Roma Locuta Est (Steven O’Reilly)
The Testimony of (former) Pope Benedict XVI
[T]here is a mentality of narrow views that isolates Vatican II .... There are many accounts of it, which give the impression that from Vatican II onward, everything has been changed, and what preceded it has no value or, at best, has value only in the light of Vatican II. ... The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council; and yet many treat it as though it had made itself into a sort of superdogma which takes away the importance of all the rest.note [https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/vatican-ii-is-not-infallible.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
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1]
Comments
I had sworn off even bothering to comment anymore on your blog as you tend toward sensationalism. However, in this case, I'll make an exception. If you had read my article, then one would know I say nothing of Lumen Gentium's doctrinal status, infallible or not, and that this consideration does not even enter into the discussion.
Lumen Gentium does not need to be infallible for the article's point to remain true; for that matter, canon law is not "infallible!" The point is only, relative to canon 17, that a "parallel passages" in Dogmatic Constitutions can be used to help interpret a meaning in canon law. So says the commentary on canon law that I cite -- in the article.
The Benepapists try to use canon 17 to allege an absolute distinction between the meaning of ministerium and munus. Indeed they must do so, for if they fail to do maintain this fiction, Benepapist theories crumble completely. That is the issue.
However, Canon 17 does not restrict interpretation of the law only to canon law, it specifically suggests looking at "parallel passages", and this may include the Church's Constitutions. Thus, this leads us to Lumen Gentium which does shed light on the meaning and relationship of ministerium to the munus. So, for example, we see in LG 20, ** a munus IS a ministry.**
So...instead of tossing out a red herring for your readers to chase after; why not read my article, and actually address the arguments made therein. The title of your article, and the quote from BXVI clearly suggest that you have not read it; or if you have read it, the title and BXVI clearly show you are not being straight with your readers about the contents of my article. In which case, I suggest your readers click the link, and read my article
God bless,
Steve O'Reilly
What does it mean to let your yes be yes and your no be no?https://www.gotquestions.org › ... › Matthew
Jan 4, 2022 — Jesus said, “Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil” (Matthew 5:37, KJV).
Steve said: "I say nothing of Lumen Gentium's doctrinal status, infallible or not, and that this consideration does not even enter into the discussion."
Steve, Sorry to tell you this Steve, but it is a big "consideration" in your agrument if Vatican II is infallible or not. Just like it is a big "consideration" in Francis's agruments if Vatican II is infallible or not.
Also, I've heard all your stuff a million times. There is nothing really new in it, it seems to me. What appears to be new is that you may be a big Vatican II promoter. Are you a big Vatican II promoter or not? Did Vatican II define dogma or not according to you? I know it's hard for you to say yes or no, but try.
God bless you,
Fred
Fred,
I am not getting into your sensationalist rabbit-holes, Fred. The infallibility or non-infallibility of Vatican II has NOTHING to do with my argument!! It could be just a non=infallible document like canon 17 in the code of canon law. It could be just an official Church document providing a historical treatment of the hierarchy. My argument -- as I am the one making it -- does NOT require Vatican II or Lumen Gentium to be infallible. I'll concede, arguendo, any assumption that YOU may wish for YOUR side of the argument.
If you want to assume it is infallible fine. If you want to assume it is NOT infallible. Fine!
That allows us to get to the heart of the matter related to BXVI's resignation.
Without agreeing Lumen Gentium is necessarily correct in what it is saying; do you agree Lumen Gentium 20 effectively says on a plain reading of the text that "a munus is a ministry" -- as my article argues? If not, explain to me precisely how or where my reading of the plain text, and the logic, goes wrong. It is pretty straightforward.
Pretty simple, Fred.
Regards,
Steven O'Reilly
Again, I ask:
Are you a big Vatican II promoter or not? Did Vatican II define dogma or not according to you? I know it's hard for you to say yes or no, but try.
Best,
Fred
Fred,
It appears my judgment to swear off your blog was the better one. Should have stuck with my instinct. You haven't changed.
If you cannot see or understand what the argument was about with regard to canon 17, and finding "parallel passages" to shed light on meanings, such as upon munus and ministerium, then I don't know what to say. You have NOT seen this argument before.
Vatican II's or Lumen Gentium's infallible or noninfallible status has NOTHING to do with that. Canon law commentaries say we can look at "parallel passages", in documents like Church Constitutions, i.e., like Lumen Gentium. So, there infallible or not status is IRRELEVANT.
But, instead, you want to have another stupid click bait headline about "Steve O'Reilly" and "Vatican II" to draw clicks to your site by making this about Vatican II. Your headline ought to be, "Benepapists have no response to the Lumen Gentium argument" I just offered.
Fred, you lost the plot. Try actually reading my article, and understanding it. If you want an honest conversation about it, you have my email. I am even willing to discuss in your combox, provided should you ever cut out the bullshit, headline antics your famous for.
Out of here. Good night, and God bless.
Steve O'Reilly
P.S. For those interested in the actual debate, and not what Fred wants to make it about, please read my article here: https://romalocutaest.com/2022/11/04/lumen-gentium-destroys-benepapism-in-toto/
P.P.S. For those who read it, and want a sane discussion...you are welcome to comment on my blog. www.RomaLocutaEst.com
Dawn Eden Goldstein as gone downhill quickly.