What John XXIII REALLY said at his deathbed

"1: I read somewhere that the usual rule regarding Popes dying in the middle of a Council is that it should be viewed as a sign that God does not wish for the Council to go on."

The Council of Trent lasted off and on for nearly 20 years, through the pontificates of 5 separate popes. The idea that God did not wish that council to go on would be preposterous at best.

@DJRESQ No doubt I didn't write my comment clearly enough for you to get the gist of the REAL problem that needs resolving. Paul VI restarted the ECUMENICAL Council and it is possible that his predecessor had quite validly asked for it to be halted just before he died.
You have not read the binding Document written by Sixtus V linked above. It states that no more than 70 Cardinals can ever be elected (one of which is clearly the Pope himself). When John XXIII died he had (for some odd reason) decided this binding, Canonical Magesterial Law did not apply to himself, and had elected as many Cardinals as he wanted to have. Consequently, at the Conclave that elected Paul VI, there were fully 18 surplus Cardinals which (on the strength of the limitations stated within "Postquam Verus") undeniably reveals that 18 Cardinals participating in the Conclave that elected Paul VI were "Null and Void" and not able to vote in a Conclave.
Firstly. I am a Catholic, I believe in every Law that has been handed down to us in History by every legitimate, validly elected Pope. It is abiding by these Laws that makes us really Catholic. The people who don't want to submit to our Sacred Magesterial Documents are Protestants! We are not allowed to cherry pick which Papal Encyclicals we want to abide by, and which we can throw on the scrap heap. "Not one jot or iota of the Law can be altered" Is Christ's view.. I beg your pardon, but if Pope Sixtus V stated that NEVER can there be any more than 70 Cardinals - He is to be obeyed. If a Pope does NOT obey a Dogmatically binding Law, then he is promised that the wrath of God, St Peter and St Paul will fall upon him. (It's all there in the Document!)
That was the REAL point of my Post. The other issue, ? You make a valid point, but in this case it won't make a difference, since the Pope that re-convened the ECUMENICAL Council was voted into Office by 18 invalid Cardinals (Which is what Pope Sixtus states such men are. Cardinals 1-70 are Valid Cardinals - Cardinals 71-88 on the other hand, are not to be viewed by the Faithful as being Cardinals at all! They are all legally "Null and Void" So how can they vote in a Conclave? Or give us a New Mass? Or Alter the Sacraments, Or alter the position of the Mass Celebrant, Or rob Our Lord's Temples of all their grandeur, (which befits His Majesty) Or bind us to a run of Popes that were invalidly elected?
TBH I don't much like what the document says either - but unlike the majority, I don't stick my head in the sand and hope the reality will go away. We have a new false Church, A new Mass, some very strange un-Catholic Cardinals and Bishops - and the Present Day Pope isn't even a Latin Mass Catholic. According to "Quo Primum" we are not even ALLOWED to have a "New Mass" We can only use (for eternity) The Missal of Pope Pius V. No new Missals.
Once again, being Catholic is HARD, but I'm sure we can do better if we get our heads out of the sand and pray that all will be resolved shortly by Christ.

"Quo Primum - Promulgating the Tridentine Liturgy Pope Pius V 1570 APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION

papalencyclicals.net/Pius05/Sp5quopri.htm

God Bless

Caroline: Unfortunately, as you will see in the article, there is ZERO factual evidence to support the claim that he "yelled "Stop the Council" prior to his death." all the evidence points to precisely the opposite. A statement does not become true simply because it is *thought* to be so a significant number of people. If anyone can provide *referenced* material to back up the claim that he did indeed cry for the council to be stopped, i shall be happy to modify and or retract the article.

@Santiago Gracia In answering my comment, Are you still deluding yourself that whether he shouted "Stop the Council" or not is the primary issue of importance here? Talk about "straining at gnats and swallowing Camels"

Good Heavens, whilst it is seen as important to you what poor John XXIII proclaimed from his death-bed. All that is truly important is the OTHER, really important issue that I mentioned in my Comment that you have overlooked or viewed as not of any interest. The RC Church is founded on Rules/Laws and a Sacred Magisterium of infallibly declared Truths. If a validly elected Pope declares something using infallible language, then that declaration is forever binding on the entire Church and EVERY Pope that succeeds him. As I stated in my comment above, Sixtus V in 1586 stated infallibly in language that is binding upon the entire Church, that there must NEVER be any more than 70 Cardinals in the College!

All Popes remained obedient to this Law from 1586 (when the Constitution was written) to 1958 when John chose to go his own way! Due to his stubborn "lets renew everything" reasoning he disobeyed the Sacred Magisterium, and increased the College of Cardinals to 88 Members! According to the Constitution of Sixtus V only 70 of those Cardinals are Legitimate the other 18 are NOT to be viewed as Cardinals - they are rendered "null and void" by the authority of the Document itself.
JOHN XXIII has more than likely totally destroyed the Hierarchy, Papacy and Priesthood of the the RC Church. If 88 "Cardinals (18 of which the Church HERSELF has declared are not really Cardinals,) took part in a Conclave that elected Paul VI. We know that THAT Conclave was unlawful and his election invalid. Whether Paul VI was permitted to reopen Vatican II is not what should be bothering us here.It is the least of our problems. It is possible that the RC Church no longer has a valid Hierarchy/Pope or legitimate Priests. (The SSPX are still valid anyway) Let's get our heads around THAT far more pressing issue.

Maybe you don't realize how important this is? Perhaps you think it does not matter? You maybe think that a new Pope can tear up Dogmatic, binding Magisterial Documents (infallibly proclaimed by God Himself) and view them as no longer being relevant for him to follow? But when any Pope takes that stance, he in his stubborn, disobedient wretched state has taken an axe to the Church. Cut off the branch from the roots - created a new Church, whilst retaining the Name "Catholic"? Coincidentally this is just as the great Catholic Mystics WARNED would happen in the 20th century.

Outside the Church there is no Salvation - to disagree with ONE point of Church Dogmatic Teaching is to fall outside the Church. God Bless you but the important issue here is not what John XXIII muttered on his death-bed, but whether we are now surrounded by invalid Priests and Hierarchy because John XXIII thought Magisterial Documents had no authority over him.

I asked you for contrary evidence to my claims if I were ever to reconsider the arguments made *in the article*, not on some side issue which may or may not be a-propos. You could not provide any counter-claims, for the simple fact that there aren’t any. I know that for a fact because I am not merely some anonymous “key board warrior” making wholly inappropriate and uncharitable statements about being “deluded” and "straining at gnats and swallowing Camels", but I am speaking as someone who has spent long hours digging through the sources as far as possible in order to get to the bottom of things. You make the all-too common mistake of arriving at rash judgments without knowing things properly.

It’s ironic that you should expect me to look carefully through your mini-essay while you have clearly paid no attention whatsoever to my article (if you have even bothered to read it). If you want to properly understand my position, I suggest you actually READ the articles in my blog, of course particularly the one that immediately concerns us here.

It is further ironic that you should describe as “poor John” a man initiated into Freemasonry and Rosicrucianism, who sold the Church to the powers “behind the curtain” for 30 pieces of silver, who cosied up to Soviet Premier Khruschev’s immediate family in a private audience a few months before his death, a man universally praised by socialists, Freemasons, and communists alike after his death. Never have I heard anyone describing as “poor” Judas Iscariot or even the degenerate Renaissance pope, Alexander VI.

I would rather describe as “poor” all the spiritual victims of his gnostic pseudo-Council, and all Catholics unjustly deprived of their rightful spiritual inheritance, given and sold over to ravenous wolves after Pius XII’s pontificate by himself and his successors.

@Santiago Gracia Hello Santiago, I've not been on Gloria TV news much for a LONG time. That comment was ages ago - so much has changed since then. I no longer have any interest in John XXIII - Actually, so futile is it to discuss him (long deceased) a strawman, whilst "Rome" allows it's present falsification of the entire Church to continue, that I am now heartily sick of hearing it discussed. Since Vigano was silenced by Michael Matt I've stopped listening to Michael Matt too. I've lost all interest in the topic. I don't trust ANY "Pope" since Pius XII. I no longer care what John said on his death-bed -. That is the only answer I want to give you. Much has changed here on earth since I made that statement to you back in September. That now seems a long time ago living - In the here and now, The hate I've read in many comments that I have seen on Gloria TV News against the Jews since October 7th is demonic. Comments made by "Catholics" literally HATING Jews - in connection with the plight of Israel during their present day crisis. Yet, Unless ANY of us have righteousness that exceeds that of the Scribes and Pharisees we will be denied Heaven ourselves. Belonging to "the One TRUE Church" is not going to guarantee any of us Heaven - if we literally HATE other people.
Certain Rabbis- let's call them the potential "Synagogue of Satan" have altered the Hebrew Scriptures to disguise the prophecies of Christ and the normal Jews walking the streets of Israel would no longer be able to recognise Jesus in the Old Testament even if they searched for Him. I tend to do what I can today to prove from the dead Sea Scrolls that the Hebrew Scriptures of today have been altered - doing what Our Lord wills us to do - to hopefully do something that REALLY HELPS CHRIST - to help the Jews find the True Christ Hope you agree. . What John XXIII may or may not have said may have concerned me a couple of months ago - but we are now obviously in the End Times. John XXIII has gone to his Judgement, there is still time to save those who are alive today. God Bless us all.
PS The Euphrates River has dried up - as foretold in the Book of the Apocalypse 9 and 16.
End Times Euphrates River Revelation: What does the Bible Say?
God Bless.