Posted on 04/10/2013 9:10:06 AM PDT by marshmallow
I think all of us were distressed by the fragility of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI when we saw him greet his successor, Pope Francis. The footage was almost too painful to watch. Now, according to the excellent Fr Ray Blake, a Spanish newspaper says he is suffering from something "very severe", and that "we won't have us with him for very much longer".
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
What a macabre statement. Are you taking bets?
We praise Thee and we adore Thee.
Grant, we beseech Thee, Thy saintly servant and our Holy Father Pope Emeritus Benedict peace and serenity in his remaining days on earth.
May Thy name be praised above all names and may Thy papacy be ever stronger.
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, in the company of St. Peter and all the sainted popes, amen.
“I am not in any way trying to minimise his illness and or suffering but every single Pope - save Celestine (whose circumstances were completely different than were Benedict’s) - has lived and died as Pope...”
Yes, Celestine’s circumstances were different, but he abdicated because he wanted to return to his pre-papal life. In other words, he didn’t even try to live out his life as Pope. If this was an allowable reason, then why is it an issue for Benedict XVI? Obviously we don’t want this to become the norm, but 2 popes abdicating in hundreds of years doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to be the norm now.
Yeah, nothing about this report sounds credible to me.
It is an office, after all.and a very demanding one. He is just about the third oldest man to hold it. Other bishops stand down, and i think his doing so will lead to other prelates to shut up and live out their lives in lesser roles.We have is but one pope. It was a wise move to make all cardinals over 80 to give up the right to choose the pope.
The obvious thing is that Benedict is a VERY old man, and he has been physically frail for many years. He seems not to have wanted see the Church repeat what happened during the last five years of John Paul’s life.
And why are you calling him Pope Emeritus? He is not a Pope in any way shape or form. He abdicated. He ought be called Bishop Emeritus.
Out of all of the Popes, Celestine was the rarest of exceptions but, already, he is being cited as normative which is indicative of how rapidly we become inured to novelty if it is a Pope who personally institutes that novelty.
I will take a few moments to search for and then post the reaction to this revolutionary act which was so contrary to traditional praxis and the Bible; think about the men of the Bible and what they accomplished in their old age..
I am having trouble copying the full interview with the great Roman, Cardinal Ottaviani that I have (I downloaded it as a file) but his response to this radical and foolish act was to cite the Bible and the "multicentennial tradition" against this revolutionary act and he predicted that this would lead to the retirement of Popes - and here we are today as Catholics praising these revolutionary acts and defending the Papal retirement and insisting that age is a barrier to wisdom and claiming that a Cardinal over 80 ought not elect a Pope and that naturalism is contrary to the multicentennial tradition, the Bible, and Ecclesiastical praxis
Be that as it may, this practice has gone on forever in one guise or another. Bishops who have gotten long in the tooth have had co-adjutors appointed to “assist,” them and of course to replace them when the time came. It worked at thew parish level, too. You might remember the film “Going my Way,” My own diocese suffered with a dying bishop for several years, and his dynamic replacement has recently been promoted to a much large diocese leaving behind a full seminary. and a list of other spiritual and material accomplishments. God willing he will have more than 10 years before he has to retire., although, as is so often with such energetic men, he had to contend with a sick spell. We all get old. As a guy beyond the “age,” I can testify that there is no fool like an old fool, that joint do wear out and brain cells die etc, etc. etc.
Saint Teresa of Avila, Foundations
Shun novelties; especially Papal novelties
To Our Venerable Brothers, Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and Bishops. Venerable Brothers, Greetings and Apostolic Benediction.According to the custom of Our ancestors, We are about to assume Our pontificate in the church of the Lateran. This office has been granted to Us, even though We are humble and unworthy. We open Our heart with joy to you, venerable brothers, whom God has given to Us as helpers in the conduct of so great an administration. We are pleased to let you know the intimate sentiments of Our will. We also think it helpful to communicate those things from which the Christian cause may benefit. For the duty of Our office is not only to feed, rule, and direct the lambs, namely the Christian people, but also the sheep, that is the clergy.
2. We rejoice and praise Christ, who raised up shepherds for the safekeeping of His flock. These shepherds vigilantly lead their flocks so as not to lose even one of those they have received from the Father. For We know well, venerable brothers, your unshakeable faith, your zeal for religion, your sanctity of life, and your singular prudence. Co-workers such as you make Us happy and confident. This pleasant situation encourages Us when We fear because of the great responsibility of Our office, and it refreshes and strengthens Us when We feel overwhelmed by so many serious concerns. We shall not detain you with a long sermon to remind you what things are required to perform sacred duties well, what the canons prescribe lest anyone depart from vigilance over his flock, and what attention ought to be given in preparing and accepting ministers. Rather We call upon God the Savior that He may protect you with His omnipresent divinity and bless your activities and endeavors with happy success.
3. Although God may console Us with you, We are nonetheless sad. This is due to the numberless errors and the teachings of perverse doctrines which, no longer secretly and clandestinely but openly and vigorously, attack the Catholic faith. You know how evil men have raised the standard of revolt against religion through philosophy (of which they proclaim themselves doctors) and through empty fallacies devised according to natural reason. In the first place, the Roman See is assailed and the bonds of unity are, every day, being severed. The authority of the Church is weakened and the protectors of things sacred are snatched away and held in contempt. The holy precepts are despised, the celebration of divine offices is ridiculed, and the worship of God is cursed by the sinner.[1] All things which concern religion are relegated to the fables of old women and the superstitions of priests. Truly lions have roared in Israel.[2] With tears We say: "Truly they have conspired against the Lord and against His Christ." Truly the impious have said: "Raze it, raze it down to its foundations."
Principles of Catholic Theology: Joseph Ratzinger
"The task is not, therefore, to suppress the Council [Vatican II] but to discover the real Council and to deepen its true intention in the light of present experience. That means there can be no return to the Syllabus, which may have marked the first stage in the confrontation with liberalism and a newly conceived Marxism but cannot be the last stage…. The fact is, as Hans Urs von Balthasar pointed out as early as 1952, that the ‘demolition of the bastions’ is a long-overdue task.
"The Church cannot choose the times in which she will live…. She must relinquish many of the things that have hitherto spelled security for her and that she has taken for granted. She must demolish longstanding bastions and trust solely to the shield of faith."
Pope vs Pope and yet we constantly here talk of continuity and no rupture when, in fact, many of the previous Papal teachings that were vacated by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger CLEARLY were intended as definitive for all time and one even was promulgated with an automatic excommunication for any cleric who violated it; and, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger took the Oath against Modernism promising before God that he would abide by the very teachings he later vacated as Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of The Faith
Well, the novelties tend to be those that are slipped in by persons other than the pope/bishop/pastor.
I agree that the term “pope emeritus” is unfortunate , except that the word is just short for patriarch.
I have to wonder if there might be a disease track that involves mental impairment in play. Physical discomfort is one thing, but the thought of mental deterioration would have given Pope Benedict serious reason for contemplating resigning - because he could have damaged the church by unsound thought.
This is pure speculation, but I believe it to be germane. If Benedict thought that he would misspeak or, perhaps worse, allow others to corrupt the church’s teaching because his mind was being affected by disease, I believe he would resign. I do not see the man resigning over physical impairment.
Just my opinion.
Pope Emeritus is the title they gave him
Pope Emeritus” or second Pope?
THE CAMERLENGO WITH HIS "TEAM" OF CARDINALS Italian Catholic periodical, Civiltà Cattolica would prefer to call Benedict XVI “Bishop Emeritus of Rome”. Canonists contest Ratzinger’s choice
ANDREA TORNIELLI
VATICAN CITY
“Pope Emeritus” or “Emeritus Roman Pontiff”: these are the titles Benedict XVI chose for himself at the end of his pontificate. This is according to Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi, who reported Benedict XVI’s decision communicated to him by the former Pope’s personal secretary, Georg Gänswein. But in an article published in Civiltà Cattolica, one of Italy’s oldest Catholic periodicals, Canonist Gianfranco Ghirlanda suggested a more suitable title would be “Bishop Emeritus of Rome”. Other Canonists preferred the term “former Pope”, added to the name Joseph Ratzinger, scrapping the papal name Benedict XVI which is linked to the papal acts of his eight years as leader of the Catholic Church.
This issue of Civiltà Cattolica never reached news stands so the public was only informed of Ratzinger’s choice. But no one has quite realised the implications of the existence of a Pope and a “Pope Emeritus”. Benedict XVI cleared the field of any potential objections, by pledging complete respect and obedience to his successor, whoever this turned out to be. The fact remains, however, that the outgoing Pope is no longer Pope, regardless of whether he continues to give his whole life in service to the Church, through intercessory prayer, “hidden from the world.”
“He who gives up the papal ministry for any reason other than death, remains a bishop of course, but is no longer pope as he loses all primatial power because he did not gain this through Episcopal consecration but directly from Christ, after his legitimate election,” Fr. Ghirlanda wrote. If we go by this statement, attributing the title of Pope, albeit Emeritus, to Joseph Ratzinger is problematic. Referring to him as “former Pope” or “former Roman Pontiff” is quite different. These definitions clearly indicate that Ratzinger has renounced the papacy definitively as they contain a reference to the past. “Pope Emeritus” on the other hand risks insinuating he is a second Pope.
One gets the impression that little reflection was given to Ratzinger’s current title, from both a canonistic and theological point of view. It is not Ratzinger’s resignation that is being questioned, which is in compliance with the Code of Canon Law, but the need for careful reflection when thinking about how the former pope fits into the Holy See framework now.
I stand corrected! thanks
I wasn’t against Pope Benedict XVI stepping down before, but now that I know why, I feel it was a horrible decision and reflects poorly on the man.
I'll let one of my favorite authors speak to that truth:
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
- Samuel Langhorne Clemens, better known as Mark Twain (November 30, 1835 – April 21, 1910)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.