Trad Catholic VS Jay Dyer: The True Church & Vatican II

[00:00:00]Hey Jay, how you doing?

[00:00:01]>> Good.

[00:00:03]>> Uh, you know, this is not the first time that we've spoken. Um, if you remember a alternate current radio, uh, we we spoke there a long time ago.

[00:00:17]Um, >> remind me. I'm sorry I don't remember what who who are you or you don't want to know? You don't want to you remember the name Hesser?

[00:00:26]>> Well, yeah, I know Hesser. Yeah.

[00:00:28]>> Okay. Yeah, he was I was uh one of the people in the mix on his website.

[00:00:34]Um >> you don't want to say which guy you were. I mean >> Oh, uh Ryan.

[00:00:42]>> Ryan G.

[00:00:43]>> Yes, sir.

[00:00:44]>> Oh, what's up, man? How you doing?

[00:00:45]>> Pretty good. How are you doing?

[00:00:46]>> Good. What's up? What's on your mind?

[00:00:49]>> Um so, yeah, I apologize. I could have just jumped into it. Just uh just wanted you to know I'm not some >> That's cool.

[00:00:57]>> stranger.

[00:00:57]>> Yeah. I hope I hope hope you're doing well.

[00:01:00]>> You as well. Um, so, funny enough, when we last spoke, uh, you probably didn't even know my stance on any of this, but I I was probably uh, closest to what you could call a deist at that time. Um, I grew up in Catholicism but fell away, spent about 12 years away from the church. Um, I've since come back. Um, I at this point I am convinced of the truth of the Catholic faith.

[00:01:41]Um, so I I just thought I would call in and [snorts] try to not I mean I know this is about debate and I don't mind h having a bit of a debate, but my my goal here is more having mutual understanding and hopefully gleaning that hopefully we could glean something from each other. Um, but you know that I'm just saying that's my goal. Uh where I would start it at is do we agree on the four marks of the church as stated in the nyine creed?

[00:02:18]>> Absolutely. Well, I I think we would agree at least uh basically uh one holy Catholic apostolic. But but what I would actually argue that's an argument against the Roman Catholic position because there's nothing in the creed uh or in you know sort of the petristic era theological summaries whether it's John Damascus's uh on the orthodox faith or whether it's uh catechetical lectures of St. Jerusalem. Like none of those texts really make Rome the focal point of the one holy catholic apostolic church. And in fact the council which is constant number one in 381 when they composed that additional section to the creed you know the section about the church that section is is composed by a council had out of communion with Rome presided over by St. Midios who died out of communion with Rome. And so if Constantinople one accurately lists the phrase one holy Catholic apostolic church and they were not in communion with Rome when they they wrote that they did not mean the papacy. And so I would argue that that's actually in favor of my position.

[00:03:22]>> Okay. When you say Rome you're not I mean just to clarify uh you're not speaking geographically.

[00:03:31]>> I'm speaking of the Sea of Rome, >> right? So uh >> I mean the Sea of Rome is geographic.

[00:03:37]Sure.

[00:03:39]Well, I mean it I guess you could say the charter is the world though.

[00:03:46]>> The charter. I don't know what you mean.

[00:03:48]the the the scope of uh influence of the Roman >> well influence influence is one thing u but like if you read the chi document of Rome from a few years ago it admits that the uh bishop of Rome did not have jurisdiction over the churches of east in the first millennium.

[00:04:12]>> Okay. No, I um actually that makes sense to me. I mean in in terms of um the as far as I understand it there were multiple seas um >> yeah but Vatican 1 claims that from the earliest days of the church the Roman sea had universal jurisdiction over the entire Christian imperium the Christian body and I'm saying that I'm saying that the chi8 document that Rome has up on the Vatican website uh admits that this is not true that the Roman church >> when was that when was that publicublished 2016.

[00:04:50]>> Okay. Well, I I'd probably have issues with that, but I >> So, no, wait a minute. So, you do you know better than Francis?

[00:04:59]>> Um I I mean I can't I can't say in what in what particulars. Well, I mean, Benedict the 16th, okay, Benedict the 16th in his book, Introduction to Christianity says basically the same thing that in uh the first millennium, the the Roman sea did not exercise universal jurisdiction over the East.

[00:05:21]>> Okay. Well, um >> so is Vatican one right or are they right?

[00:05:26]>> Um I mean I think I'd be really interested to go over the exact lines where you're saying that those two are in contradiction. Well, I mean, Vatican 1 says very clearly, it's not even contested that the it that the bishop of Rome has universal jurisdiction and headship unilaterally over all of the church without any need for a senate or any other bishop to approve what he says and does. That's the whole basis for Excathedra. I mean, that's that's Vatican 1, >> right? Well, as I'm understanding that, this all emanates from the primacy of Peter, the Petrine office. Well, I mean what you mean by the first among equals or something like that, the Orthodox person could agree to that to the word quote premacy because right >> because in the councils Rome is listed first. Rome usually signed the council first but the bishop of Rome didn't call any ecumenical councils. There were popes who were excommunicated by ex by ecumenical councils. There were popes who submitted to ecumenical councils like vigilious. So I'm just pointing out that Vatican 1 is an innovation over the cenodality collegiality practice of the church in the first millennium.

[00:06:38]>> Okay. But in I mean I guess I could I I'm not going to say that you're wrong there, but I I without having it directly in front of me, I'm not sure exactly where you're saying those terms.

[00:06:50]>> That's fine. So if you So if you go to papencicals.net, net you can type in Vatican 1 and you'll get the full uh documentation of all of if you print it out it's about 15 pages that's all of Vatican 1 and then I would say if you look at the Chi document ch H I E TI from 2016 that document is about the admissions of the Roman sea to the Eastern churches so that's why that's very uh relevant to this discussion and paragraph [clears throat] 19 is the last of the Chi document and that's where it says that the bishop of Rome did not exercise canonical authority over the churches of the east. So that's an admission that the east and the orthodox have been complaining about for so long for a thousand years. And I'm arguing that this admission contradicts the claims of Vatican 1. So you can I mean you can feel free to go uh fact check me please do. No, I I I think that there's I think we may have a common understanding here in terms of the the concept of sooie urus self-governing that that there um there was a self-governing or I shouldn't say what was that in some sense there's a self-governing aspect of Eastern Catholic churches. But that's not about this is not about whether there were autophilis churches which Ephesus council of Ephesus grants autophille to uh the church of Cyprus.

[00:08:16]So there are autophilis churches which everyone admits but that's a different issue from whether or not Vatican 1 dogmatically teaches that the pope has unilateral universal jurisdiction. I mean it's not even in question. It's what Vatican everybody knows Vatican 1 teaches that that knows what Vatican 1 says.

[00:08:31]>> So yeah. So I I grasp what you've said uh and I'll definitely do more research on on what you've referenced there. Um what I wanted to more nail down in terms of what I was saying is the four marks of the church stated in the nine >> creed. Um so for me when I reverted I had uh a fork in the road which was Catholicism or orthodoxy and where I had it was concerning the Nian creed that I fell on the side of Catholicism and >> but did you hear that I said about Constantinople one that when they wrote one holy Catholic apostolic they were out of communion with Rome.

[00:09:20]Were you aware of that?

[00:09:21]>> Um, no. But I >> So if you look up the schism, the Malaysian schism and the schism of Constantinople one, Rome did not accept Constant Constantinople one until centuries later. So retroactively, Rome Rome says, "Okay, we we do accept uh the addition to the creed and and Constantinople 1's teachings." Um, but that's centuries later. So when they wrote that and the Capidosians were the you know primary theologians at Constantinople one they clearly did not have the Vatican 1 mindset in mind when they wrote one holy Catholic apostolic.

[00:09:59]>> Okay. Um but so yeah what I'm more getting at so that I mean that that may be all just fine and true and I I >> I'm not necessarily trying to dispute that at the moment. Um, what I'm trying to get at is one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic. So, >> so, so, and that's fine. We can move on.

[00:10:20]But you're saying that the mindset of the people that wrote it doesn't really matter. It's what Rome says it means. Is that Is that where we're going?

[00:10:31]>> Not so much. I I'm just trying to nail down what my reasoning is and why you might think my reasoning is false.

[00:10:39]>> So, I mean, so you're going to say what?

[00:10:41]That like the Catholicity involves numbers. Rome has a lot of numbers and Orthodox don't. Is that where you're going?

[00:10:48]>> Um, so well, sort of. I mean, you're you're not far off. Um, the >> So, what was Catholicity true in the 4th century when most of the church was Aryan or semi-aran? Where were the numbers?

[00:11:05]>> Was Catholicity true?

[00:11:08]>> Um, if it's Yeah, it was. It was. Well, what do you mean by numbers? I don't >> If the argument is going to be that the Roman Catholic Church is the one holy Catholic apostolic church because it's the one that has the numbers, then that's false because they didn't have no whether you're Orthodox or Catholic. In the 4th century, the majority of the church was Aryan or semi-aran. And at one point, there was only a handful of bishops that were Orthodox. St. Athanasius being one of them. So, it cannot be a numbers game. Catholicity in the Orthodox view means fullness of truth, not primarily essentially numbers.

[00:11:46]>> Um that's so that's not Yeah, I don't understand it in terms of numbers. How I understand like if if you wouldn't mind I'll just break it down real quick.

[00:11:56]>> Sure.

[00:11:57]>> Um Catholic means un universal uh cicos means applying to the whole.

[00:12:08]Yeah. Fullness. Agreed. We agree.

[00:12:11]>> So, um and then um holy would be uh from God.

[00:12:20]>> Well, and produ produces saints >> and yes. So, uh but but essentially um >> sanctified it would be another way to put that.

[00:12:33]>> Yeah. Um, apostolic would be emanating from the apostles, >> which which >> apostolic succession. We agree with that. Yeah.

[00:12:42]>> Ultimately saying a mission from Christ, given by Christ.

[00:12:45]>> Well, it means apostolic succession, >> right? But I'm saying the the apostles are the apostles because they were given a mission by Christ.

[00:12:53]>> Well, that's part of apostolic succession is that the apostles are the successors to Christ, >> right? and um and then one meaning unified.

[00:13:03]>> And so my issue comes in when well I I'd say I have two issues but the the latter is maybe more easily resolvable. So I think one and Catholic are an at issue and um but but Catholic maybe not like I said maybe that's eas easily resolvable but I think that >> uh >> well let me give you an example of where I would say that the Roman Catholic Church is not one um the Roman Catholic Church allows all of the Eastern Catholics to recite a different creed than the Western church. How can the true church have two different creeds?

[00:13:42]And in the first thousand years, the church didn't have two different creeds.

[00:13:46]They had one creed.

[00:13:48]>> Oh, I think that's a big issue. Um, but but to say that >> Well, now so then what does one mean?

[00:13:53]Just the pope. It doesn't mean actual faith. They're not one in faith. It's just the >> one faith, one baptism.

[00:13:59]>> Okay. But how is it one faith if the church has two creeds?

[00:14:04]>> Um, I mean, that's an issue. But but I think that when you say the Roman Catholic Church says, that's where I'm not connecting with what you're saying.

[00:14:16]It it's not I'm not trying to say that um what where you got that is wrong, but it seems that >> many what did I what did I say that what did I say Rome says that you're unclear about? And I'll I'll sort cite you whatever documents you want.

[00:14:34]>> Um wait, I'm sorry.

[00:14:37]Uh, >> you're you're saying to me, Jay, when you say Rome says, I don't know if that's accurate or where you got that, and I'm asking you, which thing are you unclear about? I'll give you the source.

[00:14:47]>> Oh, sure.

[00:14:48]>> I mean, I've got we got Denzinger right here.

[00:14:51]>> Well, it it's just I I noticed that you and and many people say the Roman Catholic Church believes or says X. And and I think that often you can have a source from those who claim to be of the Roman Catholic hierarchy >> like the Vatican. I mean I'm going to Denzinger. Do you know what Denzinger is?

[00:15:13]>> Well, are you talking I think that papal infallible statements are of at the peak of what >> I mean I'm not Do you know what [clears throat] Denzinger is? Are you familiar with Denzinger?

[00:15:28]I'm I'm familiar with the name but I mean probably not.

[00:15:30]>> So this is the collection of dogmas that Rome has affirmed. So this is one place to start for Roman Catholic dogma and hence it's called the sources of Catholic dogma. I'm not being arrogant.

[00:15:42]I'm not being mean to you. I'm just literally saying that's what Denzinger is. It's the sources of Catholic dogma.

[00:15:48]And so when I say something like Vatican 1 says this, you can find it at papalencyclicals.net net under Vatican 1 or in Denzinger because Denzinger pretty much has all of Vatican 1. It's not the only source of Roman Catholic dogma because Denzinger doesn't have everything that's uh taught by the papacy. It just has a collection of papily approved things. But if you go to the Vatican website, >> they cite Denzinger. So, it's definitely an authoritative source.

[00:16:16]>> Okay. Um but it well uh where do you source the claim that you made though?

[00:16:24]Roman Catholic Church.

[00:16:26]>> Um >> you know I'm I'm kind of blanking because I I guess I was so focused on what you were just saying but you you were suggesting um uh well I know I know you mentioned um about the Eastern churches having a different creed. That's not that's not even a controversial I mean you go ask any uniate or Greek Catholic like they they recite the creed without the filioquay this is well known >> right yeah >> so do you need a you need a a papal statement whether that's true >> no >> right >> no no no I what I'm saying well no I guess I I think I think I got lost in the mix there uh you had made a statement that the Roman Catholic Church says and I'm I'm just questioning is that an infallible teaching or is that something that you read from the Vatican that may or may not be >> well Vatican 1 is infallible. It's a dogmatic ecumenical council. So in the Roman Catholic system, yes, Vatican 1 is infallible and presumably I mean maybe some Roman Catholic has some argument they would make. I would say Denzinger also includes everything that is quote infallible or ordinary universal magisterial teaching which according to Vatican 1 is protected by the Petranarism. So Denzinger also should be without error.

[00:17:48]>> Okay. Um and that that may be the case.

[00:17:51]I can't speak to that. U my issue comes down to when I think about the question um of orthodox versus Catholicism. I I think that uh orthodox is lacking the unity. And I I guess I'm to me there is >> now and my first question to you was well then why does if the Roman Catholic Church has the unity supposedly is that a unity of faith and belief or just a unity of we all believe in Francis and then underneath Francis it's all fair game do whatever you want because that's what I see and I that's what I experience in the Roman Catholic world.

[00:18:34]I see no unity between the Novasorduro uh hippie mass and Nostraatate and the SSPX Latin mass down the road. There's no unity between those things. The only unity that exists is a common confession of Pope Francis or the papacy. So my point is precisely that that unity or the oneness of one holy Catholic apostolic refers then to we're all one under the pope but not a unity of actual theological faith confession. Hence my argument that the Roman Catholic Church has two different competing creeds within it.

[00:19:08]>> I I think that you and I have different concepts of unity going. So I would say >> what is the oneness of the Roman Catholic Church then?

[00:19:17]>> One faith. One >> how is it one faith when there's two different creeds with two different faiths?

[00:19:24]>> Both recite the apostles creed.

[00:19:26]>> No the nyine creed where the uniates recite the filioquay. Excuse me. They don't recite the filioquay and the rest of the Roman Catholic Church does. Do you not know what I'm talking about?

[00:19:38]>> Uh I feel like I missed something in what way you said.

[00:19:41]>> Okay. I'm sorry. I'm not trying to be mean, but like so this is a really basic. So all of the Eastern Roman Catholics, the Eastern Union Catholic Church, Melkites, whatever, Russian Catholics, Greek Catholics, they recite a different creed, literally a different nyine creed than the rest of the Latin church. They cite the creed that we Orthodox have which is without the filioquay.

[00:20:03]>> The >> Well, that that's an issue. But I thought you were saying between the Novasordo and the SSP.

[00:20:08]>> I made a different analogy to uh a lack of actual unity between those groups.

[00:20:13]Yes, I did. But that wasn't in reference to the creed. I'm saying that they don't believe the same theology. Almost all the SSPX and traditional Catholics do not agree with the theology of Vatican 2. So, how is there unified faith when a giant portion of the church doesn't accept or rejects or doesn't want to believe Vatican 2?

[00:20:33]Um, I think that there's a there's a distinction to be made between the what what is officially the faith that is uh prayed at mass and what is the faith that is demonstrated in say a typical novasordo.

[00:20:54]>> I'm talking about Vatican 2 documents and the dogmas and teachings of Vatican 2. Regardless of what you believe when you walk into a Novasordo or an SSBX mass, do you as a Roman Catholic have to believe Vatican 2?

[00:21:07]>> Um, I don't know what that would even mean. Believe Vatican 2. It wasn't a dogmatic council.

[00:21:12]>> It is a dogmatic council. No, that's totally false. No, it's not. It's what Paul V 6 said was it quote proclaimed no new dogmas. There's four separate statements from the popes that say it is dogmatic. So, it's a total tried myth.

[00:21:26]It's a trad.

[00:21:28][laughter] >> Yes, it is. Do you want me to give you the four statements from the Vatican that you have to believe it?

[00:21:34]>> Sure. But they they they state that it's an that I don't even what I'm saying is I don't know what that would mean. It's an ecumenical council is what they state.

[00:21:45]>> Yeah. And you have to believe in ecumenical counsel. You think that when the pope confirms an ecumenical council for the entire church on faith and morals, you don't have to believe it.

[00:21:54]All Paul the 6, all Paul V 6 said was that it proclaimed no new dogmas. He never said it's not dogmatic. And in fact, Francis and every Roman Catholic, why are you interrupting? Every Roman Catholic after the council, every Roman Cath, every pope has enforced Vatican 2 and the New Mass on the entire church.

[00:22:10]So the idea that you don't have to believe it is ludicrous. Every Roman Catholic church that you go to tells you and teaches you in the catechism that you must accept the documents of Vatican 2.

[00:22:20]>> What must I accept from the documents?

[00:22:22]All of the the teaching, all the documents of Vatican 2 are signed off by the papacy.

[00:22:27]>> What specifically do I as a lay person?

[00:22:31]>> All of them. The entirety of it. You don't get to reject any of it because it's ordinary universal teaching.

[00:22:37]>> What new doctrine was brought in in Vatican 2? [clears throat] >> Well, Paul V 6 claims there was no new doctrines. I don't believe that. I believe that Vatican 2 with no rotate, for example, taught that Hindus now worship the one true God as do Muslims.

[00:22:51]Do you believe that Muslims and Hindus worship the same God as Roman Catholics?

[00:22:57]>> I I think that that can be scrutinized a bit further than the way you just stated it.

[00:23:04]>> Do how do they believe in the Trinity? I mean, because that's the only one true God that exists, >> right? Well, so I I think this is I I do have an issue with that and I I see I've studied this problem and I see the the same issue that you see. Um, >> yeah, cuz it's not true that I >> that's because you have some discernment. You're you're correct. It's not true. Muslims and Catholics and and Orthodox do not worship the same God because they use the word god. And in fact, Vatican nostratate goes so far as to say that Muslims and Catholics have the same faith as Abraham. And yet Jesus says in John 5 that Abraham rejoiced to see his day and saw it and was glad.

[00:23:44]Excuse me, John 8. John 5 through8 Jesus constantly argues with the Pharisees that Abraham believed in him. Well, then Muslims are not of the Abraimic faith.

[00:23:54]>> Sure. So, >> well, if that's sure, then Vatican 2 is false. If you say sure, then Vatican 2 is false because it says the opposite of that.

[00:24:02]>> I grasp what you're saying and I've wrestled with the same problem.

[00:24:07]>> Well, this is an example of why Rome is a contradictory position.

[00:24:12]>> If I could, I I just want to explain how I read what is in Vatican 2 there. Um it it's you know I will say that it this is what is called weaponized ambiguity and I think that there is a huge problem >> I know man when I I mean I've heard all this since 2005 when I was I was going to the Latin mass in 2005 and I've heard about weaponized ambiguity. Do you think it's ambiguous when the pope goes into the mosque and prays towards Mecca? Is that ambiguous or is he acting is he acting out this theology?

[00:24:43]>> Yeah there that's uh that's wackiness.

[00:24:46]Uh, and I I'm with you on that, but >> Okay. Well, then then then Vatican 1 is false and the Roman Sea has defected.

[00:24:54]>> I don't think that's the case.

[00:24:56]>> How are you keeping the true faith if you're praying in moss towards Mecca?

[00:25:02]>> I mean, I don't think you would. You you you certainly are uh committing at least heresy if not apostasy.

[00:25:10]>> Okay. So, then Vatican 1's not true and Rome can error and the papacy is not indeible. I don't think that that's necessarily true.

[00:25:19]>> I mean, you just literally said that you think it's heretical Francis and Benedict did it.

[00:25:26]>> Mhm.

[00:25:28]>> So, are they heretics who defected or not?

[00:25:33]>> I I can answer that, but I I wanted to address the the bit about Vatican 2 that you were saying.

[00:25:41]>> Okay. Sure. Go ahead.

[00:25:43]like uh I have no problem going through methodically on this, but I just I don't want to go all over the place and lose where we were.

[00:25:50]>> Okay, let me can I read the paragraph?

[00:25:52]Uh it says, "The church regards with esteem the Muslims. Muslims adore the one the one God living and subsisting in himself, merciful and all powerful, creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men. Muslims take pains to submit wholeheartedly to his decrees.

[00:26:07]Just like Abraham with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they honor him as a prophet. And then it goes on to say they value the moral life and the worship of God through prayer, almsgiving, and fasting. This gives the impression that we have the same common faith and that God accepts Islamic prayer, almsgiving, and fasting. And none of that's true.

[00:26:35]So yeah, I I mean that's uh there's a lot of problems in that statement. Um but I think that it's important to look at the specific wording like they um uh I don't have it in front of me, but I I could get it in front of me. Um they said that they they claim to have Abrahamic faith or what is um what was that bit that >> No, it actually says that it says that they adore the one God living and subsisting in himself. It doesn't say they claim to. It says they do it >> well. So let me just explain how I read that. And it's not um may or may not be what was intended in the words. And I certainly think that that the way it's worded is highly problematic.

[00:27:23]>> Okay. Well, I thought that the papacy was here to give us clarity, certitude, and to guide us and preserve it. So now it's weaponized ambiguity.

[00:27:31]>> Vatican 2 definitely did not do that.

[00:27:33]>> Okay. Well, then the papacy doesn't work because >> I don't think that has to be true. Um, but the way that I read that, >> so we need you I'm not trying to be rude, but you don't see how Protestant this is. We actually need you, an individual Catholic, to sus through all these stacks of papal documents to tell us the true papal meaning of the true papal councils.

[00:27:55]>> No, that I'm not suggesting that.

[00:27:57]>> Well, but you are because you're saying that the way to read it is blah blah blah blah blah.

[00:28:01]>> No, I'm saying I'm saying that each individual has to apply critical thinking when they analyze anything.

[00:28:09]Does Vatican 1 say that you judge the first sea and apply critical thinking to its teachings?

[00:28:14]>> Or does it say you submit with dosility to whatever teachings?

[00:28:17]>> You're you're not supposed to uh violate your conscience. So >> it's not an issue of conscience. It because it also says that you submit with dosility. That's the teaching of Vatican 1 is that the ley do not judge the first sea. You submit with dosility to its rulings and teachings.

[00:28:34]>> That's true.

[00:28:35]>> Then you're not in a position to say that this is weaponized ambiguity.

[00:28:39]I think we're getting too scattered and I >> No, this is precisely the issue. It's not. It's precisely the issue.

[00:28:46]>> Well, it's just I want to be able to address that one statement that you read from Vatican 2. I'm I'm perfectly fine to move on to the other points, but >> uh the way the way I grasp what is said there in Vatican 2, which >> admittedly it sucks the way it's worded.

[00:29:03]Um, it like >> I mean these are dogmatic statements and you're saying it sucks. So this is like saying that divine revelation sucks.

[00:29:11]>> They're not dogmatic statements.

[00:29:13]>> They are dogmatic statements. I'll give you four examples of the pope saying that you have to accept all the documents of Vatican 2.

[00:29:19]>> There's nothing for me to accept there.

[00:29:21]That's that's uh >> that's just that you're lying to yourself because you are told in other places four times that you must accept all of Vatican 2 >> and that means nothing. that you they can keep repeating that but that >> so you don't actually follow the papacy.

[00:29:34]So that thank you for admitting my point that you interpret and follow the papacy when you want to.

[00:29:40]>> No, that's >> you literally just said you don't have to accept Vatican 2's dogmatic even though the pope tells you you have to.

[00:29:46]>> No, again we're jump we're jumping to another point. I just wanted to address >> because you're saying that a dogmatic teaching is sucky and I'm telling you that you don't get to say that in the Roman Catholic system and it is dogmatic.

[00:29:57]>> I No, it's not.

[00:29:59]>> Yes, it is. If I So if I give you four places where the pope says you have to accept Vatican 2, you're telling me that you don't have to listen to that.

[00:30:07]>> Accept Vatican 2 to mean something in practical reality.

[00:30:12]>> It means you must believe. Are you Why are you lying to yourself and lying to the audience? Because I can open up the Catholic the Roman Catholic Catechism sites from Vatican 2 countless times and you're telling me that Rome doesn't teach that >> infallible document. It it's absolutely authoritative and binding. It doesn't have to be infallible.

[00:30:30]>> The catechism is not.

[00:30:31]>> Yes, it is binding. It is ordinary teaching. Do you know what ordinary teaching is?

[00:30:36]>> You didn't even know there was two different creeds in the church. Do you know what ordinary teaching is?

[00:30:41]>> What do you mean two different creeds?

[00:30:42]The 19 and apostles creed. Is that what you're saying?

[00:30:45]>> No. Earlier the two different creeds between the west and the east, the uniates and the Latin church.

[00:30:50]>> I'm aware of that. The >> Okay. So, what do you know what ordinary teaching is?

[00:30:56]>> Yeah. the ordinary magisterium, >> right? Do you have to accept that?

[00:31:00]According to Vatican 1.

[00:31:04]>> If >> No, there's no ifs. Do you have to accept?

[00:31:08]>> Yes, you do.

[00:31:08]>> Okay. What's the criteria for ordinary?

[00:31:11]Right.

[00:31:11]>> To what?

[00:31:12]>> What's the criteria for it?

[00:31:14]>> I mean, I can't spit it out at the moment. Um, >> it's anytime that that the pope is teaching authoritatively in concert with what the church has always taught for the entire church. You have to accept that. And it's and it's free from error.

[00:31:29]It is also according to Vatican 1 under the Petrine carrorism. Vatican 2's documents listen Vatican 2's documents are affirmed by the Roman Sea for the entire church on faith and morals. You are told in every Catholic church in the world that you have to accept it. So you do not have the liberty of rejecting Vatican 2. It's false.

[00:31:50]>> All right. Here's here's the issue. what you just said it it it can't contradict itself >> only if Roman Catholicism is true. I'm arguing that it does contradict. That's the whole point of why we're having this conversation.

[00:32:02]>> No, but what I'm saying is that if there is a contradiction, which you're highlighting, and I I'm I'm with you on that, then that's the problem. It's >> Yeah. And it means the Roman system is false. It means the system is false.

[00:32:15]That's the point. I I don't I don't think that >> I'm sorry that you don't see that because it's a systemic level reputation.

[00:32:24]>> I get where you're coming from, but I don't think that you've heard my case on that. And I I'm just trying to >> Your case was the wording is sucky, which I've heard for 20 years.

[00:32:34]>> Yeah. And I'm just trying to parse out these two issues. I I am perfectly fine to have the conversation that you're trying to have right now, but we have not addressed that statement from bad or I haven't been able statement.

[00:32:48]>> So the way I read that is replace Muslim with unbaptized individual. Can an un unbaptized individual pray?

[00:33:05]None of that has anything to do with the fact that it's trying to say they have the faith of Abraham. That's the problem in the statement. The faith of Abraham was faith in Christ.

[00:33:13]>> Is is a single Muslim representative of the entirety of Islam, the religion?

[00:33:22]>> I don't see how that's relevant because Islam as a universal position rejects the Trinity and the deity of Christ. So it doesn't matter what one Muslim thinks or believes when the public profession of the religion is that they are unitarians and they reject the trinity.

[00:33:37]In fact, they believe in putting to death people who believe in the trinity.

[00:33:40]>> But this is what I'm trying to say. If if if an atheist is unbaptized and prays, is that somehow invalid? Can an atheist not pray?

[00:33:51]praying. None of that has anything to do with the public profession of their faith, what the theology is, the public profession of the religion.

[00:34:00]>> It's not saying, it's not saying, can God choose to listen to an individual when they pray. It's saying that Muslims have the same God as us, and it's just categorically false. They don't.

[00:34:11]>> I I totally see where you're coming from, but I think there's a discontinuity in how you're reading it and how I'm reading it. I'm reading it from the perspective of they shouldn't.

[00:34:21]>> And all of this begs the question that that's the whole point, man. Like I just I give up because I'm going to give you right here. Uh actually, it's actually five places that tell you that you have to believe in Vatican 2. All of these are right here underneath my I wrote I did a video called was Vatican 2 infallible. If you look up this uh video, I list five papal documents underneath that tell you that you have to believe Vatican 2. So, look, I appreciate you coming on, Ryan. I It was good to chat with you. I wish you well.

[00:34:51]I just don't buy it, man. And if you want to reject Vatican 2, go for it. Uh, but it's not a consistent Roman Catholic position to reject something that five papal documents tell you you have to accept. And here they are. First one is right here. It's Francis talking about the uh dogmatic nature of the reforms of Vatican 2. It's his audience that he gave in 2017. There's the first one.

[00:35:16]Second one is another speech. Uh this one is John uh the 23rd's opening speech to the uh uh Vatican 2 and he says it is an ecumenical council that is dogmatic and must be accepted. The third one is this one which you have to hit uh translate into English. It's only in Italian. It is uh a discussion from Paul V 6 I believe in 1976 where Paul the sixth says that you have to believe it. It's dogmatic.

[00:35:48]It's just a tad myth. This is like they're inventing ways to try to make the system work when all you have to do is demonstrate one dogmatic contradiction and the whole system is false. And it's like Roman Catholics can't conceive of that being a systemic level defeater because in their mind you can just keep stacking up more explanations and more quote evidences.

[00:36:08]So pas the 11th castubi paragraph 104 this says that you're bound by more than what is even extraordinary you have to believe in whatever the Roman Catholic Church the Roman sea teaches even if it's ordinary teaching and not ordinary magisterium even just the ordinary teaching is is supposed to be submitted to with dosility. And the last one is C.

[00:36:27]Delegious of Pest I 12th. Obedience is necessary even if you think the Pope is wrong. Do you see this? All you goofball Roman Catholics. See Deleligus.

[00:36:39]Pest the 10th canonization by Pest I 12th. Even if you think the Pope is wrong, you still must submit with dosility. That is what Roman Catholic Vatican 1 obedience had in mind.

[00:36:53]So, there's the five things that prove you don't get to pick and choose and throw out Vatican 2. And you notice he did two things there in that discussion.

[00:37:03]At first, he says, "No, I don't have to accept Vatican 2." No, actually, you do.

[00:37:07]Here's five examples of where you have to. Oh, well, uh, it's the wording. No, which one is it? Do you not have to accept it, or is it just shitty wording?

[00:37:15]And by the way, the Roman Sea is supposed to be there to make it clear and not put us in this Protestant position of we don't know what it means.

[00:37:23]It's ambiguous. It's shitty wording. So, everybody should go watch this podcast from 2020 where we walk through all of these different documents.