Posted on 08/27/2021 9:35:11 AM PDT by viewfromthefrontier
Pope Francis could soon promulgate a new law (in the form of an Apostolic Constitution) to regulate the resignation of the Pope, and especially the status following the resignation of a Pontiff.
This is also to avoid a whole series of misleading interpretations on the existence of two Popes, on their cohabitation, on the thesis of “an enlarged papacy” and on other issues that, although not having touched the vast majority of the faithful, have fed the underground poisons of the so-called “Pope-vacantists,” [Note: “Pope” or “Papacy Vacantists”] who have come to hypothesize that the only true Pope is Ratzinger.
In short, it is not even excluded, although it would be sensational, that for the new law there has been no Pope Emeritus at all.
(Excerpt) Read more at joansrome.wordpress.com ...
I think the term is Sedevacantist and it goes back to Pius XII, IIRC. But I'm not Catholic.
I don’t know but some of the moves of this pope has led some of us to believe he is gearing up for the position of the false prophet as found in the book of Revelation.
“the underground poisons of [those] who have come to hypothesize that the only true Pope is Ratzinger.”
So, the theory (which is very tempting to me) is that Pope Benedict XVI is still pope because
1. He still references the charisms of the papacy as though he still has them,
2. He chose to refer to his position as “pope emeritus” instead of “former pope,” and “emeritus” means someone who is still recognized as retaining the described status, and
3. Only a pope can have the charisms of the papacy, by definition. If he believes he retains the charisms of the papacy, then he has not voluntarily ceased being the pope, and if he has not voluntarily ceased being the pope, he is still the one and only pope. It doesn’t matter if he is confused about this, or his actions cause others to be confused: if he still desires the papacy, he is still pope.
(2a: he has occasionally suggested his intent with having a second pope is so that second pope can administer the Church. Such an administerial role does not make one pope. In other cases, such a bishop is called a bishop adjutant. A bishop adjutant is still a bishop, but not THE bishop of that diocese. Rather, he is a titular bishop of another diocese. So an adjutant bishop of Rome is not a bishop of Rome, but a titular bishop of another diocese.)
So here’s the thing:
If Pope Francis promulgates an official explanation that “pope emeritus” means “former pope,” it certainly follows that any future pope who claims that title, knowing it means he is abdicating the papacy, will surely have willingly abdicated the papacy. But it won’t change a bloody thing about Pope Benedict’s papacy unless Pope Benedict were to say, “Yes, I affirm this is what I meant.”
IOW, only Pope Benedict can clarify that he is no longer Pope.
For one thing, it would make it easier for him to pick his successor. Otherwise the next Pope might be be someone who would derail the reset and return to tradition.
The Papacy is getting as crowded as the heavyweight boxing championship.
Further, of course it stands to reason that if Pope Francis is not pope, then of course he has no authority to define moral law. Since Pope Benedict yielded authority to administer the church to him, I suppose Pope Francis can define canon law, so again, his document would be relevant in any future abdications, but not to Pope Benedict.
He wouldn’t have any ability to pick his own successor anyway. Once the conclave is locked up, they do the picking.
“He wouldn’t have any ability to pick his own successor anyway. Once the conclave is locked up, they do the picking.”
Yeah but Pope Francis has stacked the Cardinal deck to elect a next Pope that will be a clone of this one.
So why is Pope Francis writing a document which can’t apply to Pope Benedict?
Catholics owe the pope a presumption of good will, so we can’t suppose that his intent is to simply inflame the judgmental passions of those who accept him as Pope against those whose reason he cannot budge. (It would be less sinful to suppose he is an idiot.) More likely, this rumor is related to the other rumor spreading which is that Pope Francis will himself abdicate the papacy and wants none of the confusion that surrounded Pope Benedict’s apparent abdication. The irony is that if he retires, with this document very clearly laying out, the definition of “pope emeritus,” it will become very easy for people to presume he has been an anti-pope, since anything he clarifies establishes a pope emeritus as no longer being a pope that Pope Benedict did NOT clarify can easily be seen as a distinction between Pope Benedict’s apparent abdication and his own abdication.
I'll just say this: if there truly is a debate about the legitimacy of two popes simultaneously and how that works it will not be resolved by just one of them writing a memo saying 'this is the answer'.
>> The Papacy is getting as crowded as the heavyweight boxing championship. <<
Not really. The most anyone recognizes is two popes. To discredit the Catholic church, so many anti-Catholic publications present various anti-popes as if their claim to the papacy is anything other than Cpl. Max Klinger’s claim to be Empress of Austria. It’s like conflating Pres. Trump’s claim he won the election with that crazy guy at the subway station who insists he’s the emperor of North America.
Yeah, but they’re just as stacked whether he resigns or dies.
I don’t believe that a power-mad tyrant like Bergoglio will ever resign.
I can, however, believe that Bergoglio is petty enough and tacky enough to promulgate some kind of edict abolishing the title and office of “Pope Emeritus” while Ratzinger is still alive.
The meat of the theory is that Benedict only resigned the ministry of the Papacy, not the office, as reflected in his own words.
His odd language paved the path for all this speculation...and the things you mentioned all added fuel to the fire.
The whole thing is very weird. Say what you want about Benedict, he wasn’t a stupid man that would use words loosely.
Legal games only matter to people who are in power, and want to play them.
Francis is in power, and has no need to play legal games. Benedict has retired, and (from my perspective) has made no move to publicly play legal games.
The key world is “publicly.” If Francis IS writing this, there is more going on beneath the surface.
>> Say what you want about Benedict, he wasn’t a stupid man that would use words loosely. <<
Inscrutibly intelligent... exorcist... known chess player.
Makes for interesting times.
Doesn’t she mean an Apostolic Exhortation?
An A.E. is not canon law!
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.