Abstract: According to well respected Professor of Canon Law, the supposedly resigning Benedict XVI intended to change the nature of the Papacy. His attempt has neither theological nor canonical foundation. The Pope lacks the authority to alter the nature of the Papacy. The Resignation suffers from a defect of intention which renders the act itself invalid. No one asserting the validity of the Resignation has come forward to present its theological or canonical bases. None has propounded a credible explanation for the bizarre and confusing spectacle of two men in white who both, mutually approving, call the other (and themselves) Pope. Rome has abandoned its duty to provide truth and clarity to the Faithful. The Faithful cannot be bound to obey that they permit intellectual violence to be inflicted upon themselves.
The Grand High Imperial Wizards of Smart have informed Catholics that the so-called resignation of Benedict is valid. If you need further explanation on how this can be, your very request ipso facto indicates that you are too dumb to possibly understand whatever drivel is slobbered out in the form of an answer. Expect all such requests to be ignored (just like those requests that our modern[ist] Churchmen attend to the salvation of souls). Catholic dummies need pictures, so here is one to help us understand that Benedict really (no, seriously!) resigned.
The Imperial Wizards of Smart want you to identify what everyone else already knows because it’s so jaw-droppingly obvious. We must answer the following multiple choice question.
Depicted above is
A. the Pope
B. The ingeniously expanded Petrine Ministry.
C. Your failure to pretend not to see Benedict XVI dressed as Pope.
D. Your failure to submit to being mentally raped into believing 1 pope = 2 men
E. Your success in being mentally raped, by seeing Jorge the Apostate as Pope
I. B, C and D
II. A, B and E
III. A, C and D
IV. all of the above
V. none of the above
(answer at bottom – no peeking!)
Can the Wizards please explain
the theological and canonical basis for what Pope Benedict XVI has attempted to do? SHUT UP, CRICKETS and let these high thinkers speak!
So with all the donation money flowing into certain sparkly, fancy and flickering Catholic blogs out there, the best defense they have to assert Bergoglio’s claim on the papacy is “because the Universal Church (infected with homo-heresy throughout) says so.” R-i-i-ght. However, does the visible Church’s authority not bear with it the concomitant responsibility to proclaim the Truth, free of error, and with clarity? We have a right to know whether Benedict XVI really and truly thinks he can bend reality and, whether he has intended change the nature of the Petrine Office through resigning the active ministry, while retaining the contemplative. Regarding the justification for this Papacy-altering aspect of the resignation, the present state of affairs remains wildly unclear; and unfortunately, interpretations externally imposed from well-intended (and bedazzling) blogs will not suffice. Without fulfilling their duty to be clear with the Faithful, the ideologues in Rome cannot claim the authority to compel the Faithful, as it were, “to obey because we say so.” For them to do so is not the use of Catholic authority, rather it is an exercise in the sheer will to power.
There is no canonical or theological basis
for what Benedict has attempted to do. Let’s reconnect with a little article from the Remnant, 03 July 2014, which doubtless many will recall. It is a quick and worthwhile re-read. Siscoe (of all people) adds commentary to key quotes by Italian writer Vittorio Messori, who himself discusses a piece by Professor of Canon Law Stefano Violi of the Faculty of Theology in Bologna and Lugano
“Messori asks the question, ‘would the Church then for the first time, truly have two Popes, one reigning and one emeritus?’, and then replies: It appears that this was the will of Joseph Ratzinger himself, with the renunciation of active service only and that it was “a solemn act of his magisterium’ to cite the canon lawyer [Professor Violi].”
-Oh, those Professors of Canon Law and their facile comments!
There is a BIG problem with Benedict’s resignation,
in that it attempts to simultaneously both retain and relinquish the Chair of Peter by way of handing part of the office to someone else. Thus is made manifest a defect in Benedict’s intention, which also looks a lot like a denial of the principle of non-contradiction. Further, understanding this flawed thinking at the nucleus of Benedict’s act, that he some how undertook to bifurcate the Chair of Peter, offers us the most complete explanation for why he remains in the Enclosure, wears white, and retains the title His Holiness. He didn’t intend to fully resign, which is another way of saying HE DIDN’T REALLY RESIGN, and therefore the only possibility is that he is still Pope.
I can admit that in 2005 and beyond I thought Benedict was the bee’s-knees, but not too much anymore. His disordered modernist intellect, manifest ever so dreadfully in his so-called resignation, actually supports the premise that his resignation is defective, therefore not valid, and thus leaving him Pope. Benedict’s philosophical affinity with Bergy is not only obvious now, but it further proves the point that something is wrong, and that the way out of this is not through Catholics’ pretending that two men in white are not an attempt to change the nature of the Papacy.
Why do the vast majority of Catholic voices avoid
discussing the obvious and confusing spectacle of two men in white, and their lack of any acceptable explanation? Perspective on this question arose unexpectedly from a conversation had with an elderly, loyal novus ordite. In assessing the decades-long run-up to the present state of affairs, we wound our way around to the recognition that vast swaths of Catholicism seemed to have been compromised for a long, long time before the wicked council. His exhausted takeaway was to wonder where God is in all that.
I understood in the comment what I myself experienced for a time during which the water of Catholic truth gradually rinsed the novus ordo slime out of my thinking, praying and believing. It seemed a feeling of fear, that we’re so buried in the regnant insanity of modern life and its effects on our religion, unveiled little by little, from the goofy worship, to the pederast clerics, to the coverup of the pederast clerics, etc., that we could never survive pressure of the ocean of iniquity on top of us, or hold our breath long enough to rise to the surface and breathe holy air.
Maybe this fear arises from a dread of being sucked down an epistemological black hole, from which we think we are suspended by one last strand of the fact of a Pope’s being Pope. If that tense strand snaps, maybe we won’t know where God is anymore. Worse yet, without that last strand of continuity with the past, that link of knowing who is Pope from Peter through to us, we will then be stripped of the very means of knowing anything. A real life Rod Serling production unfolds with us in principal roles. Unseen forces pull our identity as Catholics and the Faith itself, all into some terrifying void. As if the Church Herself, populated by that part of the human race that escaped contraception and abortion just long enough to discover the meaning of the word dysfunction, and commit mortal sins they never learned were mortal sins; could not possibly endure such desolation; could not possibly have Her visible structure’s future left to us, and be expected to survive. The state of exhaustion and entropy induced by the enemy, in spite of our prayers, threatens to overcome with finality. – But it won’t.
These ecclesiastical infiltrators have perpetuated their scam for half a century, in no small part due to the acceptance of the false pretenses upon which they act. Witness the funny language games played with verb tenses (perfect vs. present) needed to dodge an accusatory bullet with their so-called promulgation of the novus ordo ritual. They seem to believe that because they get away with the crime, that they actually possess legitimate authority. Over time, how their brazenness has magnified! After decades of such abuse of power, on a basis of increasing frequency the few Catholics left are now being mentally prison raped by Bergoglio and his merry band of buggers. Why would the criminals stop? Acquiescence is their reward.
This cycle of crime-submission-bigger-crime is the reason we have to quit playing the role of abuse victim and fight back. The novus ordo religion needs to be felled to the floor and have a Catholic knee shatter its left cheekbone. That means if the bloody resignation is valid, they can damn well demonstrate the validity explicitly, with precise theological and canonical foundations, or they can (ahead of schedule) GO. TO. HELL. What’s that you say – they don’t think that way anymore? They don’t use Thomism? Their outlook is too heretical? Well pardon me, that’s their problem. Until they clarify and explain themselves, they’ve got no authority to play this game with the Chair of Peter. When they confuse deliberately, we should refuse deliberately. The decision we have of continuing to submit to their ongoing crimes, versus refusing to do so any longer, is not a decision for future churchmen. We must decide. We must end the abuse cycle. Further submission will only deepen the fearsome epistemological black hole. These criminals must be tenaciously, ferociously battled. Pray like things depend on Heaven (as things most certainly do) and fight like they depend on us. Otherwise we can just slouch, sigh and walk away as our poor novus ordite brethren are subjected to things like Benny and Bruce tying the knot, or Bishopette Heloise concelebrating, or the overt Satanist’s slithering in to steal Communion in the hand.
Resignation is valid? Because Benedict the modernist makes up reality as he goes along? And because mind rapist Bergoglio enforces? Sorry, gonna need a little more than that.
(answer to mc question above is III! Just kidding, the Wizards of Knowing Best and their mental whelps all agree that the answer is II. Sometimes reality is just plain wrong.)