An Unnecessary Clarification
I wrote yesterday:
In Italy, every university Professor is called, upon retirement, “Professore Emerito”.
This is meant to mean exactly what Benedict stated: the professor is not in charge anymore, but the honour of the position remains with him forever, it stays with him for life.
No one thinks he still has the job.
Nobody.
Not one.
The words and the concept are elementarily clear to every Italian, and Ratzinger has lived there for the better part of his life. It is clear enough what he wanted to say. The rest is fluff.
This is not difficult to understand for anyone who takes the time to, actually, read.
No Italian thinks that a Professore Emerito still has the job.
Nobody.
Not one.
What the word mean, is that the man is now retired, and another one is teaching in his place.
Professore Emerito is, very simply, how you call a retired professor.
This is exactly why Benedict has chosen the title of Pontiff Emeritus, and he explicitly said that he does not want to be the one in charge anymore. He very clearly wanted to convey exactly this meaning.
Therefore, I am (emphatically) not stating that nobody believes that Benedict is still the reigning Pope.
I am, obviously, well aware that there are people who keep floating this absurd idea.
This is exactly why I write blog posts refuting it.
I don’t like being misrepresented, and I do not think this is, whether you agree with me or not, fair to this little effort.
M
Share this:
Posted on November 22, 2018, in Traditional Catholicism. Bookmark the permalink. 16 Comments.
Mundabor's Blog 
Well it’s No! Nay! Never!
No! Nay! Never—No More!
If so, Mundy, perhaps methinks our good Benny should doff the damn Whites; Depart the Vatican; say “Call me Joe;” stop talking about the irrevocable “for forever” Petrine ministry; and fire fem Ganswein as his official spokesman. Not to mention publicly DISAVOW all talk of a split papacy, the creation of a papal dyarchy, and the creation of a new kind of papacy with two members, an “active” and a “contemplative.”
Barnhardt has a salient argument. And the better of the argument in this humble sheep’s opinion.
When Celestine V resigned, the “Great Refusal” back in 1294, he didn’t say call me Pope Emeritus! He said here’re the whites; call me Peter of Morrone; and: “I’m outta here! Adios!”
We love Benedict despite whatever considerable confusion and perhaps peril into which he has plunged Holy Mother Church. We’d love him whether he validly resigned or not. Yet it would appear indeed that he is clearly still the one and only living and reigning Pope—de jure if not de facto—even if he has let go the reins and given them to a usurper. Where are the papal protections of infallibility on faith and morals of Bergoglio? No Hell? Jesus “became the devil for us?” The Blessed Mother cursed God and called the St. Gabriel “Liar!” from the foot of the Cross?? Please the man’s a criminal and raging heretic in his statements on the Faith.
It’s Francis or Fatima. Important to know in that equation Who Francis is—and it ain’t Pope.
Anti-Pope, Anyone?
He has not disavowed Francis. Why wouldyou expect that he disavows Gaenswein?
It leads from absurdity to absurdity. You would have a legitimate Pope who does not challenge the illegitimate one.
Nonsense.
M
Suppose the legitimate Pope is scared shitless….like Peter when he was hanging around the charcoal fire getting all warmed up when he was confronted and accused of being one of Christ’s followers???
3 times the charm.
Supposition allow pretty much everyone to believe pretty much everything.
Yes. Now you have it. Would that it were nonsense.
Alegitimate Pope who does not challenge the illegitimate usurper—who as you well know has a propensity for heretical utterance, satanic paraphernalia i.e. the Stang, and a fetish for fags as he promotes professes establishes and defends them remorselessly—whether for fear of the wolves or of something else.
Effeminacy is a problem in the Church hierarchy. If they’re not fags they’re fems in about ninety percent of the cases.
In Pope Benedict’s case, however, there well could be something else going on here partly due to his flashes of intellectual brilliance and partly to his modernist nominalist mindset, a dangerous combination.
Are you familiar with Deus Ex Machina’s declared state of necessity theory?
I read it some time ago, and I was not persuaded. I believe in the reality about me, not about the theories I make in order to reconcile a reality I do not like with my own desires.
You make an extremely valid point about Benedict: if lawful Pope does not challenge alleged antipope, and actually praises him, then lawful pope is not one iota less heretical than alleged antipope an dtherefor eless illegitimate.
Every Benedict-ism ends in sedevacantism, from whatever angle you see it.
The comparison of a resignation of a professorship is not the same as an abidication of the papacy. If the abdication is done freely ( not under coercion)
The form and process of the abdication of the papacy must be done properly; otherwise the abdication is deemed null and void and the status quo of what was, prior to the faulty/ invalid abdication becomes again the status quo.
Retiring from a professorship is very different.
The premise is wrong.
It is not for you to say in which way a Pope should resign. Benedict is an experienced theologian, and there is no doubt he intended to resign.
“Anyone who accepts the Petrine ministry no longer has any privacy. He belongs always and completely to everyone, to the whole Church… “The ‘always’ is also a “forever”—there can no longer be a return to the private sphere.
My decision to resign THE ACTIVE EXCERSISE ( to become the passive one ) of the ministry does not revoke this. ”
Benedict XVI
General Audience, February 27, 2013, the day before his resignation
———————-
so, as HIM stated, he just let out the “ACTIVE” PART of the “ministry”, BUT THE “always” its also “FOREVER”…
CRYSTAL CLEAR?
on HIS own words, the ones that declared HIS OWN INTENTION?
Please.
What he is simply saying is: I cannot return to be a bishop, because this would mean diminishing the papacy.
Five years ago people found his way of abdication strange, but no one questioned the validity of the newly elected Pope. The fact that only now all these “doubt” emerge is further proof that all this Benedict-ism is just a way to rationalise away the unpleasant reality of a heretical papacy.
Cdl Ratzinger chose to remain in white, which, savvy as he is, understood would drive the confusion factor over the top. Echoing other comments perhaps, had he truly intended to *demonstrate* turning over of all concerning the See of Peter, he would have taken the attire of a simple bishop (or priest), or otherwise a monastic habit. More murky waters of VII, but at the end of the day, 1 picture = 1000 words; q.e.d.
Their goal is confusion and discord, as always.
NB, ..or perhaps now attired in a business suit, such as when he was a young priest.
He…
I do not think the decision to keep the white and the title was white. I think it was the fruit of vanity and the desire to avoid being considered (very likely, rightly so, as we know now) a coward.
Had he simply resigned and retired himself into, say, a monastery, posterity would have been much kinder to him.
After reading the comments here and on other blogs about this controversy, this scenario occurred to me. Suppose the conclave of March, 2013, elected a Pius XIII instead of Jorge the Horrible. And suppose this hypothetical traditional pope rescinded all of the Vatican II changes, abolished the Novus Ordo mass, and it was like 1960 all over again in the Catholic Church. Would the folks who are crying over Benedict now, be speculating about an invalid resignation? More likely, he would be vaguely remembered as the moderate pope who resigned to pave the way for Pope Wonderful.
Back to the present situation, it doesn’t matter how elaborate and well thought out the invalid election/resignation theories are. The same goes for deposing him on the grounds of heresy. Only the cardinals and bishops have the power to do anything, and I doubt they would act even if the proof were staring them in the face. Most of them agree with the direction that Francis is taking the Church. Unless a revelation comes out that Francis personally committed an abuse or another crime back in Argentina, I think we are stuck with him until God intervenes.
Yes, I have made your point many times myself. Five years of atrocious pontificate, and there comes the fantasies about a pope who has not really done what he has solemnly states he has done, and an “anti”pope who is is not “antied” by anyone.
Mind, if Benedict has resigned every title and had closed himself in a monastery, the “escape from reality” crowd would say that he has been forced by evil cardinals, or has been given a magic potion, or has been hypnotised into abdicating…