It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pope Paul VI replaced by an impersonator in 1972 or 1973?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 06:43 PM
link   
I don't think this has been covered recently... I was surfing purely for the fun of discovery last December when I stumbled onto this... the conspiracy theory that Pope Paul VI was abducted or drugged down sometime between 1972 and 1974 and replaced by an "impersonator".


"It is common knowledge now in the city of Rome that there is one who has been impersonating your Vicar, an actor of great talent; one who through surgery has gained the countenance of your Vicar. It is now common knowledge, My children, and now there shall be a game of chess played. There will be bishop against bishop and cardinal against cardinal, for satan has set himself in their midst." (Our Lady, August 14, 1976)


www.tldm.org...

There is no mention of why this would've been done, and other than the quite interesting photo comparisons in the site above... but if anything, it makes for an entertaining read.

www.roses.org...
ladyofroses.org...




posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Intersting read, Otts.
If in fact this happened and the RCC covered it up, is it too much of a stretch to think maybe there WAS a pope Joan.
en.wikipedia.org...
The RCC does work in mysterious ways



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:05 AM
link   
With all do respect even if the Pope was replaced by an imposter it hardly matters the Pope heads an organisation that exists to force an agenda down peoples throats based on the false belief in god.
Perhaps a someone can come up with some ways the church would be affected if the Pope is an imposter?



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 07:46 AM
link   
This is a quote by Paul VI from 1972:

"I have a strange feeling that the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God".

Source: www.vatican.va...

Maybe this statement was the reason he got drugged down and replaced with an impostor?

Something equivalent happened when John Paul I died, and the assassination attempt on John Paul II. Maybe someone wanted to quicken the coming of the Antichrist, which I believe is the next pope.


d1k

posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11
With all do respect even if the Pope was replaced by an imposter it hardly matters the Pope heads an organisation that exists to force an agenda down peoples throats based on the false belief in god.


You do know that the vatican is the richest organization on earth right? Not only that but the pope plays a great deal in world politics whether it's in the lime light or behind the scenes.



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by otherwise
This is a quote by Paul VI from 1972:
"I have a strange feeling that the smoke of
Satan has entered the temple of God".


The reason the 'smoke of Satan has entered the Church'
is directly because of the actions of Paul VI. I don't know
if he was replaced or not ... I doubt it ... but he certainly
damaged the church a great deal.

Ref: Pope Joan. Nope. Just a fantasy.



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Great find, its a possibility this is the "third secret of Fatima" since "this" pope has sealed all records and says he doesnt want the world to know what it is. Interesting.



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 08:47 PM
link   
FlyersFan - I'm curious... how do you feel Paul VI damaged the Church?

I personally feel that he should've allowed contraception.

Otherwise - According to Malachy's Prophecies, the next pope (designated by the motto "De Gloria Olivae") is to be the last legitimate pontiff. His successor (designated as Petrus Romanus, Peter the Roman) will be the last pope and possibly the Antichrist.


Odd

posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   
This is an extremely interesting site. As a Catholic (albiet a poor one), I tend to take the whole Pope thing pretty seriously... and that site had some photographic evidence that I really can't argue with.

My only question is this, since I haven't found the answer just yet: is the current Pope legitimate? It'd be rather silly of them to have gone to all that trouble of replacing John VI just to have a genuine pontiff installed afterwards, wouldn't it?



posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 01:55 AM
link   
You do know that the vatican is the richest organization on earth right? Not only that but the pope plays a great deal in world politics whether it's in the lime light or behind the scenes.

Apart from maybe slaping Bush over wrist for Iraq and asking for world peace
what role dose the pope play in global politics?



posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Odd - but assuming for a moment that Paul VI *was* replaced... what if John Paul II was indeed the candidate whoever supposedly did this to Paul VI really wanted chosen, and John Paul I was just an inconvenient accident?

I've been reading up a bit on the conclave that took place after Pope Paul's death in 1978. Apparently, the choice - Cardinal Albino Luciani, who became John Paul I - came as a surprise to everyone, including the new Pope. "May God forgive you what you have done on my behalf", he told his fellow cardinals. And while there are some indications that John Paul I's health wasn't that good, the suddenness of his death seems pretty suspicious, especially the way the Vatican explained it:


His quick death, only 33 days after his election, caused widespread shock worldwide. The Vatican raised major issues over the handling of the events surrounding his death; it lied about who found the body (it claimed it was papal secretary John Magee; in fact it was later revealed that he was found by a nun in the Papal Household, Sister Vincenza, who had brought him some coffee), lied about the time, that personal property of his (his glasses, his will, documents he was working on when he died) disappeared from his bedroom and was never found. (In fact that was shown to be untrue. His possessions are in the possession of his sister's family.) It claimed he had been reading Thomas Kempis's Imitation of Christ. Conflicting stories were told as to his health. It was hinted that his ill-health was due to heavy smoking; in fact he never smoked. The impact of this mis-information was shown in a headline of the Irish Independent newspaper, 'THIRTY-THREE BRAVE DAYS' conveying the image of a weak and ill man physically unable to withstand the pressures of the papacy, and who was in effect killed by it.


en.wikipedia.org...

So let's face it, the aforementioned theory about Paul VI, combined with what we know of John Paul I's death, makes for an intriguing mystery.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join