Skip to main content

Aqua: "I find the Cionci Thesis compelling, but not determinative (doesn't change anything fundamental)"

 Discussion Time Episode 12 - And That's Terrible! - YouTube

Below is a Catholic Monitor comment section threat that mostly features the thoughts of Aqua whose analytic abilities I respect having a discussion mostly with the Catholic conservative blogger Steven O'Reilly:  

Aqua said…
Fred, What is your take on this?

I find the Cionci thesis compelling, but not determinative (doesn't change anything fundamental).

He accepts important fundamental facts. He draws interesting and,to my way of thinking, reasonable inferences.

What say you?
Steven O'Reilly said…

Aqua, Fred...

the Cionci thesis is utterly ridiculous. It is comprised of his "Plan B" thesis, and his gnostic claims of a "Ratzinger Code." On my blog, Roma Locuta Est, I have addressed his nonsense.

Regarding Plan B, see:

https://romalocutaest.com/2021/04/12/benedicts-plan-b-from-outer-space/

https://romalocutaest.com/2021/08/03/benedicts-plan-b-from-outer-space-the-sequel/


Regarding the Cionci's "Ratzinger Code", see:

https://romalocutaest.com/2022/04/28/regarding-the-ratzinger-code/

For the record, I do note that Cionci blocked me on Twitter when I challenged his analysis - utilizing the Ratzinger Code - involving Benedict's words on February 28, 2013 to a group of pilgrims from Albano.

Though I certainly disagree with Mr. Docherty on Benepapism...it was good to see that even some Benepapists can see the Ratzinger Code/Plan B nonsense for what it is.

Regards,

Steven O'Reilly
www.RomaLocutaEst.com

For the case against the Benepapists, see: https://romalocutaest.com/2022/03/21/the-case-against-those-who-claim-benedict-is-still-pope/



Aqua,

Thanks your thoughtful comments as always unlike someone who seems to be doing a lot of name calling. It's late and I'll tell you my hope for this discussion tomorrow after work.

In JMJ,

Fred
Aqua said…
Steven,
How's your investigation of the "St. Gallen Mafia" coming along?
Regards,
Aqua
Aqua said…
CM,
Cheers!
Aqua
Anonymous said…
Ann Barnhardt is never going to admit she is wrong on this, none of you Beneplenists are going to admit that Benedict is not Pope anymore.

A bunch of dreamers, and I get it...Francis is a liberal and not doing the church any favors promoting Amoris Letitia again. He's a bad pontiff. You guys just can't accept that he had a valid conclave. Mazza is a fool too.
Anonymous said…
@Steven O'Reilly,

Thank you for all the good work. And @Aqua I do enjoy reading your posts.
Steven O'Reilly said…

@Aqua,

I haven't really looked into the St. Gallen mafia per se. Julia Meloni investigated that question through her recent book. My interest has been on focusing on the conclave. I continue to look into things. The results of that research to date is gathered together here:

https://romalocutaest.com/2020/09/23/the-conclave-chronicles/

I think there's some interesting stuff in it; and there are some details not covered elsewhere -- such as McCarrick declaring "we did it" after Francis was eleced, or a detailed look at the "October Surprise" that seems to have targeted Scola's papal chances. Take a look if you haven't already.


@anonymous: thanks.


Steve
www.RomaLocutaEst.com

T said…
Annoynamous:

You best tell missionaries that they sin badly when they try to convince unbelievers to become Catholic instead of being friends and dialoging with them like your Holy Father says. Maybe He’ll correct the Great Commission in the scriptures just like he corrected the Our Father to be more in line with modern sensibilities.
Anonymous said…
Francis can have his version of the our Father, I'll keep praying the one that the church had always used...I'm not saying I'm a fan of him.
Aqua said…
Anonymous @ 8:53

I don't think you really understand the true nature and power of the Papacy.
Aqua said…
Steven,
You said repeatedly on your blog (and on the Mazza podcast, as I recall) that was the most promising path to understand how we now have an apostate Pope. Sounds kind gnostic to me, but ... just interested to see if that bore any fruit for you.
Aqua
Steven O'Reilly said…

@Aqua,

I have said, Francis is the presumptive pope. That to overthrow this would require a high bar of evidence -- and that level of evidence has not yet been met under any possible theory. I have not said that evidence exists.

I have said *if* such evidence does exist and is to be found; it is not to be found in Benepapism...but in issues surrounding the conclave.

There is nothing 'gnostic' about that at all. It is gnostic to talking about BXVI having a supposed "plan b" where he remained in office, or that he is communicating a hidden knowledge via "ratzinger code," and such things.

Sorry.

Steve
www.RomaLocutaEst.com
Aqua said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aqua said…
Hi Steven,

Nothing to be sorry about. You have your opinions. I have mine. I've read you enough to know what you believe. I know enough about what I believe to know where that leaves you. I appreciate your search for truth, and pray you (not just you, but all suffering Catholics ... including myself) find it.

God bless,
Aqua
Fred Martinez said…
Aqua,

Time is something I don't have a a lot of now to invest in going over the difference in points between the two positions. I know that Dr. Ed Mazza is as smart as they come, but I'd would still like to know what Cionci's thesis in a quick summary. My hope for this discussion is that you who are always fair and don't get into name calling will give me the solid reasons why you find "Cionci thesis compelling, but not determinative without changing anything fundamental." I trust your fairness and intellect and after seeing what you have to say then I might see if I want to try spending some time researching Cionci's position.

In JMJ,

Fred
[https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2022/05/marco-tosatti-edmund-mazza-ratzingers.html]

Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis's Amoris Laetitia.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost - Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

- Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

"[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See."
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)


Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said "the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church."
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

- "If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

- "Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 -  LifeSiteNews, "Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers," December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows "sexually active adulterous couples facing 'complex circumstances' to 'access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'"

-  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

"The AAS statement... establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense."

- On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

"Francis' heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents."

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes:  

- Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: "212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted...Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden" [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

- Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times "Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003": http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html

- Tucker Carlson's Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written" according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1
 
- A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1
 
What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: "Anitfa 'Agent Provocateurs'":
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God's Will and to do it.
 
Pray an Our Father now for America.
 
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

   

Comments

Aqua said…
Fred, here's my take. Been writing A lot about this lately, since I've been in the distinct minority that Cionci has a reasonable, compelling proposition. Most everyone else, like Dr, Mazza, are very angered by Cionci. And I've had to do a lot of thinking about it just trying to understand what all the controversy was about. It still makes little sense to me. So this is the "other side" of the coin, I suppose.

As I understand it (fwiw), and with my own commentary now mixed in:

Cionci starts from the premise that Pope Benedict committed substantial error in his resignation on purpose, with intent. He retained the Office with carefully planned purpose. Cionci acknowledges all of the errors that rendered his resignation invalid. But rather than presuming he made those errors out of (a) ignorance, (b) heretical Teutonic error, (c) sloppy work ... he made the obvious and long discussed errors for an important purpose.

First point is important: Cionci affirms it is a quantifiable fact that Pope Benedict retained the Munus of Office and remains Pope.

*Why* he did that is the point of what comes next, which he refers to and explains as "The Ratzinger Code".

In sum, Cionci's answer to "Why" is that Pope Benedict recognized the existential crisis the Church and the world were about to enter and he took the Papacy into hiding to protect Christ's Holy Office from satanic malignancies. He rendered the Throne an Impeded See. How Cionci arrives at his conclusion is the topic of his forthcoming book by that name - proving his thesis (so he says).

As for me ... I find the proposition compelling. It matches what I know about the Church, the world situation, Pope Benedict and the clear, fully exposed evil forces opposing him within the Church, in alliance with the their worldly bretheren, now deconstructing Holy Mother Church (or what they think she is) with energy and passion. This is the chastisement promised by our Lady of Fatima if we failed to repent, do Penance and consecrate Russia. Popes have known of this threat to the Church, likely going back to at least Pope Leo XIII. And there is no doubt Pope Benedict knew everything.

- contd -
Aqua said…
- contd -

The Cionci thesis is that Pope Benedict acted heroically and saved the See by taking it into hiding during the time of present tribulation.

If you've read "Lord Of The World", the book Bishop of Rome Bergoglio recommended early in his tenure as important, you know there is a visible antichrist and an invisible ... impeded .... Pope. The antichrist spends the entire story (written in 1908!) trying to find his archenemy, the hidden Pope. The hidden (impeded) Pope remains deeply connected to Almighty God in a very mystical way until the very end.

I find this thesis of Papal heroism at the beginning of the chastisement much more compelling and believable than that the Pope destroyed the Seat of Peter, by Papal proclomation *from* the Seat of Peter (against Divine protections guaranteed by Sacred Tradition ... esp Vatican I) by dividing it on heretical purpose into two parts.

(1) Pope Benedict XVI is and always has been Pope.
(2) Pope Benedict recognized the malignant danger was at hand.
(3) He acted to save the Papacy and the Church most likely in contemplative prayer with Our Lady and Our Lord.
(4) Pope Benedict took the Holy See into hiding and it is now "impeded".
(5j Pope Benedict communicated his "impeded" actions and intent to those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

The Papacy for the foreseeable future will not be the same. This is very much (as I see it) like The Lord Of The World's premise,min which a tiny, very tiny and select group even knew who the Pope was ... an even smaller number knew where he was. I think that's where this is going. Whatever happens as Benedict and Bergoglio pass on to their rewards, after that I do not expect the Church to be the same as we've known in Tradition. We are in a time of emergency. God still speaks to the Pope directly - guaranteed. That Pope is not Bergoglio. Who it is next ... I don't expect it to be clear at all. I fully expect future ongoing impediment and a Papacy that may very well be heroic, but may also be utterly hidden from the Faithful.

The Cionci thesis and my own commentary mixed in ... because I agree with him, as I currently understand him.
Fred Martinez said…
Aqua,

Thank you so much for this post.

In JMJ,

Fred
Steven O'Reilly said…


@Aqua @Fred,

here is my latest on the Benepapist Civil War. The two competing theories are not compatible.

https://romalocutaest.com/2022/05/29/benedict-xvi-strategic-genius-or-theological-fool/

While each side points at the other and says "you are wrong"...they forget the reality is...neither of them is right!

Fred...btw...weeks and weeks are passing. Where are your answers to my Dubia???? You have time to post all these articles...but you can't post a simple "yes" or "no" to my questions? What's up? You pointed me to an outstanding question Debbie had...and I answered it immediately? Where is the reciprocity?

God bless,

Steve
Aqua said…
Steven,

Your fundamental mistake is that you think you can explain why Pope Benedict did something. If the Pope does not tell us, then we can't really know *why* he did what he did, can we? No one knows. Certainly not Barnhardt; not Cionci; you or me. Does it matter? Helpful, sure. Essential, no. All I need to know is: who *IS* Pope. That I know. Because he told us.

What was the last thing he did tell us? He told us, speaking from the official Chair of St. Peter, that he resigned the Ministry of Pope; kept the Office of Pope. The Office IS the Papacy. Further speculation is irrelevant. He is Pope.

Btw, did you read Barnhardt's latest ... reminding us of Ganswein's commentary on the matter? Gamswein's title? Prefect of the *Papal Household*. Prefect of the man wearing white, in the Vatican, signing as Pope, bestowing Apostolic blessing, receiving Cardinals - that guy ... Ganswein is Prefect of his Papal Household. And all you can is: those words don't matter. Fine for you, I guess, not for me.

Speculate all you want - you speculate plenty on your own theories ... everyone is trying to make their own sense of things, and that's fine - but all we really know is what the Pope said in his last official words from the Chair of St. Peter, from his own lips. And that is an ontological fact: he kept the Office; he lent the Ministry: Pope, according to Canon Law and Sacred Tradition.
Steven O'Reilly said…

@Aqua,

First of all...literally the last thing that Benedict said before his resignation on the February 28th was that he would no longer be the "supreme pontiff." Doesn't fit nicely into any Benepapist theory:

https://romalocutaest.com/2022/03/08/regarding-benedicts-comments-to-the-pilgrims-from-albano/

Cionci has an incredibly, laughable secret decoder ring explanation of it though...I addressed it here:

https://romalocutaest.com/2022/04/28/regarding-the-ratzinger-code/

Yes...as for Mr. Barnhardt...I read Ms. Barnhardt's latest. Beat her to the punch:

https://romalocutaest.com/2022/03/19/regarding-gansweins-speech/

Also, I also called out today for her misuse of the Principle of Non-Contradiction...which she does not seem to properly understand:

https://romalocutaest.com/2022/05/30/ms-ann-barnhardt-vs-the-law-of-non-contradiction-ms-barnhardt-loses/

But...I don't know why you appeal to Ms. Barnhardt...when Mr. Cionci criticizes her, and she him! It is amusing to watch this civil war. My latest commentary on it, may be found here:

https://romalocutaest.com/2022/05/29/benedict-xvi-strategic-genius-or-theological-fool/

So which is it, Aqua? Tell me. I have answered your questions. Is Benedict a "strategic genius" or a "theological fool"? Don't dodge...please.

Regards,

Steve O'Reilly
(www.RomaLocutaEst.com)





Aqua said…
Steven,

First of all ... why would you think a "civil war" within the Catholic faith is amusing? I don't. It hurts, wherever it may be found. It also hurts to see massive numbers of Faithful apostacize with the apostate sitting on the Holy See. You might want to think about that.

As to Pope Benedict's resignation error, it does not surprise me that his letter is full of supporting errors. It does not surprise me that he tries to justify his error. It remains the fact - he is in error. And everyone with eyes and a brain can judge it for themselves. I see Canon Law. I see his letter. I hear the words he spoke from The Chair. I see everything he has done since he left The Chair.

God gave us a brain and senses and a conscience. We are responsible to God for our own individual choices. We are not required to apostacize just because the Roman Bishop and the Cardinals in union with him have told us that we must. If I see a murder, I can judge it a murder, even though I can't render judgement on the perp. In the same way, if I see substantial error, or any heretical act that is proposed and imposed upon me I can (actually MUST) judge it as such, even though I cannot render judgement on the perp.

You call that "good enough".
I call that "substantial error".
That square can't be circled.

Your premise is not compatible with mine. And so you are left with what you see - two visible Popes, a new Emeritus title never seen before in them history of the Church without foundation in the Sacred Deposit of Faith or the clear words of Jesus Christ and you are left with an Apostate as your Holy Father whom, if you are still trying to be faithful as a Catholic, must ignore almost everything he says (funny way to be a Catholic imo).

As to your final question, it is not relevant to me - as you would know if you had read what I wrote. I am not Pope, nor am I privy to the mind of the Pope, naturally. I don't need to know "why". God does. I dont. All I need to know is "who" is the Pope. I know "who", and Imremain faithful to the Sacred Deposit of Faith from that perspective and ignore utterly the man squatting on the sacred Throne of St. Peter.
Aqua said…
Steven,
Another thought,min reference to the "humorous" civil war.

Unity is the natural state under the true Vicar of Christ who unified the living Faithful with the Roman Catholic Church past, present, future; militant, suffering, triumphant.

20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

(John 17: 20-23)

The entire 17th Chapter of St. John's Gospel are the holy words of Jesus Christ at the beginning of His Passion - the final spoken words He spoke prior to his ultimate suffering and crucifixion. He desired unity of the Faithful within Holy Mother Church, which is a Type of the unity to come within the Blessed Trinity, which is the essence of heaven, the Beatific Vision.

Disunity is a sign that we are in, or at least moving toward hell. Disunity and war within the Faithful is bad, not good. And it is ANOTHER sign that a false apostate Pope is leading this Church away from God toward another.
Aqua said…
Steven,

For clarification - here is the relevant Canon Law which must be fulfilled for a valid Papal resignation:

§2. If it happens that the Roman Pontiff resigns his office ..." (Canon 332.2)

Then read the rest of the relevant paragraphs of the section regards the authority endowed in the Papacy Canon 331 - 335, subset of "THE SUPREME AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH (Cann. 330 - 367)".

"https://www.vatican.va/archive/cod-iuris-canonici/eng/documents/cic_lib2-cann330-367_en.html

Upon what does this Papal authority rest? Munus. Office. Over and over it refers to various facets of Papal authority derived from his Munus, his Office. Never once does it refer to his Ministerium.

WHAT did Pope Benedict specifically resign in his letter, read directly to the Faithful from the Chair of St. Peter? Ministerium.

Again - your premise is that Ministerium = Munus.
It does not.

Aqua said…
Steven,
Another relevant phrase in 332.2: “properly manifested”.

Merriam-Webster Def:

1: readily perceived by the senses and especially by the sense of sight.
2: easily understood or recognized by the mind : OBVIOUS
3: to make evident or certain by showing or displaying

Words matter. They especially matter at the point where heaven meets earth in the person occupying the Office, endowed by Christ to visibly and substantially represent Him as visible earthly Monarch.

Popular posts from this blog

Bishops of Colorado gave an apparent Vaxx "Exemption" Letter & Stated: "Vaccination is Not Morally Obligatory and so Must Be Voluntary"

Today, the bishops of Colorado gave an apparent Vaxx " exemption" letter (21_8_Vaccine_Exemption_CCC_Fin...docx(20KB)) and stated that "Vaccination is Not Morally Obligatory and so Must Be Voluntary":  COLORADO CATHOLIC CONFERENCE 1535 Logan Street | Denver, CO 80203-1913 303-894-8808 | cocatholicconference.org   [Date]   To Whom It May Concern, [Name] is a baptized Catholic seeking a religious exemption from an immunization requirement. This letter explains how the Catholic Church’s teachings may lead individual Catholics, including [name], to decline certain vaccines. The Catholic Church teaches that a person may be required to refuse a medical intervention, including a vaccination, if his or her conscience comes to this judgment. While the Catholic Church does not prohibit the use of most vaccines, and generally encourages them to safeguard personal and public health, the following authoritative Church teachings demonstrate the principled religious

Does Francis's "Right-hand Man" Parra have a "Sexual Predation against Seminarians, Adultery, and even a Deadly Sex Game...[that] 'might even be a Scandal Surpassing that of McCarrick'"?

  Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra with Francis Today, the Call Me Jorge website asked "What could be so important that Francis interrupted his weekly adulation [Audience] session?": Pope gets a phone call during the Audience. Haven’t seen this before. Then he quickly leaves and says he will be back. pic.twitter.com/npCuPzdnxP — The Catholic Traveler (@MountainButorac) August 11, 2021 It was Abp. Mons. Edgar Robinson Peña Parra, Substitute for the Secretariat of State, who was involved in the recent scandal of mismanagement during the acquisition of a € 300 million building in London. Still no word on what the phone call was about . [http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2021/08/what-could-be-so-important-that-francis.html] Who is Archbishop Edgar Robinson Peña Parra ? Parra according to the Catholic Herald is Francis's "right-hand man"[https://catholicherald.co.uk/roman-curia-the-popes-new-right-hand-man/] In 2019, Life Site News reported that Parra alleged

Might it be Good for all of us & for Francis to Read about the "Gruesome Death of Arius"?

  I have read the letters of your piety , in which you have requested me to make known to you the events of my times relating to myself, and to give an account of that most impious heresy of the Arians , in consequence of which I have endured these sufferings, and also of the manner of the death of Arius . With two out of your three demands I have readily undertaken to comply, and have sent to your Godliness what I wrote to the Monks; from which you will be able to learn my own history as well as that of the heresy . But with respect to the other matter, I mean the death, I debated with myself for a long time, fearing lest any one should suppose that I was exulting in the death of that man. But yet, since a disputation which has taken place among you concerning the heresy , has issued in this question, whether Arius died after previously communicating with the Church ; I therefore was necessarily desirous of giving an account of his death, as thinking that the question woul