thought he was faced with an 'impossible' choice. I am a mere human, with human weaknesses. So was he... except... (assuming) he was Pope, he had access to graces I can't even begin to comprehend.
One of the most basic lessons in the Catholic Faith is Which is more important, the body or the soul? We know it is the soul. You know, fear not he who can kill the body, but fear Him Who can destroy both body and soul in hell.
The murder of hundreds of thousands, or millions, of people by a hydrogen bomb would have been a great evil, NO QUESTION! But what is the greater evil? That, or the destruction of millions, possibly tens or even hundreds of millions, of souls in hell because of apostasy, of modernism, of countless blasphemies?
Sorry folks, if Siri was in fact Pope, he was a coward, who opened the door to Roncalli, to Vatican II, and to all that came after. He is responsible for all of this. And what does that say about the sede- vacantists who try to hold Siri up as some kind of hero?
Exactly - and no-one to my knowledge has EVER pointed out that if he really was elected etc., (which is a big IF), might it just be because he was part of it all or willingly passed on the job? At this stage, anyone who thinks that just because a Cardinal gives out all the signs of being orthodox etc., that that means he must be so, is pulling a lot of wool over their eyes. The sad thing is, that if he wasn't involved in anything underhand, by now he's been incriminated by the very people who keep pushing the story, because he doesn't come out of it smelling of roses, whatever happened. Truth is, we'll probably never know what happened, but the smoke story details keep growing every time I read a newer version of events!
True. That's why it's called the Siri Thesis... It's just a theory dreamed up by people who just don't want to deal with the reality (now history). No matter the truth of it, there's nothing that can be done about it now. Siri is dead, John XXIII to Benedict XVI are dead, along with pretty much all the other major players of that time...
It has as much relevance as the "Benedict's resignation was invalid" nonsense. Barnhardt, Docherty, Mazza and their fans were still pushing this not too long ago... and I'm sure will keep pushing it for as long as they can, until enough people wake up and stop contributing to them.
I'm all for truth. However, is Truth about certain things going to make a real world difference, or is it just going to be a source of curiosity satisfaction?
We'll never know the Truth about a lot of things until either we die, or until Judgment Day.
On Benedict's resignation, for me that also falls into the category of 'I read all the arguments and just file everything at the back of my mind, because at the end of the day, most people just go along with the person who's most convincing or who supports their opinions.' and I don't want to fall into that trap. After 10 years I've learnt that that's one of the main problems about Trad. Catholic outlets and personalities - I say no more!
Interesting. Nothing to say about the rest of my comment, and the practical reality of what I said, just basically 'no one holds up Siri as a hero, only a valid Pope...', yeah, ok.
It is of course perfectly legitimate to comment on one thing you said, rather than having to write a treatise on the whole of your tome.
BTW, I don't find Siri's personal character relevant to this discussion, nor do I consider myself in possession of enough facts to attempt to make such a judgment even if I wished to.
"It is of course perfectly legitimate to comment on one thing you said, rather than having to write a treatise on the whole of your tome."
True. I agree with you there.
"BTW, I don't find Siri's personal character relevant to this discussion, ..."
Really? How is not relevant? And so does this mean that the personal character of John XXIII to Leo XIV is also not relevant?
"nor do I consider myself in possession of enough facts to attempt to make such a judgment even if I wished to."
I kind of agree on this point in that I don't know much about Cardinal Siri, but if he was 'actually Pope', then... I think his character was revealed.
"Not in my Church". Thank you, Exactly. Not Christ's Church, YOUR church. It's clear you didn't read my comment to understand what I was trying to say, but only to find something to attack. Bye.
Not sure what you mean - Siri was a demon? John? If either were validly elected, they would receive the graces which go with the job, or at least have access to them if they wished to avail themselves of them. It think it's pushing it to suggest someone was possessed. Under the influence, possibly.
Dear Chris, I don’t know how much you can stomach of what I want to say, but I am so happy that you opened this door knowing of course the kickback you might receive for doing so. And I hope you never close the door again, but instead allow others to walk into your new spacious room of truth that actually explains everything.
First, I just have to make a comment about Stephen Kokx sp.? who is still very much an R&R spectator. I could not leave a comment on his latest piece re-published, because only paid subscribers can do so. But I was gonna let him have it. But your post just now makes satisfaction and appeases my anger for what Stephen is, as of yet, refusing to see. He is so close but yet still, so far away.
You Chris are now in possession of the key that unlocks what people in the R&R are calling confusion and chaos when in actuality, there’s nothing confusing about a man who, with the world Freemasonic powers behind him, usurped the Papacy. We may never know, as you said , what actually happened. But what we do know is sufficient to conclude he could not have been a true Catholic Pope. Instead, with his reign began a dynasty of false popes that we are currently suffering under. And how do we know this? Because beginning with “good Pope John“ also began heresy and apostasy, and Sacramental upheaval in which the very substance of the Church was attacked and destroyed in order to create a new false, ape of the church.
I am sure you know that you were only scratching the surface about all of the damaging history that we now know about Roncolli that was not known to most people in the 60s or 70s or 80s. So let it be said: heretical Communists cannot be popes, Freemasons cannot be popes, and modernists
cannot be popes. But what we got in Roncolli was a triple header.
Many people know that we are lost in the midst of the crisis in the church. But what you just published shows us what is necessary to find our way back home. Sure, many people know that somewhere along the line we took a wrong turn, far too many think Francis was the real problem . But you , Chris, have identified exactly when and where that wrong turn was made. And identifying Roncolli as the source of the problem is the only real solution to invite people home to the Catholic Church once again. As you have pointed out time and time again the church that Jesus Christ founded is not to be found under the current umbrella of the Vatican since 1958.
I hope with this recent post, that your readership and support will blossom exponentially, although the reverse is more often the case. But you are in a position to explain things to a large number of people. And you do it so well in both content and style.
Yes, many people are hurting today because they have been deceived so bitterly. And although the truth that you have unlocked is surely painful , I hope people will accept the pain that goes along with the truth, as the only remedy to finally being healed of one of the greatest deceptions ever perpetrated upon humanity and the Catholic Church.
Happy Feast Day - Mary Mother of God !!!! And on that note, all that needs to be known is that this man, John the antipope 23rd, refused to obey the mother of God! The secret of Fatima, that the whole world was waiting to hear was silenced by him in 1960 exactly when she said it would be more clearly understood. And indeed, what you have done Chris, is to explain today, what should be clear to anyone, that anyone who publicly and blatantly disobeys the mother of God certainly cannot be the vicar of her son. We will know that we have a true Catholic pope again when such a man tells us what the mother of God wanted us to hear in 1960. I think Chris what you have begun to reveal, in part, is the secret that the mother of God wanted us to be warned about. Thank you so much !!!! 🙏🙏🙏
Great post! Many years ago I read the truth in Fr Luigi's villa's news paper. Detrich Von Hildebrand,I think was the editor. Everything you just said concerning pope John23rd is true. It painful, but catholic have to grow a pair and admit the shocking proof of the corruption that has occurred to the papal chair in then last 60yrs.
Pre-VII Popes disobeyed as well, if you remember. The little detail of the Consecration of Russia. I believe they also had 'good and valid' reasons to ignore the Mother of God. so were those Popes not the Vicar of Christ?
I don't think Chris has revealed much at all which isn't already known by a lot of people who are interested. It's a good round-up and summary of the important facts which some people, admittedly probably many, don't know anything about, but it's doubtful they'll read it here if they're still completely ignorant of VII's history. I certainly don't think my synodalling Bishop - who didn't even know there was a crisis in the Church when I asked him about it 10 years ago - will be doing so and I guess he's a pretty standard Bishop.
What differentiates Popes before 1958 and those claiming to be popes afterwards, it is true, is not whether they consecrated Russia to the immaculate heart. It’s whether or not they were public heretics. You are correct, Prudential decisions, however much contrary to the wishes of the BVM, do not impinge upon the charisma of Papal infallibility .
That suggests that Our Lady would request something which was too difficult to accomplish. If Pius XI and XII had wanted to obey her, they would have put everything in motion as requested and God would have seen to its success.
"...others whispered that a pope had indeed been elected but had refused the office."
The white smoke means that we have a new pope. It does not mean that a pope has been elected. It means that a pope has been elected and has accepted and has taken a papal name.
There is nothing out of the ordinary for someone to be elected for the papal office and then to refuse that office. The problem, the big problem, the huge 1958 conclave problem, is that the office was soon refused by someone who had just accepted it.
His prior acceptance had made him pope immediately. There was no grace period to cancel his membership. What he needed to do was to resign canonically so that his resignation would be valid in the eyes of God, the same God in Whose eyes his acceptance had been valid.
But what we got instead was an invalid papal resignation. Sound familiar? A real trend setter wasn't it. Yogi Berra's 'deja vu all over again', only this time it happened before it happened (so to speak).
With Roncalli, wearing the papal regalia really was donning the tools of ignorance.
When the prior 1958 pope changed his mind, to actually effect this change he needed to resign canonically. A mere hi and goodbye doesn't cut the mustard, not with God. You don't slack around when God is involved. You do things by the book, or the things you want done don't really get done at all.
But of course there was no canonical resignation. We know because a resignation would have had to be public to be canonical and valid.
The white smoke announcing his papacy had been public. People knew there was a new pope. People also needed to know that there was no longer a new pope. The papacy is a public office. People have a right to know who is pope, who was pope, and who isn't pope anymore.
Because there was no canonically valid resignation, the ongoing reality of this new pope created a Divine impediment to the election of Roncalli. Consequently Vatican II was also not valid.
All this is a completely logical and plausible account of what happened. It is based on evidence. It certainly makes far more sense than holding that a valid pope created all the mayhem of Vatican II and what followed.
From my research on this topic, it’s possible that Cardinal Siri was elected. But he would have to accept the position according to canon law. If he didn’t, the cardinals would go back to square one and start all over again. At that point you get John XXIII who most definitely did accept. I believe he was legitimately elected but his heretical views and deeds could have led to his ouster if the hierarchy deposed him. But they didn’t.
So here we are all these years later with a slew of heretical popes. I don’t think it qualifies for sede vacante because the princes of the church, the cardinals and the bishops, failed to do their duty. It’s because of them, that we find ourselves in this predicament to this day.
"...others whispered that a pope had indeed been elected but had refused the office."
Dry straw for white smoke is only put into the stove after a pope has been elected, accepted the office and has chosen a name. White smoke issued from the stove for 5 minutes (not 30) on Oct. 26, 1958. (At the election of Pius XII in 1939 it was for just over 3 minutes.)
Siri accepted and took the name Gregory XVII. He was then issued a very serious threat if he didn't abdicate. He did, invalidly, according to Canon Law, since under threat/duress/fear. The enemies of the Church, inspired by Satan, knew that this was how they could get a man on the Chair of Peter lacking the grace of the papal office.
Sources:
whitesmoke1958.com (including important interviews 1-3 with the premier researcher into the 1958 conclave)
In my research, I read that certain additives make white smoke and certain additives make black smoke. The fathers don’t always get it right. Let’s say Siri was elected and accepted, which I doubt. Why didn’t he publicly state it afterwards? He didn’t. So unless he did, all you have is hearsay and speculation. That’s not enough.
The only additive is water for wet straw to make black smoke. Very simple. What happened on Oct. 26, 1958 re- the smoke change is unprecedented. It went from 5 min. of white, then to gray, white again, then gray, then black. There are reports that there was actually a scuffle at the stove. All this and much more is in the articles and interviews linked above.
Siri was validly elected, he invalidly abdicated, and this was the enabling act for a series of false popes, the present "eclipse" of the Church and the prophesied Great Apostasy.
A scuffle at the stove? Seriously? So some evil cardinals threatened to put a bullet in Siri’s head unless he declined his election? In front of the conclave? If that was true, Siri would have resisted and become a martyr for Christ and gone straight to Heaven.
Once again, there’s no evidence beyond hearsay that what you propose is true. You can believe what you want but I choose to believe John XXIII was legitimately elected but promoted heresy after the fact. The fact that neither he nor Paul VI were not deposed is the fault of the hierarchy at that time. It’s the very same reason that Francis and now Leo are allowed to stay on. The majority of the hierarchy is either too cowardly to do their jobs, or even worse, complicit.
Much more than hearsay, which you would see if you'll do some homework, e.g. the links I provided.
True popes are prevented by the Holy Spirit from teaching, promoting or approving heresy, or anything harmful to souls.
“…this See of Saint Peter always remains unblemished by any error, according to the divine promise of our Lord & Savior to the prince of his disciples: ‘I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail….’” – Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, 4.
This is not easy to accept, even when one's mind perceives the truth in it, especially since accepting such unpleasant and unpopular truth usually means experiencing an adverse effect on our family and/or social life. "How will this affect ME" is a natural human response. But the truth is immeasurably more important for us than human respect or any price we must pay.
Melissa doesn't appear to be having a personal ''How will this affect ME" reaction. She's giving pretty much the same response that I keep giving. I read all the sources years ago and yes, they may have some truth in them and they 'might' be correct, but we do not know for certain what happened. As I said recently, Siri had a duty to the Church to make public whatever any threat there had been (which he should have ignored anyway if had been elected). If he had accepted, he was 100% bound to serve God, threats and all. IMO.
It’s OK to be skeptical. It’s actually our duty to be skeptical. But authentic skepticism entails gathering in the whole of the story. The Church had been warning of the existential threat of Modernism for 100 years. Overnight, a notorious Modernist becomes pope under suspicious circumstances, followed by a heretical Counsel that dismantles and trashes Tradition wholesale. Many of us are on the team that believes this ecclesiastical anomaly is worth questioning and understanding.
Like all the cardinals and everyone else there, Siri had taken a very solemn vow of silence. I believe at one point afterwards he actually referred to this vow as a reason for his silence.
Melissa, don't get wrapped up in concern about the term sedevacantism. If you read Canon 2314 of the 1917 Code, sedevacantism is the licit conclusion of the fact that we have had multiple heretical popes, just as you said.
Don't take this as criticism of you, but it is not what anyone "thinks" that is important. What is important and essential is that we faithful Catholics believe all the doctrines of the Traditional Faith before the abomination of V-II. Clearly Canon 2314 is doctrine, so its consequences, one being sede vacante, are truth.
It's WAY past time to stop with these theories: Siri was Pope; Paul VI was replaced by an imposter (though that one has way more in its favor); JP II didn't consecrate Russia (or do other things) because the Soviets threatened to execute all the prisoners in the slave labor camps; Sister Lucy was replaced by an imposter; Benedict's resignation was invalid, and on and on...
Here's the thing. Even if all these theories could be proven beyond any shadow of doubt to be true, so what?
How does any of that help us in our daily lives to live out the Faith?
In the account of the Last Judgment, Jesus nowhere asks "did you believe in this or that theory? He asks When did you give food, drink, etc, etc, which also implies the spiritual works of mercy at the same time.
Put another way, He is asking: What did you do to prove your love for Me? What did you do to help your brothers and sisters to save their souls? What did you do to glorify my Name?
Attending one Mass and receiving Holy Communion worthily; praying one Rosary; spending one hour in Eucharistic Adoration; making a valid and worthy Confession; are far, far more important things to be doing.
If you were to receive a private revelation from the Blessed Virgin Mary that you will die 6 hours from now, and have the choice between what I just said above, and reading the newest book on the Crisis, which are you going to choose?
Thanks so much! We’ll all shut up now. We’ve seen the errors of our ways. We’ll pretend all is well in Rome and leave everything solely to prayer and the Sacraments. Just like St. Ambrose… wait… no, he defied an emperor. Just like St. John Bellarmine… uh uh… not him either, he wrote copiously on corruption in Rome. Just like St. John Fisher… oops… maybe not... he took death rather than quietly praying heresy out of England. Aw shoot… do you also go around peeing on people’s charcoal grills?
Jesus commanded us to love God with our whole mind. The mind is the seat of reason. That means we have an obligation to use our reason with regards to important matters in the Church.
St Paul writes that having a love of truth is essential for getting into heaven. Having a love of truth means that we use our reason to discover the truth.
If I knew I were going to die in 6 hours, i would do the same thing that I would do if I didn't know that I were going to die in 6 hours: try to discern God's will for what I should do, and then do it. I would not stay in my room and pray for my own soul if God wanted me to go do something else.
Just wondering. I'm not sure what you're trying to say in your 1st & 2nd paragraphs. There's nothing there I disagree with, so...
I'm also not sure about your 3rd paragraph. I never said or implied that I would "stay in my room and pray", nor did I say or imply that anyone else should either...
You wrote: "Here's the thing. Even if all these theories could be proven beyond any shadow of doubt to be true, so what? How does any of that help us in our daily lives to live out the Faith?"
"So what?" That's your reaction to knowing all that has been done and is being done to our Church? Knowing the truth about those who've led us into a deep dark tunnel just might be the only way for us to realize that we are indeed in a deep dark tunnel and need to get out.
In any case those who have a love of truth will use their minds so as to come to the truth about the dire situation Holy Mother Church finds herself in. Even Pope Benedict acknowledged that there is a crisis in the Church. It is incumbent upon us to uncover both the crisis and the solution to it.
Thank you for this information. Faithful Catholics can not allow the errors and heresies of V-II to lead us to Hell. As challenging as it is, consider the infinite wisdom in Fiat voluntas tua, Domine.
"The Church canonized a man precisely for rejecting the theology of every pope before him."
I think it would be more appropriate to say: "Bergoglio 'canonized' a man precisely for rejecting the theology of every pope before him." - which, btw., was completely expected and fully understandable from him, as he did the same for the other conciliar popes...
Was Bergoglio the Church? Did Bergoglio even represent the Catholic and Apostolic Church? At all? By any means?
Good point. I changed it to Francis. It is a true statement. Francis did canonize him.
There’s some interesting shuffling going on with calendar dates in all this.
John XXIII was celebrated yesterday in the new calendar instead of The Maternity of Our Lady, an important feast that is not ancient but that had been put there for a reason. It’s in a Marian month; it follows the Feast of the Rosary and the commemoration of Lepanto; it looks back to the 3rd Ecumenical Council and the rejection of the Nestorian heresy.
They said the Feast wasn’t needed, because of the new Marian Feast instituted on Jan 1st. However, while Our Lady has been honoured in the past on that day it’s always primarily been known as the Circumcision of Christ. (Incidentally, this is the day when the action of the medieval poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight opens, which is undoubtedly significant for the understanding of that poem.) This was a theologically significant Feast, because it emphasises that Christ fulfils the requirements of the old Law. It’s also the first time he bleeds, theologically looking forward to the crucifixion where he sheds his blood for the remission of sins. It’s gone missing.
Vatican II church hates Our Lady, although secretly. Roncalli did not accept Assumption, Wojtla said St John was only one Jesus referred to when He said, Behold your Mother , Mother behold Your son …. Ratz and Paul 6 disdained the Rosary. Jorge denied She was Immaculate Conception and Coredemptrix. I cannot judge their souls, but I sure would take bets and give good odds that they are all in hell with the Judeo Freemasons and Judeo Commies that put them, appearing to be popes.
I say that I am worried for their salvation given their behavior during their pontificates.
Sources? I’m aware of Francis’s not wanting to declare Mary as Co-Redemptrix (not necessarily signaling rejection), but I’m not aware of the remainder
First, the Cannon Law regarding Sainthood had to be “relaxed”. Good Pope John certainly doesn’t deserve a “Pass” on the 3rd secret of Fatima.
"... and all I got was this Roncalli t-shirt."
The Motherhood of Mary is celebrated on the Octave of Christmas on January 1 despite it being known as the Feast of the Circumcision. Read the Office for that day. It is loaded from one end to the other with references to her Divine Maternity.
Jorge Bergoglio (stage name "Pope Francis") also "canonized" the unchaste homosexual Paul VI, the principal agent of destruction of all things Catholic, and John Paul II, who transformed the already heretical V2 ecumenism into religious indifferentism.
Fr Villa's opposition to their beatification as well can be seen in these articles:
On Paul VI: chiesaviva.com/lettera%20ai%20cardinali/letter%20to%20cardinals.pdf
On John Paul II: chiesaviva.com/430%20mensile%20ing.pdf
JPII for ulterior motives eliminated the important "Devil's Advocate" from the canonization process, thus fast-tracking his own and others' false canonizations. Fr Villa would have been the perfect Devil's Advocate. The enemy colonizers of the Vatican and the Judeo-Masonic powers knew he was a threat to their nefarious plans and tried to assassinate him 7 times. An amazing short biography of him by his associate, Dr Franco Adessa, can be seen here:
chiesaviva.com/donluigivilla%20ing.pdf (error p. 8: read "Impostor Sr Lucia of Fatima," as sisterlucytruth.org proves)
And now Leo lives in the papal apartments with a man he met in '07 when Prevost was 52 and the lad was 17. They have had an 'intimate' mentor-protégé relationship ever since. They live with two other young men in the apartments. This is unprecedented. Even my Brave AI summary defends the novelty as 'Augustinian companionship'.
Prevost is flagrant, and gets away with it because even Sedes don't want to mention this.
Our respect, even for the desolate office, is too great to admit such depravity.
Yet, we see from Leo the same sense of moral superiority you get from Gnostic Sex Magic practitioners.
Whoa! Didn't know that and kind of wish I still didn't. 'Thank you' for that info.
There is of course a charitable take, but I think in this, as in many cases of the NO churchmen, charity is cover for naivete.
Also, sorry to be the bearer of unsavoury news.
Don't worry - it was bound to come out more publicly sooner or later.
Thats funny//needed a laugh ,its so depressing!!!
Thanks for these sources. Very informative.
Thank you for the insight.
Chris-
I subscribe to a website that every day id’s a saint of the day and gives a short bio. I employ the Saint’s assistance throughout the day in all my prayers. When I saw yesterday that it was Roncalli, my response was “nope”.
Blessings and appreciation from Sydney Australia.
I research Pope John 23rd's life and it was shocking. Birds of a fellow flock together. He hung with modernist, freemasons and communists galore . Under his leadership the gaslighting of the Vatican began. The Catholic Church to be Catholic must condemn error. He never did. It must be noted that the masonic cabal entered the church much earlier than during pope john's reign. They were instrumental in letting John 23rd occupy the papal throne. He was under suspicion of heresy by Puis 10th vatican but the pope died before something substantial could be done.
I remember that conclave, it was the year I made my First Communion, and feeling grieved at Pius XII's passing. I didn't like Roncalli, he was not holy as was Pius XII (a child's initial thoughts). And when he later refused to proclaim the Third Secret of Fatima, I knew he was bad, otherwise how would he dare go against the Blessed Mother? The subsequent history of this pontiff speaks for itself in Vatican II and the attack on the True Church.
Good article as usual.
Frankly, this debate is beyond tiring however. It's beating a dead horse, and at this point, it's more the powder of the smashed bones that have become the consistency of silt.
Here's the thing. Let's say the sede-vacantists are right.
Let's look at the facts: Siri was a Cardinal. Cardinals wear red. Why? To symbolize their willingness to die for the Faith if necessary.
When a man is elected Pope, and he accepts the Office, he becomes Pope immediately, and thus acquires access to the graces attached to that office.
Let's assume for the moment that Siri was Pope. And that he abdicated because of some threat, even of a hydrogen bomb being detonated somewhere, then did he do the right thing? Siri knew that the heresy of modernism was an even greater threat. Even as a mere Cardinal, he knew that; as Pope, he should have seen the true scope of what could happen if modernism were allowed free reign. We all can see how that turned out. We see it every single day.
If Siri was Pope for real, then he turned into a coward, plain and simple. He ran from the wolves rather than trusting that God was (is) in control.
Whether or not he was aware of the story of the Jesuit priests who survived Hiroshima, he still should have trusted God. From a merely human standpoint, I get it, he thought he was faced with an 'impossible' choice. I am a mere human, with human weaknesses. So was he... except... (assuming) he was Pope, he had access to graces I can't even begin to comprehend.
One of the most basic lessons in the Catholic Faith is Which is more important, the body or the soul? We know it is the soul. You know, fear not he who can kill the body, but fear Him Who can destroy both body and soul in hell.
The murder of hundreds of thousands, or millions, of people by a hydrogen bomb would have been a great evil, NO QUESTION! But what is the greater evil? That, or the destruction of millions, possibly tens or even hundreds of millions, of souls in hell because of apostasy, of modernism, of countless blasphemies?
Sorry folks, if Siri was in fact Pope, he was a coward, who opened the door to Roncalli, to Vatican II, and to all that came after. He is responsible for all of this. And what does that say about the sede- vacantists who try to hold Siri up as some kind of hero?
Exactly - and no-one to my knowledge has EVER pointed out that if he really was elected etc., (which is a big IF), might it just be because he was part of it all or willingly passed on the job? At this stage, anyone who thinks that just because a Cardinal gives out all the signs of being orthodox etc., that that means he must be so, is pulling a lot of wool over their eyes. The sad thing is, that if he wasn't involved in anything underhand, by now he's been incriminated by the very people who keep pushing the story, because he doesn't come out of it smelling of roses, whatever happened. Truth is, we'll probably never know what happened, but the smoke story details keep growing every time I read a newer version of events!
True. That's why it's called the Siri Thesis... It's just a theory dreamed up by people who just don't want to deal with the reality (now history). No matter the truth of it, there's nothing that can be done about it now. Siri is dead, John XXIII to Benedict XVI are dead, along with pretty much all the other major players of that time...
It has as much relevance as the "Benedict's resignation was invalid" nonsense. Barnhardt, Docherty, Mazza and their fans were still pushing this not too long ago... and I'm sure will keep pushing it for as long as they can, until enough people wake up and stop contributing to them.
I'm all for truth. However, is Truth about certain things going to make a real world difference, or is it just going to be a source of curiosity satisfaction?
We'll never know the Truth about a lot of things until either we die, or until Judgment Day.
It's what it is...
On Benedict's resignation, for me that also falls into the category of 'I read all the arguments and just file everything at the back of my mind, because at the end of the day, most people just go along with the person who's most convincing or who supports their opinions.' and I don't want to fall into that trap. After 10 years I've learnt that that's one of the main problems about Trad. Catholic outlets and personalities - I say no more!
I am not aware of anyone who holds up Siri as a hero. Only as a valid pope.
Interesting. Nothing to say about the rest of my comment, and the practical reality of what I said, just basically 'no one holds up Siri as a hero, only a valid Pope...', yeah, ok.
It is of course perfectly legitimate to comment on one thing you said, rather than having to write a treatise on the whole of your tome.
BTW, I don't find Siri's personal character relevant to this discussion, nor do I consider myself in possession of enough facts to attempt to make such a judgment even if I wished to.
"It is of course perfectly legitimate to comment on one thing you said, rather than having to write a treatise on the whole of your tome."
True. I agree with you there.
"BTW, I don't find Siri's personal character relevant to this discussion, ..."
Really? How is not relevant? And so does this mean that the personal character of John XXIII to Leo XIV is also not relevant?
"nor do I consider myself in possession of enough facts to attempt to make such a judgment even if I wished to."
I kind of agree on this point in that I don't know much about Cardinal Siri, but if he was 'actually Pope', then... I think his character was revealed.
I've read loads of eulogies about him over the last few years. Some seem to have canonized him privately!! Think the word martyr also cropped up.
One way or the other his character is irrelevant. The issue is the acceptance of the papacy by whomever the white smoke signified.
I what version of Roman Catholicism does a demon have “access to the graces?” Certainly not God’s graces. Not in my Church.
"Not in my Church". Thank you, Exactly. Not Christ's Church, YOUR church. It's clear you didn't read my comment to understand what I was trying to say, but only to find something to attack. Bye.
Are you here for the single $10 argument or the $90 course of ten? 😅
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
THAT’S FUNNY!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Not sure what you mean - Siri was a demon? John? If either were validly elected, they would receive the graces which go with the job, or at least have access to them if they wished to avail themselves of them. It think it's pushing it to suggest someone was possessed. Under the influence, possibly.
Dear Chris, I don’t know how much you can stomach of what I want to say, but I am so happy that you opened this door knowing of course the kickback you might receive for doing so. And I hope you never close the door again, but instead allow others to walk into your new spacious room of truth that actually explains everything.
First, I just have to make a comment about Stephen Kokx sp.? who is still very much an R&R spectator. I could not leave a comment on his latest piece re-published, because only paid subscribers can do so. But I was gonna let him have it. But your post just now makes satisfaction and appeases my anger for what Stephen is, as of yet, refusing to see. He is so close but yet still, so far away.
You Chris are now in possession of the key that unlocks what people in the R&R are calling confusion and chaos when in actuality, there’s nothing confusing about a man who, with the world Freemasonic powers behind him, usurped the Papacy. We may never know, as you said , what actually happened. But what we do know is sufficient to conclude he could not have been a true Catholic Pope. Instead, with his reign began a dynasty of false popes that we are currently suffering under. And how do we know this? Because beginning with “good Pope John“ also began heresy and apostasy, and Sacramental upheaval in which the very substance of the Church was attacked and destroyed in order to create a new false, ape of the church.
I am sure you know that you were only scratching the surface about all of the damaging history that we now know about Roncolli that was not known to most people in the 60s or 70s or 80s. So let it be said: heretical Communists cannot be popes, Freemasons cannot be popes, and modernists
cannot be popes. But what we got in Roncolli was a triple header.
Many people know that we are lost in the midst of the crisis in the church. But what you just published shows us what is necessary to find our way back home. Sure, many people know that somewhere along the line we took a wrong turn, far too many think Francis was the real problem . But you , Chris, have identified exactly when and where that wrong turn was made. And identifying Roncolli as the source of the problem is the only real solution to invite people home to the Catholic Church once again. As you have pointed out time and time again the church that Jesus Christ founded is not to be found under the current umbrella of the Vatican since 1958.
I hope with this recent post, that your readership and support will blossom exponentially, although the reverse is more often the case. But you are in a position to explain things to a large number of people. And you do it so well in both content and style.
Yes, many people are hurting today because they have been deceived so bitterly. And although the truth that you have unlocked is surely painful , I hope people will accept the pain that goes along with the truth, as the only remedy to finally being healed of one of the greatest deceptions ever perpetrated upon humanity and the Catholic Church.
Happy Feast Day - Mary Mother of God !!!! And on that note, all that needs to be known is that this man, John the antipope 23rd, refused to obey the mother of God! The secret of Fatima, that the whole world was waiting to hear was silenced by him in 1960 exactly when she said it would be more clearly understood. And indeed, what you have done Chris, is to explain today, what should be clear to anyone, that anyone who publicly and blatantly disobeys the mother of God certainly cannot be the vicar of her son. We will know that we have a true Catholic pope again when such a man tells us what the mother of God wanted us to hear in 1960. I think Chris what you have begun to reveal, in part, is the secret that the mother of God wanted us to be warned about. Thank you so much !!!! 🙏🙏🙏
Great post! Many years ago I read the truth in Fr Luigi's villa's news paper. Detrich Von Hildebrand,I think was the editor. Everything you just said concerning pope John23rd is true. It painful, but catholic have to grow a pair and admit the shocking proof of the corruption that has occurred to the papal chair in then last 60yrs.
Pre-VII Popes disobeyed as well, if you remember. The little detail of the Consecration of Russia. I believe they also had 'good and valid' reasons to ignore the Mother of God. so were those Popes not the Vicar of Christ?
I don't think Chris has revealed much at all which isn't already known by a lot of people who are interested. It's a good round-up and summary of the important facts which some people, admittedly probably many, don't know anything about, but it's doubtful they'll read it here if they're still completely ignorant of VII's history. I certainly don't think my synodalling Bishop - who didn't even know there was a crisis in the Church when I asked him about it 10 years ago - will be doing so and I guess he's a pretty standard Bishop.
What differentiates Popes before 1958 and those claiming to be popes afterwards, it is true, is not whether they consecrated Russia to the immaculate heart. It’s whether or not they were public heretics. You are correct, Prudential decisions, however much contrary to the wishes of the BVM, do not impinge upon the charisma of Papal infallibility .
For what it's worth, it would have been a lot easier to release the third secret, than to carry out the consecration of Russia.
That suggests that Our Lady would request something which was too difficult to accomplish. If Pius XI and XII had wanted to obey her, they would have put everything in motion as requested and God would have seen to its success.
You’re not a Catholic, loser
I was 3 years old when John XXIII was elected. The horror he initiated is still felt today.
"...others whispered that a pope had indeed been elected but had refused the office."
The white smoke means that we have a new pope. It does not mean that a pope has been elected. It means that a pope has been elected and has accepted and has taken a papal name.
There is nothing out of the ordinary for someone to be elected for the papal office and then to refuse that office. The problem, the big problem, the huge 1958 conclave problem, is that the office was soon refused by someone who had just accepted it.
His prior acceptance had made him pope immediately. There was no grace period to cancel his membership. What he needed to do was to resign canonically so that his resignation would be valid in the eyes of God, the same God in Whose eyes his acceptance had been valid.
But what we got instead was an invalid papal resignation. Sound familiar? A real trend setter wasn't it. Yogi Berra's 'deja vu all over again', only this time it happened before it happened (so to speak).
With Roncalli, wearing the papal regalia really was donning the tools of ignorance.
When the prior 1958 pope changed his mind, to actually effect this change he needed to resign canonically. A mere hi and goodbye doesn't cut the mustard, not with God. You don't slack around when God is involved. You do things by the book, or the things you want done don't really get done at all.
But of course there was no canonical resignation. We know because a resignation would have had to be public to be canonical and valid.
The white smoke announcing his papacy had been public. People knew there was a new pope. People also needed to know that there was no longer a new pope. The papacy is a public office. People have a right to know who is pope, who was pope, and who isn't pope anymore.
Because there was no canonically valid resignation, the ongoing reality of this new pope created a Divine impediment to the election of Roncalli. Consequently Vatican II was also not valid.
All this is a completely logical and plausible account of what happened. It is based on evidence. It certainly makes far more sense than holding that a valid pope created all the mayhem of Vatican II and what followed.
From my research on this topic, it’s possible that Cardinal Siri was elected. But he would have to accept the position according to canon law. If he didn’t, the cardinals would go back to square one and start all over again. At that point you get John XXIII who most definitely did accept. I believe he was legitimately elected but his heretical views and deeds could have led to his ouster if the hierarchy deposed him. But they didn’t.
So here we are all these years later with a slew of heretical popes. I don’t think it qualifies for sede vacante because the princes of the church, the cardinals and the bishops, failed to do their duty. It’s because of them, that we find ourselves in this predicament to this day.
"...others whispered that a pope had indeed been elected but had refused the office."
Dry straw for white smoke is only put into the stove after a pope has been elected, accepted the office and has chosen a name. White smoke issued from the stove for 5 minutes (not 30) on Oct. 26, 1958. (At the election of Pius XII in 1939 it was for just over 3 minutes.)
Siri accepted and took the name Gregory XVII. He was then issued a very serious threat if he didn't abdicate. He did, invalidly, according to Canon Law, since under threat/duress/fear. The enemies of the Church, inspired by Satan, knew that this was how they could get a man on the Chair of Peter lacking the grace of the papal office.
Sources:
whitesmoke1958.com (including important interviews 1-3 with the premier researcher into the 1958 conclave)
novusordowatch.org/2016/10/smoke-signals-white-smoke-1958
novusordowatch.org/cardinal-siri-elected-pope-1958
On the probable threat:
whitesmoke1958.com/2021/05/27/grave-reasons-of-state
In my research, I read that certain additives make white smoke and certain additives make black smoke. The fathers don’t always get it right. Let’s say Siri was elected and accepted, which I doubt. Why didn’t he publicly state it afterwards? He didn’t. So unless he did, all you have is hearsay and speculation. That’s not enough.
The only additive is water for wet straw to make black smoke. Very simple. What happened on Oct. 26, 1958 re- the smoke change is unprecedented. It went from 5 min. of white, then to gray, white again, then gray, then black. There are reports that there was actually a scuffle at the stove. All this and much more is in the articles and interviews linked above.
Siri was validly elected, he invalidly abdicated, and this was the enabling act for a series of false popes, the present "eclipse" of the Church and the prophesied Great Apostasy.
A scuffle at the stove? Seriously? So some evil cardinals threatened to put a bullet in Siri’s head unless he declined his election? In front of the conclave? If that was true, Siri would have resisted and become a martyr for Christ and gone straight to Heaven.
Once again, there’s no evidence beyond hearsay that what you propose is true. You can believe what you want but I choose to believe John XXIII was legitimately elected but promoted heresy after the fact. The fact that neither he nor Paul VI were not deposed is the fault of the hierarchy at that time. It’s the very same reason that Francis and now Leo are allowed to stay on. The majority of the hierarchy is either too cowardly to do their jobs, or even worse, complicit.
Siri wasn't involved in the scuffle and the probable threat was nuclear:
whitesmoke1958.com/2021/05/27/grave-reasons-of-state
Much more than hearsay, which you would see if you'll do some homework, e.g. the links I provided.
True popes are prevented by the Holy Spirit from teaching, promoting or approving heresy, or anything harmful to souls.
“…this See of Saint Peter always remains unblemished by any error, according to the divine promise of our Lord & Savior to the prince of his disciples: ‘I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail….’” – Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, 4.
novusordowatch.org/2022/04/felix-cappello-heretical-pope-impossible
This is not easy to accept, even when one's mind perceives the truth in it, especially since accepting such unpleasant and unpopular truth usually means experiencing an adverse effect on our family and/or social life. "How will this affect ME" is a natural human response. But the truth is immeasurably more important for us than human respect or any price we must pay.
Melissa doesn't appear to be having a personal ''How will this affect ME" reaction. She's giving pretty much the same response that I keep giving. I read all the sources years ago and yes, they may have some truth in them and they 'might' be correct, but we do not know for certain what happened. As I said recently, Siri had a duty to the Church to make public whatever any threat there had been (which he should have ignored anyway if had been elected). If he had accepted, he was 100% bound to serve God, threats and all. IMO.
It’s OK to be skeptical. It’s actually our duty to be skeptical. But authentic skepticism entails gathering in the whole of the story. The Church had been warning of the existential threat of Modernism for 100 years. Overnight, a notorious Modernist becomes pope under suspicious circumstances, followed by a heretical Counsel that dismantles and trashes Tradition wholesale. Many of us are on the team that believes this ecclesiastical anomaly is worth questioning and understanding.
yes
Like all the cardinals and everyone else there, Siri had taken a very solemn vow of silence. I believe at one point afterwards he actually referred to this vow as a reason for his silence.
… and yes.
Melissa, don't get wrapped up in concern about the term sedevacantism. If you read Canon 2314 of the 1917 Code, sedevacantism is the licit conclusion of the fact that we have had multiple heretical popes, just as you said.
Don't take this as criticism of you, but it is not what anyone "thinks" that is important. What is important and essential is that we faithful Catholics believe all the doctrines of the Traditional Faith before the abomination of V-II. Clearly Canon 2314 is doctrine, so its consequences, one being sede vacante, are truth.
Crux sacra sit mihi lux.
The problem with your assumption is Siri (or somebody) would have had to accept the office before they sent up the white smoke.
Siri and all these wretched V 2 Bishops lost their office. Thuc regained it
On a related note to my previous comment:
It's WAY past time to stop with these theories: Siri was Pope; Paul VI was replaced by an imposter (though that one has way more in its favor); JP II didn't consecrate Russia (or do other things) because the Soviets threatened to execute all the prisoners in the slave labor camps; Sister Lucy was replaced by an imposter; Benedict's resignation was invalid, and on and on...
Here's the thing. Even if all these theories could be proven beyond any shadow of doubt to be true, so what?
How does any of that help us in our daily lives to live out the Faith?
In the account of the Last Judgment, Jesus nowhere asks "did you believe in this or that theory? He asks When did you give food, drink, etc, etc, which also implies the spiritual works of mercy at the same time.
Put another way, He is asking: What did you do to prove your love for Me? What did you do to help your brothers and sisters to save their souls? What did you do to glorify my Name?
Attending one Mass and receiving Holy Communion worthily; praying one Rosary; spending one hour in Eucharistic Adoration; making a valid and worthy Confession; are far, far more important things to be doing.
If you were to receive a private revelation from the Blessed Virgin Mary that you will die 6 hours from now, and have the choice between what I just said above, and reading the newest book on the Crisis, which are you going to choose?
“How does any of that help us in our daily lives to live out the Faith?”
Since when is the quest for truth a disordered pursuit?
Thanks so much! We’ll all shut up now. We’ve seen the errors of our ways. We’ll pretend all is well in Rome and leave everything solely to prayer and the Sacraments. Just like St. Ambrose… wait… no, he defied an emperor. Just like St. John Bellarmine… uh uh… not him either, he wrote copiously on corruption in Rome. Just like St. John Fisher… oops… maybe not... he took death rather than quietly praying heresy out of England. Aw shoot… do you also go around peeing on people’s charcoal grills?
Mr. Network, say what you want. That's all you're good at.
Jesus commanded us to love God with our whole mind. The mind is the seat of reason. That means we have an obligation to use our reason with regards to important matters in the Church.
St Paul writes that having a love of truth is essential for getting into heaven. Having a love of truth means that we use our reason to discover the truth.
If I knew I were going to die in 6 hours, i would do the same thing that I would do if I didn't know that I were going to die in 6 hours: try to discern God's will for what I should do, and then do it. I would not stay in my room and pray for my own soul if God wanted me to go do something else.
Just wondering. I'm not sure what you're trying to say in your 1st & 2nd paragraphs. There's nothing there I disagree with, so...
I'm also not sure about your 3rd paragraph. I never said or implied that I would "stay in my room and pray", nor did I say or imply that anyone else should either...
You wrote: "Here's the thing. Even if all these theories could be proven beyond any shadow of doubt to be true, so what? How does any of that help us in our daily lives to live out the Faith?"
"So what?" That's your reaction to knowing all that has been done and is being done to our Church? Knowing the truth about those who've led us into a deep dark tunnel just might be the only way for us to realize that we are indeed in a deep dark tunnel and need to get out.
In any case those who have a love of truth will use their minds so as to come to the truth about the dire situation Holy Mother Church finds herself in. Even Pope Benedict acknowledged that there is a crisis in the Church. It is incumbent upon us to uncover both the crisis and the solution to it.
The problem is what is actually being done about the crisis? That's the missing component.
If you go through my past comments in this Substack, you'll know where I stand.
It isn't mere knowledge that's going to solve this crisis...
Thank you for this information. Faithful Catholics can not allow the errors and heresies of V-II to lead us to Hell. As challenging as it is, consider the infinite wisdom in Fiat voluntas tua, Domine.
I submit to they Holy Will. Amen.
Thank you so much for putting it all in black and white again Chris! We must NEVER forget.
God bless you!
Blessed be Jesus Whose mother is Mary!!!