1) Habemusne Papam? Like someone qui sibi nomen imposuit Alexander? , 2) Semble que Alexandre IX contredit le catéchisme de Pape St Pie X
Probably habemus, and that one being Alejandro IX.
But I was probably rash when submitting earlier to Gregorio XVII de Palmar de Troya, as I have been mainly thinking since 14 months after doing so, and so I will not be on my own too definite about this.
It was while submitting (very theoretically, I considered for instance that modern current media were banned - as I had read a summary notice on their site - but I could count on having a dispensation to read them, or I could count on Classical Music and Comic Books not being included) to Palmarian Catholicism, that I encountered one Michael I. I have generally found him an honest man though we disagreed on some things (his view of valid matter of Holy Eucharist and purely lay conclaves being possible and him being Pope), I had defended the position a Pope could be chosen by Private Revelation, he agreed only such could help decide which one of claimants was the right one, both of us referring to Sts Bridget of Sweden and St Catherine of Siena. However, the thing was definitely decided by a Council in the early 1400's.
I also think that since he received the Sacramental grace of Priesthood and Episcopacy very much later than his conclave, in 2011, the weekend of Gaudete Sunday, he has been praying for me, at least a while. I wonder whether my own attempt at continuing the Narniad where The Last Battle leaves off, about Susan Pevensie, has not been very favoured by his prayers. It was the night to that Gaudete Sunday that I had some dream scenes that constitute not indeed the first four chapters of the incomplete novel, but the earliest four to be written.
I hope Alexander IX does not mind me being Geocentric (as also is Michael I / David Bawden, and as I had hoped Palmar de Troya would be, when joining it). He was a third successor to one line beginning with 34 episcopi vagantes convening a conclave which obviously is not a layman only conclave - the problem I saw with the Papacy of Michael I.
This submission is preliminary. I have already once been untrue to one Iusiurandum adversus Modernismum insofar as obedience to Gregory of Palmar was concerned. And unlike St Bridget and St Catherine, I am not a prophet. As I was and remain a layman I did not even actually need to make such an oath.
We'll see if he wants me to retract anything, and what, and if I find his demands more correct than Palmar's flaw in my eyes in saying "Antichrist views the world from the fourth dimension, the Most Pure Virgin from the eighth" - which is wrong since the world has three dimensions. St Augustine is right, Moses Ben Nachman is wrong about the dimension question.
Bpi, Georges Pompidou
St Bruno, Hermit
9th anniversary of
my arrival in Santiago in 2004.