Secondly, the point of the decree is clear, it is to prevent individual Catholics with “no scientific theological training” to defend the Roman religion for in so doing they may well preach and teach against the official doctrines of Mother Rome. This being, to to use your own words, the average “Joe Schmoe on the corner” which includes the vast majority of Roman apologists encountered on the internet and elsewhere. The very same ones who are breaking this command and should be bound in the fetters of excommunication.

Thirdly, this is a papal decree and no amount of apologetical card shuffling is going to change this and that it is to be held and enforced by the “church.” One day, I’m sure this will be so again.

Fourthly, I love how Romanists will defend tooth and nail their pet Roman doctrines found no where in the Bible when decreed as doctrine by the Popes, yet when one is called into question, so often what one finds is theological back-peddling. Or, maybe better stated, buffet theology. That is, if one infallible decree by this Pope is not suited to one’s taste because they don’t like it, why not play the trump card and quote the words from another “church father” or Pope who says otherwise.

Finally, no one is out to poke holes in arguments for poking holes sake, nor is one out to lob unpleasant accusations about the Catholic religion due to some personal vendetta. The truth is, that Rome does not preach the gospel, has not Jesus Christ, and is leading people to damnation. Even as I see in my own family as another one of my family members has died. A die-hard Romanist who knew not Jesus, the gospel or salvation, yet tomorrow I will hear damnable lies from some priest about how she is up in heaven because she was a good Catholic and went to Mass and did this and that. When in reality she was a dead sinner.

This is why we write what we do so as to strive to lead people away from Rome and towards Jesus Christ for today could be the last day for any one of us.

Additionally, even if we concede that the decree you quote is still in effect, if you continued to read the original source that you quoted, you would note that there are contexts and specific guidelines regarding application of the decree – generally speaking, the idea is that a priest or someone else with formal theological training is going to be better equipped to discuss and debate theology than Joe Schmoe on the corner. However, there is allowance for laymen to engage in discussion of theology – “There are numerous questions, somewhat connected with theology, which many laymen who have received no scientific theological training can treat more intelligently than a priest. In modern life, it frequently happens that an O’Connell or a Montalembert must stand forward as a defender of Catholic interests upon occasions when a theologian would be out of place.” Also, Thomas Aquinas wrote in the Summa Theologica that “it is lawful to dispute publicly with unbelievers, under certain conditions. To discuss as doubting the truth of the faith, is a sin; to discuss for the purpose of refuting error, is praiseworthy” (II-II, Q. x, a. 7).

Also, as someone has already pointed out, an Imprimatur in a piece of writing merely states that the writing is free of doctrinal errors. It in no way declares the piece of writing to be dogmatic, infallible, or a papal decree or anything of the sort.

Now, I am sure that you and your readers will find many ways to poke holes in what I have said, or to lob unpleasant accusations about the Catholic Church about, and that’s fine, I’m prepared for that. I simply could not just ignore this post.

Your R. Catholic friend is correct, Vatican II changed a lot of both social and theological issues, sure it is not perfect but it was a radical change from the Latin Mass. I was a Roman Catholic raised in Ireland, and lived thru the Latine Mass and changes.
Fr. Robert

Hope your wife is doing well. Blessings to you both.

She is doing great praise God!

Thank you for asking, friend.

- Jeff H

Habakkuk 2:4b “but the righteous shall live by his faith.”

Amen and thanks be to God!!

Matthew – They might say that as Catholic apologists always play the chameleon to suit their purposes yet they are still wrong because this was a papal, infallible decree never annulled. And how could something that is infallible ever be annulled or removed from the books? That would mean the Papacy/Magisterium is wrong and we “know” Rome is never wrong.

Amen Habakkuk.

“that sort of restriction actually went out with Vatican II. It is not Dogma, but a Discipline open to change, and it did. It falls under the same category of how Catholics could not attend Protestant religious services before Vatican II, but that has changed. It is not a cornerstone of the Faith or anything.”.

Any thoughts on this Brother Michael?

We beg this in Jesus name
Amen