Editor’s Note: The original is in French and consists in a letter by a Canon Lawyer addressed to Andrea Cionci, the author of, “The Ratzinger Code”, in which the serious, grave and habitual doctrinal and theological errors present in Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s critique of Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIX, are indicated and compared with post Vatican II, non-infallible Church documents, for the most part.
You can read the article in your own language if you use Firefox or Chrome Browsers which have native translation capabilities.
The article claims to be a canonical study, but it is principally a doctrinal study.
The article is fundamentally sound and calls the Archbishop out for errors which I myself brought to the attention of readers of FromRome.Info for years, and which arise from the Archbishop’s decision to critique some things but remain silent on others, which forces him to marshal arguments which are not Catholic or which are gross exaggerations.
I do not think the Archbishop is a formal heretic, however, because I do not think he sincerely believes what he is writing, since he is inconsistent about which point of view he takes and because he remains so aloof as to never enter into a debate on the issues — all of which make me conclude that he is advancing what he considers contrarian opinions not certitudes, since he lacks the self confidence to defend them with reasons and presents them more as a diplomatic argument or political opposition.
However, this article published by Cionci on Sfero, is more than necessary, though it itself remains weak because of its inability to precisely discern the non-obligatory nature of the ideology contained in the documents of the Second Vatican Council, and thus, thereby, quite ironically falls into the error of Conciliarism, which is one of the errors of which the anonymous author accuses the Archbishop.
Indeed, the anonymous author appears poorly formed in theological discourse, and incapable of a truly sound theological argument, which must be founded on at least one revealed principle for each thesis, showing this is testified to by the perennial Magisterium of the Church, evidenced in Scripture, the writings of the Fathers and Doctors and Saints of the Church, and clearly explained by the most sound theologians who were their disciples, students, faithful expositors and admirers.
+ + +
The Book on the Trinity, every faithful Catholic priest would love as his next present
This is Br. Bugnolo's English Translation, of Saint Bonaventure's encylopedic book of theology on the Trinity: With this book, your priest will always have something intelligent and awesomely inspiring to preach to you about
God the Father, God the Son & God the Holy Spirit!
+ + +
Dear Br Alexis,
You need not publish this comment, but please consider editing your post. in particular, you write:
“The article is fundamentally sound…”
However, you finish with:
“Indeed, the anonymous author […] incapable of a truly sound theological argument…”
Thus giving the impression of violating the law of non-contradiction, which I’m sure wasn’t your intent.
Small world; my dad worked for Bell Labs in 1955-6; I learned to talk there and still carry a bit of New Jersey accent. 😉
God bless,
Mark
When I say, “fundamentally sound”, I mean that in regard to its purpose since it identifies correctly the errors in the writings of the Archbishop. But when I say, “incapable of a truly sound theological argument”, I refer to the manner in which he builds his argument, since the matter out of which he builds it, is not sound. So I am using “sound” in respect to two different measures, the first regarding intention, the second regarding argumentation.
As for a New Jersey Accent — I do not know what you are talking about, since in New Jersey we call it “Standard American English”, haha.
The original is in Italian. The French and English are translations.
https://www.romait.it/cattivi-maestri-contro-il-pur-cattivo-bergoglio-il-primo-studio-canonico-indipendente-sulle-eresie-di-vigano.html