Not Yet Heard Bishop Pivarunas, But Did Leave Comments

Not Yet Heard Bishop Pivarunas, But Did Leave Comments · Still Not Going Back to Luther

In my defense:

• the video is nearly three hours long (a bit less than 11 quarters of an hour, rather than 12)
• Mgr. Pivarunas defends the position that "Francis" is not Pope and "John Paul II" was not Pope
• I already hold that
• I suspect he left out the consideration I left my first comment on, if not, probably someone will tell me charitably at what time stamp to look for his remarks on it.

Bishop Pivarunas (CMRI): The Case for Sedevacantism ; an Apologetic for Traditional Catholicism
St AnthonyPadua RadTrad | 8 Febr. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqgIlh5PGuE

I

Hans Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

I very well get the case for not considering "Pope Francis" as Pope.

What I get less well is the idea, we have to wait for a miracle, or Conclavism is somehow wrong.

Are you shy of the late Pope Michael I and his successor Michael II, because he was and the other probably is Young Earth Creationist and Geocentric?

D T

@DT-cz2sl

I'm a young earth creationist. But I'm very shy of micheal 1 an 2. If there is a true Pope somewhere (siri????)🤷 they would be anti popes.

Hans Georg Lundahl

@DT-cz2sl / D T Siri died 1989.

Michael I was elected 1990.

I don't think you can agree to be a "secret pope" in accepting your election.

If Siri was, he FIRST agreed to be Pope and being elected and being Catholic was, THEN sham agreed to step back and THIRD agreed to be Pope anyway, but in secret.

He cannot have a valid successor agreeing to take up all of this in one go, since the original Siri was actually already Pope (if the story is true) before he agreed to secrecy, which per se was against his duty as a Pope.

[Somehow my follow up comment on Jean Raspail's novel L'Anneau du Pêcheur has already disappeared : it deals with secret successors of "Benedict XIII" / Pope Luna, and I point out that already the fact they are secret would make them invalid successors even if "Benedict XIII" had been the real Pope. The setup of a secret society, with secret popes and cardinals, is non-Catholic. The problem is not that the "cardinals" are fulltime beggars, the problem is that they are fulltime secret agents. In the novel setting.]

D T

@hglundahl As the bishop points out in this talk, the pope would have to be elected by the universal church, not five people in the middle of nowhere

Hans Georg Lundahl

@DT-cz2sl I am sorry, but the juxtaposition of these is totally senseless.

Any elected head of a perfect society (Pope or President) is normally elected by much less than all persons who are members of the society.

There are normal case measures for who and what can represent the members in normal circumstances, like 2/3 of cardinals present when a conclave starts (and the cardinals are locked up) or simple majority in the Second Turn in France or a majority of Electors with each state deciding all Electors according to a majority of the popular vote in the state, and the voting requirements being such that even all the voters are much less than the whole society, hence, the state by state majority by popular vote will not be all people in that state and so on.

However, in cases of necessity that preclude the use of normal measures or where their outcome is obviously vitiated, the right normally belonging to participants of such and such a procedure devolves.

The normal procedure for getting a bishop consecrated such involve an Apostolic Mandate. Thuc several times and Lefebvre twice (4 bishops + Licinio Rangel) considered the Apostolic mandate as sth to be in the normal sense of the word bypassed. That means, they also considered cardinals in a conclave sth to be bypassed.

If 160 cardinals (that would be 2/3 of one more than the current number as recognised by Bergoglio, including those who can't vote) can represent the Church, so can 6 cardinals, in the election of Pope Innocent II. The number is either way "infinitely" disproportional to the number of faithful. The 6 Cardinals on top of that were not in Rome, so "in the Middle of Nowhere" — unless you reserve that for what may correspond to "the Wilderness" mentioned in Apocalypse 12 (Kansas was clearly not a Roman Province in AD 90, hardly an Egyptian or Babylonian or Parthian one either).

In a case of necessity, the question is not whether there was a pre-made disposition to the effect that they should represent the Church, but whether they had a kind of general competence (being Catholic, not being children) and a specific intention to do so.

According to Pope Michael, clergy was invited and refused to show up. The six could easily have been swamped by 10 clergymen showing up. If you pretend David Bawden when sending invitations actually didn't send one to bishop George Musey or to bishop Carmona, Pivarunas who is interested, was not yet bishop at the time, would need to not just consult his conversations with them, but also the defector from Pope Michael's cause, Theresa S. Benns.

If the reason to not accept an invitation was the idea Siri could have a successor by July 1990, that would be tantamount to acting like a secret society, and therefore inacceptable as a Catholic.

D T

@hglundahl My opinion does not matter.

Maybe Bawden was right, but I doubt it. as the Bishop said, it will be fixed in Gods time, not our time. Some people tried to force God's time. I'd rather see saints Peter and Paul come and show us who the true Pope is like 1 private revelation says will happen.

One thing we do have to do. be Catholic. Live and die Catholic, save our souls. I think we can all agree, we're living in very confusing times. But God has allowed it , so be it. so be it.

Prayers for you and for Holy Mother Church

Hans Georg Lundahl

@DT-cz2sl "it will be fixed in Gods time, not our time."

Like the aging of Bishop Carmona in 1991?

"I'd rather see saints Peter and Paul come and show us who the true Pope is"

If he's already elected.

We can't have them naming the Pope. As ex-Palmarian, I actually once was into the idea they could solve the problem.

Now Pope Michael knew me when I was Palmarian (for c. 14 months), and he told me "no, a Pope needs to be elected" ...

Cardinals had already spoken both in Rome and in Avignon, when heaven spoke to St. Catherine of Siena. She wasn't replacing cardinals. The point not being against laymen voting, they did that all over the first millennium, but against waiting for a vision to settle it.

And especially, please don't wait for me to get one, I'm an intellectual, not a visionary!

D T

@hglundahl Does pope michael ii wife still live? Where's she at. According to the internet he had a wife and child. What a mess

Hans Georg Lundahl

@DT-cz2sl What's your source?

I did know that Michael I had rescinded the duty of priests to be unmarried when getting ordained, I did not think it was the case about bishops when ordained.

I might want to ask, but I know for very certain sacerdotal celibacy has varied in Church history, and have some indications, this can sometimes have been the case with bishops.

Then I know some divorced men have been granted dispensation to be celibate priests. I simply don't know as much about Michael II as I did about Michael I.

Hans Georg Lundahl

@DT-cz2sl I looked it up.*

As he was ordained in the Utrecht Succession (which it would seem Pope Michael I came to recognise), he may have been consecrated bishop without any obligation to celibacy.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogelio_Martinez_(antipope) (not endorsing the qualification wikipedians gave him, while giving opposite one to Bergoglio)

DANtheMANofSIPA

@DANtheMANofSIPA

@hglundahl holy smokes this is a crazy level of cope lol. If cardinal Siri agreed to be Pope he would have still been a heretic as he continued to be a cardinal well past Vatican 2

Hans Georg Lundahl

@DANtheMANofSIPA If you did not notice, I did not positively state Siri was Pope.

I stated, if he had been, he could not have had successors agreeing from start to keep up his modus operandi, since it was a secrecy contrary to the duties of the papal office.

So, from when he died in 1989, it is certain the chair was empty. I am not saying it was filled in 1988.

II

Bill

@bill8494

Bishops Tuc and Lefebvre were the two witnesses spoken of in the book of Revelation.

Hans Georg Lundahl

Oh, when were they killed in Jerusalem?

Bella Angelus

@psychedelicpython

@hglundahl - strange comment.

Hans Georg Lundahl

@psychedelicpython / Bella. No.

Apocalypse 11 gives a very precise description of how the two witnesses act, then die in earthly Jerusalem (which by now spiritually actually is both Sodom, by gay parades, and Egypt, by oppression of Palestinians, including Christian Palestinians).

So, since Thuc (it's Thuc and not Tuc, btw) and Lefebvre did not fulfill that description, I am challenging Bill how he reconciles this with the identification he gave.

Early Christian Beliefs*

@EarlyChristianBeliefs

Very interesting ... 🤔

In Treue Fest Und Lachen

@intreuefestundlachen1883

Enoch and Elias :/

Clare Kuehn

@clarekuehn4372

Or maybe Ottoviani.

Clare Kuehn

@hglundahl Maybe the spiritual Jerusalem, true faith, opposed to Babylon (Rome, defected).

Clare Kuehn

*Thuc.

Hans Georg Lundahl

@clarekuehn4372 Look, the spiritual Jerusalem cannot be "spiritually Sodom and Egypt" and can also not be "the city where their Lord was crucified.

Apocalypse 11 speaks of a very concrete end times situation in a very concrete place, and one should not spiritualise it.

Thuc and Lefebvre may remind of Enich and Elijah, but they are not Enoch and Elijah.

quememuera

@quememuera

LOL no

* see also

Is Genesis History? Early Christian Beliefs #earlychristianity #sixdays #creationism #creation #god
Early Christian Beliefs | 2 Dec. 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuJCeEnXai0
[may be replaced on the same channel]

New upload:
Is Genesis History? Early Christian Beliefs and Quotes up to 460 AD #creationism #earlychristianity
Early Christian Beliefs | 9 Febr. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xxa_NMTIpE

III

Daniel Dimond

@danieldimond5734

👍 Got some good points. All I know is that Pope Francis, is NOT a holy man & he certainly doesn't exude, even a moderate measure of Catholicism.
😂

Hans Georg Lundahl

To me, as ex-Lutheran, he exudes more than just a moderate measure of Anglican-Modernist or Lutheran-Modernist heresy.

Daniel Dimond

Most probably correct.

Hans Georg Lundahl

@danieldimond5734 as well as backed up by his known friendship to deceased Anglican Modernist Tony Palmer.

You know about what preceded TP's funeral by Bergoglio?

Clare Kuehn

@hglundahl No, what?

Hans Georg Lundahl

An agreement, @clarekuehn4372.

If Jorge Mario Bergoglio had died first, Tony Palmer would have buried him as an Anglican bishop.

Since Tony Palmer died first, Bergoglio buried him as a Catholic bishop.