by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
This is an interesting and informative discussion, but inasmuch as it does not address canon 17 or canon 188, it presents no clear conclusion, which only comes from the determination of Canon Law, since the question of what Pope Benedict XVI’s Declaratio effects or means is formally a canonical one.
However, on theological grounds the conversation also misses a major point, namely, that the connection between the Papal Primacy and the Roman Church, even if not of divine right, is of apostolic right, and that, though the Successors of Saint Peter hold the same office as Peter, they do not exercise the full authority of the Saint as Apostle, and therefore, they cannot separate the Papacy from the Church of Rome. The theological reason is that the Successors of Saint Peter are servants, not lords, of the Deposit of the Faith, which includes, among other things, Apostolic Tradition. Thus the decision of Peter to fix his Office as Pope to the Roman Church, which decision was made by Apostolic authority, and passes into Apostolic Tradition, is not something over which the successors of Saint Peter have authority. Yes, they can go and live anywhere in the world they want to, but they remain Bishop of Rome, of which there can be no other, unless in law the other be an auxiliary or vicar. Since Benedict did not grant such authority IN LAW to Bergoglio, Bergoglio has zero authority over the Church of Rome and zero authority over the Catholic Church on Earth.
Nevertheless, the discussion in the video sheds a lot of light on the intentions of Pope Benedict XVI in his own language, and how he may have intended to separate the Primacy from the Bishopric of Rome.
8 thoughts on “Dr. Mazza speaks with Dr. Taylor on Benedict’s status as Pope”
In paragraph four of Abp. Gänswein’s talk of 20 May 2016 at the Greg he actually said: “As during the times of Peter, also today the Church, One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic continues having one legitimate Pope.” Thus it cannot be argued that Benedict is in any way splitting the Papacy. And if one continues in that 4th paragraph Gänswein, if one reads carefully the Italian version, says that “we may be living with two successors of Peter among us…” Please read that fourth paragraph very carefully. The present Indicative plural and the present Subjunctive plural verb form for living is “viviamo” and hence the Archbishop says, depending how one translates it, we may be living or we are living with two successors of Peter among us . . ” This play on words was made to keep Benedict from getting into trouble with Francis.
There should be no question as to which of these men is the Pope. It is not in keeping with Christ’s Church on earth to keep the faithful groping around canon law, tradition, queries regard the mindset of a pope who resigns, etc. in order to know the answer. It should be clear, unequivocal & incontestable as to who rightfully holds the highest office of the Church. Many canon lawyers come to different conclusions when the actual position isn’t spelt out for them at the highest level. Canon law was always the litmus test for all dogmatic teaching of the CC to be followed in all respects. Since AF’s ascendency, however, it is being overtaken by the ordinary magisterium, making a dubious claimant to the Holy See of Peter able to overturn the rules to suit himself.
There must be a final authority in the Vatican to end this disastrous dual papacy. As it all began with the dubious resignation of PBXVI leading to an election that didn’t follow the rules set down by PJPII & an extra vote which hasn’t been explained by the invigilator making AF the winner, it seems to me that PBXVI has a duty before God to come forward to say what he wanted to achieve. He cannot bifurcate the Papacy. He either resigns properly according to canon law & retires to Bavaria, or he repents his iniquitous decision & takes up his cross, denounces AF & all his exhortations, betrayals, idolatry etc. & retrieves the status of the OHC&A Church. There is no other way forward until this action is taken.
Actually it does not take that, it requires that men receive the gift of repentence, humility and the light of truth from the Holy Spirit, and recognize that what he did is not what a papal resignation looks like, and that therefore he is still the pope. This is something which every catholic needs to do.
We’ve been waiting for over seven years now for PBXVI to either repent or to resign in accordance with canon law & leave the Vatican. The Holy Ghost doesn’t take that length of time to make up His mind as to which man holds the Keys & neither do His followers who have been pleading for a direct & unequivocal answer, but all we get is silence. This ruinous situation is demonic & calls for a definite resolution NOW.
The Holy Spirit is ready, but graces nevertheless have to be merited. That is why we pray every midnight for the Holy Father here at Rome, and that is why all of us have to pray and fast more to obtain these graces.
i.e. Don’t blame Benedict, blame the sad spiritual and moral condition of those within the Church at large –and that includes those who sit in silence and do not confront (publically if necessary!) their erring priests and bishops!! As a former Baptist pastor nothing has distressed me as much as this silence in face of so much evil. The fact is we get the leaders we deserve and that was the Lord’s very word to Isaiah:” I will give children to be their princes and babies shall rule over them.” Isaiah 3:1-8 What we really deserved was indeed a full resignation of Benedict in Dec 2012 (when his life was threatened) and the full authority of Bergoglio and thus the forfeiting of the “he” and “what” that was to withhold the coming of the “Man of Sin” the ” Son of Perdition” (THE AntiChrist “). (2 Thess. 2:3-10) Would it not be foolish, if not outright hypocritical, to expect Benedict to trade this grace to us for an early martyrdom when few, if any of us, would be willing to take that martyrdom in his place?
Comments are closed.