Posted on 04/10/2016 12:47:03 PM PDT by MagillaX
I am at a quandary, Not knowing if even discussing the situation with others is disrespectful and causing scandal. We live in a time with two living Popes, Pope Francis and Pope Emeritus. From what I can tell when a Pope can retire there is not some dogmatic teaching on the topic. Some quote past occurrences but actual tradition seems to side on Popes remaining Pope until death. With some past Popes in debate of the issue.
The question I have is what does this mean for a catholic. I do understand that Pope Francis is still a legitimate bishop with the respect of office that holds and he is the present leader of the Catholic faithful.
First let me say I am sure that it would be inappropriate for any Catholic to show disrespect. I would have the respect of office for him just as I would for the patriarch of the orthodox faith.
But if we have and invalid appointment due to a misunderstanding of retirement from office how does a faithful catholic react to pronouncements made from Pope Francis. Especially if his office is valid. I would be interested in hearing from those people who have thoughts on the subject that are thoughtful and not disrespectful
If Catholics are put into a double minded state because of the religious leanings or urgings of their church, they can tend to make bad decisions about a man based on whether he is religious or not
World view is shaped greatly by a man's understanding of who and what he is IN the world, and religion .. or a spiritual consciousness .. plays a large role in that perception.
Muzzies kill with very little thought to the fact that it is a human, God given life they are taking, something we westerners can't do ... it is not part of our DNA ... (probably) because of a long standing and deeply rooted spiritual understanding of human life
ALL things work .. together ...
If your commanding officer gives you an immoral order, you decline to fulfill that order whatever the cost and continue to respect his lawful authority everywhere else.
And don't get too caught up in this stuff...if the devil can't get you to leave the Catholic faith, he will busy you with the minutiae of it so that you don't pray, don't do acts of charity, etc. etc. Pray, frequent the sacraments, do all the things you need to do.
Especially I do not think poring over the minutiae of the resignation/conclave looking for technical invalidities is useful for the laity.
No, it does not qualify for a Catholic Caucus label.
If provocative comments hurt your feelings perhaps it would be best if you don’t participate on open threads and only read and post on qualified Caucus threads.
I hope your questions are sincere.
Pope Benedict resigned “in such a way that the See will be vacant.” I.e., after his resignation, there was no Bishop of Rome.
Benedict IS NOT POPE. Francis’s election was just as valid as if Benedict had died.
Benedict had intended to become Cardinal Ratzinger again, but was pressured to be “Pope Emeritus.” Either way, BENEDICT IS NOT POPE.
But we don’t have two living Popes. We have one Pope (Francis) and we have a former Pope who abdicated (Benedict) — and he is not Pope.
Yes, but I do not know how
I am sincere and I believe it is a valid concern. From what I have read there is a history of disagreement if a Pope can retire even among past Popes themselves. And from what I understand Pope John Paul II stated he saw retirement as only viable if the Pope was incapacitated.
I believe it was Pope Boniface viii who became Pope after Pope Celestine abdicated. And there seems to be some discussion that Pope Boniface saw his legitimacy challenged while Pope Celestine lived.
Under Canon law the Pope can do pretty much anything except make a square circle.
There is simply no doubt the a Pope can resign. There is no doubt that Benedict DID resign. The See was vacant—as vacant as if Benedict had died.
The fact that Benedict is called “Pope Emeritus” is meaningless—and unfortunate. That he wears white is likewise meaningless and unfortunate. He is not THE Pope. He is no longer A Pope. He is a Cardinal Archbishop who WAS Pope.
The fact that Bergoglio is a disgrace is causing a lot of people to pine for a good Pope. But the fact remains: Bergoglio is the Pope. He will be Pope until he dies or resigns.
Even though Canon law though contains infallible documents it is not in of itself infallible. If anyone could demonstrate a popes resignation is an infallible church teaching it would be welcome.
Canon Law is law, not teaching. It contains nothing infallible, unless it repeats some dogma in passing, as a given.
Only TEACHING can be infallible.
No ACTION can be “infallible.” The term has NO MEANING in relation to ACTIONS.
A Pope can do anything except that which is forbidden by the moral law. He can CERTAINLY resign the Papacy if he chooses.
I am telling you: Benedict WAS Pope. Francis IS Pope.
If you continue to chew on this bone, you are just being obstinate. Drop it, for the sake of your own moral and mental health. The well-being of the Church and the world does not depend on your prying into such matters, satisfying your curiosity, or sowing seeds of doubt in others’ minds.
You have no business occupying yourself with this issue, UNLESS YOU HAVE PLANS TO GO TO ROME, AND LEVITATE AT A PAPAL AUDIENCE, AND FROM THE CEILING INSTRUCT THE POPE THAT HE MUST RESIGN.
Well all the fun got started again late last week when that new document on the family came out.
If the Pope has the power to bind or loose, why can't he loose himself?
There is so much projection contained in your comment.
Really? How much, in your opinion?
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.