I accept that he said he is not Pope and I will take him at his word. But with all due respect to Cardinal Ratzinger/Pope Emeritus Benedict, the answers he gave in that letter are wholly unsatisfactory. He should not be in the Vatican. He should not be called Your Holiness. He should not be called Pope Emeritus. He should not be wearing the Papal Ring. He should not be wearing the Papal White. No statements about a contemplative part of the papacy should have been made. And on and on and on. These were Big, Colossal, and as Trump would say YUUUUGE mistakes.
Prophecies give us a hint of what might be happening, but we can't base decisions like this on them. Especially ones that can be taken in several different ways.
The bizarre stories of the four other popes to have resigned in the last 1,000 years On Feb. 28, Pope Benedict XVI will become the first pope to resign in almost 600 years. That's not just tradition — it's dogma. The Washington Post's Debbi Wilgoren cited a theological expert in explaining, "Most modern popes have felt that resignation is unacceptable except in cases of an incurable or debilitating disease — that paternity, in the words of Paul IV, cannot be resigned." But Benedict XVI's shocking resignation is even more curious when compared to the handful of others who have left the powerful office willingly. In the past 1000 years, only four other popes have resigned. Here are their unusual stories, which are also an indication of just how much the church has changed. Pope Benedict IX, in 1045: At age 33 and about 10 years into his tumultuous term, the Rome-born pope resigned so that he could get married – and to collect some cash from his godfather, also Roman, who paid Benedict IX to step down so that he might replace him, according to British historian Reginald L. Poole's definitive and much-cited history of the 11th century. Pope Gregory VI, in 1046: The same man who had bribed and replaced his godson ended up leaving the office himself only a year later, according to Poole's account. The trouble began when Benedict IX failed to secure the bride he'd resigned for, leading him to change his mind and return to the Vatican. Both popes remained in the city, both claiming to rule the Catholic church, for several months. That fall, the increasingly despondent clergy called on the German Emperor Henry III, of the Holy Roman Empire, to invade Rome and remove them both. When Henry III arrived, he treated Gregory VI as the rightful pope but urged him to stand before a council of fellow church leaders. The bishops urged Gregory VI to resign for bribing his way into office. Though the fresh new pope argued that he had done nothing wrong in buying the papacy, he stepped down anyway. Pope Celestine V, in 1294: After only five months in office, the somber Sicilian pope formally decreed that popes now had the right to resign, which he immediately used. according to a report in the Guardian. He wrote, referring to himself in the third person, that he had resigned out of "the desire for humility, for a purer life, for a stainless conscience, the deficiencies of his own physical strength, his ignorance, the perverseness of the people, his longing for the tranquility of his former life." He became a hermit, but two years later was dragged out of solitude by his successor, who locked him up in an Italian castle. Celestine died 10 months later. Pope Gregory XII, in 1415: The elderly Venetian had held the office for 10 years, but he was not the only pope. For decades, the Western Schism had left Europe with two popes, one in Rome and one in the French city of Avignon, according to Britannica. The schism's causes were political rather than theological: the pope had tremendous power over European politics, which had led its kings to become gradually more aggressive in manipulating the church's leaders. Gregory XII resigned so that a special council in Constance, which is today a German city, could excommunicate the Avignon-based pope and start fresh with a new, single leader of the Catholic church. Pope Benedict XVI, in 2013: Citing health reasons from old age, he announced today that he will step down on Feb. 28. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...0-years/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6407cea1f516 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ (consider the source) List of Papal Renunciations: and the "Conditional Renunciations Not Put Into Practice" is also interesting: "Before setting out for Paris to crown Napoleon in 1804, Pope Pius VII (1800–1823) signed a document of renunciation to take effect if he were imprisoned in France.[2] During World War II, Pope Pius XII drew up a document ordering that his resignation take effect immediately if he were kidnapped by the Nazis, as was thought likely in August 1943. It was thought that the College of Cardinals would evacuate to a neutral country, perhaps Portugal, and elect his successor.[23] According to longtime curial official Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, Pope Paul VI hand wrote two letters in the late 1960s or 1970, well before his death, in anticipation of an incapacitating illness. One letter was addressed to the College of Cardinals, the other to the Secretary of State, whose name was not specified. Pope John Paul II showed them to Re, and they were shown to Pope Benedict XVI in 2003.[24][25] In 2018, Paul's letter dated 2 May 1965 and addressed to the dean of the College of Cardinals was published. He wrote that "In case of infirmity, which is believed to be incurable or is of long duration and which impedes us from sufficiently exercising the functions of our apostolic ministry; or in the case of another serious and prolonged impediment", he renounced his office "both as bishop of Rome as well as head of the same holy Catholic Church".[26] Pope John Paul II wrote a letter in 1989 offering to resign if he became incapacitated. The first said that if ill health or some other unforeseen difficulty prevented him from "sufficiently carrying out the functions of my apostolic ministry ... I renounce my sacred and canonical office, both as bishop of Rome as well as head of the holy Catholic Church." In 1994 he wrote a document that he apparently planned to read aloud, that explained that he had determined he could not resign merely because of age, as other bishops are required to do, but only "in the presence of an incurable illness or an impediment", and that he would therefore continue in office.[27][28] He prayed in his will, written in 2000, that God "would help me to recognise how long I must continue this service", suggesting that renunciation was possible.[29] In the weeks before his death in 2005, there was press speculation that John Paul might resign because of his failing health.[30] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_renunciation#List_of_papal_renunciations I had heard as well from someone who knew well a person close to the Pope, a known figure of the Divine Mercy apostolate, that during his suffering Pope JPII realized that his whole pontificate had been and was intended to be entirely about this Mercy and the spread of this devotion that so needed to come to the world before the day of justice. Because of this he offered his life to the end w/ its intensity of suffering rather than resignation, as the Pope in order to extend the time of Mercy before Justice was scheduled to begin "kissing" mercy and grow until the time when there will be only justice. Originally this time was meant to be the year 2000 but it was extended until 2005 because of this offering, the year of this Pope's death.
Yes, he made a dog's dinner of his resignation, and the Cardinals made a dog's dinner of choosing his successor. Meanwhile back in the jungle, Cardinals Scicluna and Cupich have given interviews to the favoured news (spin?) outlets, letting us know what can be expected from the February Synod. Here's the CWR synopsis: https://www.catholicworldreport.com...alking-points-but-are-silent-on-key-problems/ I'm not expecting much other than the usual expressions of shame and promises to get it right next time, probably by way of numerous new committees with expense accounts, and all members, including lay members, carefully chosen or elected from a bevvy of candidates most likely products of the Jesuit atheist conveyor belts they call Catholic educational institutions. Since the Pope and his cabal would have us believe that celibacy is the cause of sexual abuse, I expect the big announcement from the Synod to be a decision to ordain married men and possibly some announcement about a female ordained diaconate. Given the hierarchy's fondness for all things homosexual, I have zero confidence that anything will be done about the seminaries. Places like Gaynooth have nothing to fear from this Synod.
I think it is very mysterious. The circumstances of his resignation seem mysterio but to speculate...that seems a slippery slope..
Yes mysterio is the word for it. I would definitely say the circumstances are mysterio Samrt phon...bah!
That is an excellent and profound point by Cardinal Mueller, that there is no such thing as homosexuality as a category, merely sinners and their sins. This is a truth that these proud perverts, with their self-aggrandising pride, will be loath to hear. This approach disembowels the concept of a homosexual identity and reduces it to a mere disgusting act. It is historical. Even the homosexualist philosopher Foucault admitted as much, if I remember correctly, when he stated that the notion of a homosexual identity is one which has only existed for 150 years or so. Before that there were only men who commited sodomitic acts. I think Cardinal Mueller is doing very well in a most difficult situation. I don't think he sat on the fence over AL-he categorically stated that all ambiguities within it had to be interpreted within the light of Tradition. This was almost certainly the primary reason he was fired from the CDF. It is necessary at the present time for those who wish to defend the True Church to be as innocent as a dove and as wily as a fox. I am beginning to think that, while Cardinals Bourke and Sarah fulfill the first criterion, it is Cardinal Mueller who is proving most adept at the second. A good counterpoint to the liberal spin of 'Crux' upon Cardinal Mueller's comments can be found at Father Hunwicke these last few days, whereby he also sings the praises of that other innocent fox, Bishop Schneider, another who astutely skewers identity politics. He also points out that Father Fessio, one of that endangered breed of orthodox Jesuits, has come out all fists flying-Saint Ignatius is undoubtedly proud.
A pope when he dies, remains a pope, I understand, even if he finds himself in Hell. Correct me if I'm wrong. Logically, this implies that a retired one can hardly stop being a pope for that period only to return to the role when he pops his clogs, red or otherwise. The issue is a real dilemma. We are in an era of two living popes, in some manner or form. We are to presume that PF is the valid, executive one, of course, but it is ambiguous how the whole episode fits into the prophecies.
Pope Benedict XVI is a highly intelligent man. I don't believe they were mistakes, but deliberate words and actions meant for us to understand the real situation. There is no other reasonable way to interpret them, except that he never really resigned.
P., Imho, the only big, colossal and huge mistake was that Pope Benedict resigned. It is up to him how he wants to live out the rest of his life and I am sure that my suggestions on how to do that would not be better than his own. I prefer seeing him in Papal White than in something like the following, lol. Aren't retired bishops called bishop emeritus and since he is still alive his ring has not been destroyed yet but "The ring is marked with a cross on the upper part as a symbol of the end of the papacy". The way he has chosen to live the rest of his life could be a matter of respect for the office that he held. We know that the poor man can't drink a beer without being ridiculed. So, I think that he is doing the best that he can to stay out of the headlines and I am thankful that he is mainly living a life of prayer and contemplation. He also feels obligated to show respect for Pope Francis and therefore, he has only spoken up a few times like when he was asked about the review of some books that Pope Francis wrote. He remained obedient but he admitted that he was not going to make the time to read them. I think that he is trying to minimize the amount of controversy that is created by having a pope and a pope emeritus but obviously not all controversy can be avoided especially since there are many people who would really like for the current papacy to have never happened. I think that we have also discussed how this is part of our chastisement. I can't help but compare this discussion to President Trump in regard to the Democrats and even some Republicans doing almost anything to have him impeached. I am not saying that I have not been suspicious about the reason for Pope Benedict's resignation but imho you are correct in accepting that he is no longer the pope. I am also not saying that I have not been suspicious about how Pope Francis rose to the papal throne. In addition, it is scary that many things appear to have been rigged in one way or another over the past few years. Dolours just posted the following article on another thread and it is more evidence of this, https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2018/11/27/the-youth-synod-and-the-birth-of-the-synodal-church/ **************************************************************** "Private meeting with Pope emeritus Benedict XVI on Wednesday, November 28th. Gift of the image of the Virgin to the child carried out for the fiftieth anniversary of the priestly ordination of the Cardinal." [Google translation]
Those Popes who have died remain on the roll of Popes because it is part of historical fact, but the office of Pope is an administrative one. It is not sacramental as are the ordination to priest and bishop. It does not create an indelible mark on the soul. The office can be resigned. If we study the men who have resigned the office in the past they always went back to their former title. Always. There is no Emeritus position. They also left Rome and went back to whatever they were doing before or retired to a monastery or some such (or were imprisoned). Not a single one of them continued to be called Holiness, or wore white, or wore the papal ring, or continued to use their papal name, or continued to live in the Vatican, or any such nonsense.
earthtoangels, I believe the articles indicate their bishop was giving them a hard time, too. Safe in the Father's Arms!
My impression of Cardinal Muller is that he is Catholic to the core. Learned and highly intelligent, he seems to have an unparalleled knowledge of Church teaching and an ability to explain that teaching clearly to those of us who don't have doctorates in theology, philosophy or canon law. When Cardinal Muller speaks, I hear the voice of a shepherd. I haven't read Fr. Hunwicke's blog but I did read the LifeSite article which included a reference to Fr. Fessio's defence of Cardinal Muller after the disgraceful attacks on him coming from Germany. Bishop Schneider, quoted in the same article, hit the nail on the head with this comment about those promoting the homo-heresy in the Church: “They disguise their heresy and apostasy, for instance, with the sophistic and gnostic expression “further development of Catholic moral doctrine”. Cardinal Muller disappointed me when he didn't support the dubia. Perhaps he considered that to be the prudent approach but in the end he had no choice but to affirm Church teaching although he never did support the dubia. I don't think that his statement about AL was the only reason he got the boot. It provided Pope Francis with an excuse, but I think that Muller's days were numbered from the minute Pope Francis was elected. He was hated by the modernists, especially for his efforts to deal with predator priests. He wasn't merciful enough for Pope Francis and I think that the Pope suspected that Cardinal Muller was the source of the comment about the distinction between predator priests with Cardinal friends and those without Cardinal friends. Cardinal Muller actually said something similar in the Raymond Arroyo interview. Some of those "Cardinal friends" were very close to Pope Francis so there was no chance of his escaping the axe of mercy. Maybe he hopes now that the Pope will use him to mend fences with the Bishops the likes of Spadaro et al have been badmouthing on the Pope's behalf. Tornielli, Crux and the rest of the usual suspects are making a big deal about Cardinal Muller saying that he believes Pope Francis genuinely wants to tackle the sex abuse crisis. Pope Francis has no choice but to tackle the problem of the abuse of minors. Secular powers will hold his feet to the fire on that, but secular powers aren't interested in the problems of a homosexual culture in the priesthood and sexual predation in seminaries. Cardinal Muller didn't say that the Pope acknowledges the root cause of the vast majority of abuse cases. No matter how genuine he is, the Pope can't fix the problem if he won't face up to the root of it, and it isn't celibacy. Was the abuse of seminarians mentioned in the Tornielli interview? I don't think so, and I can't imagine Tornielli asking a question that might get an answer which didn't fit the Vatican's agenda.
