by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

I have previously published two translations of Pope Benedict XVI’s Declaratio of Feb. 11, 2013, which is the basis of the claims of the Vatican that the pope has abdicated. In addition, published a 7 part documentary on Youtube (here) which explains the canon law, logic, linguistics and philosophical considerations which arise in its regard.

As for my previous two translations, in my former, I attempted a better version of the Vatican translation, presuming it was correct.  In my second, I showed that the Latin does not mean what the Vatican translation makes it say it to mean.

But since in my second translation, I myself criticized the papal text presuming it intended to say what the Vatican translation made it say, I owe it to Pope Benedict XVI and to history to translate it again, leaving aside all presuppositions as to what it means, and letting the Latin speak for itself.

To show the true and authentic meaning, I will intersperse the English among the Latin, and explain where and how the Latin may mean 2 different things at the same time. This is the style of the great Latinists of the ancient world, just as Juvenal, Virgin and Cicero.  And since Cionci has discovered that Pope Benedict XVI in German and Italian always speaks in a way which can be read in two different senses, this may in fact be the true sense of the Latin in this document too.

But we must remember, that this text was written by Benedict XVI, according to what he was allowed to say to Peter Sewald his official biographer, and then corrected by the Secretary of State personnel. So in truth it has two authors, both of whom may not have had the same intention or mind in making it signify the same thing.

Since this translation would take a long time to explain, I will constrain my remarks here to only three phrases, the first, the renunciation and the last prayer, which frame it in such a way that only one reading is logically and grammatically consistent.

Literal Translation of Pope Benedict XVI’s
Declaratio of Feb. 11, 2013

The Opening Shot

Non solum propter tres canonizationes (1) ad hoc Consistorium (2) vos convocavi (3), sed etiam ut vobis decisionem magni momenti pro Ecclesiae vita communicem (4.

Not only for the sake of the three acts of canonization have I called you together for this Consistory, but also so that I may communicate a separation from you of great moment for the life of the Church.

NOTES:

(1) I have previously criticized this construction, proper tres canonizationes, because propter is not used this way in Latin. Rendering it as, “for the sake of the three acts of canonization” preserves its awkward signification.  The correct Latin should be a dative of purpose such as tribus canonizationibus or better celebrandis his tres canonizationibus, that is, “to celebrate these three canonizations”, the “these” (his) being required on account of the act having just taken place. But perhaps this omission indicates that the timing of the reading of the text was not determined before the text was composed or at the time of its correction.

(2) This should be, in my judgement, in hoc Consistorio, since it is an event, not a place, and thus should not be introduced by ad, which can only be used for places and purposes. Those who think in modern languages cannot see or understand such distinctions.

(3) Here the document shows its first canonical error, since the verb should be in the first person plural, “have We called you together” (convocavimus), since the act of convening a Consistory is a juridical act of the Roman Pontiff, not of the man who is the Roman Pontiff.  This error implies the possibility that this entire sentence was added to the core text of the Declaration as a clumsy sort of introduction to set the context, once the time and place of the declaration was determined and by someone either totally ignorant of the distinction between the Roman Pontiff and the man who abdicates, or someone who intentionally wanted to draw our attention to the fact that this text is not by the Roman Pontiff but by the man who is the Roman Pontiff and thus cannot be read as valid by recourse to an appeal to papal power, being above canon law.

(4) This next phrase is, in my opinion, the entire key to the whole Declaration. It is written in a very exact and subtle style which only a true Latinist can see, who is familiar with the classical forms and knows its rules. The rude or clumsy reader will render it as the Vatican translations have rendered it, but that is not what it means.  For decisio, is the Bonaventuran and Augustinian word for a physical separation, a falling off, a falling away, a dying.  And vobis cannot be a direct object of the main verb, communicem (inasmuch as there is no known usage of this kind in the entire history of the Latin tongue to my knowledge and to that of all the Latinists who have argued with me in vain on this score).  Therefore, it must be a dative with decisio, and thus either a dative of reference, agent or a dative of possession. So it must be either “a separation from you”, “a separation for you”, or “your separation”. This reading, as a “separation from you”, is in my opinion the most sound one. It is  based on the usage of Tacitus in his Germania, chapter 10, where he uses the verb decido, “to cut off” with virgam arbori “a branch from a tree”. This is a very important theological and ecclesiological concept used by Our Lord Himself, in regard to the Divine vineyard owner Who must trim the vines to make it produce fruit.  The construction with communicem is in turn suggested by the Roman Historian Suetonius, in his book on Caligula, n. 56: consilium communicaverunt perfeceruntque, where consilium is replaced by decisionem. The entire phrase is constructed to show the decisive authoritative sentence of Pope Benedict XVI in making a determination and announcing it to the world and to the Cardinals.  His declaration of separation from them, obviously, is a meaning that they will never admit to, and the entire text of his Declaratio shows in what this consists and when it will begin and what the consequences of it will be. Benedict omits in this phrase, “my” with “separation”, so give emphasis that it is the separation of the whole Church from the cardinals. And he uses “moment” (momentum) not “importance” (importantia) to show that the entire weight of history will be struck and moved by his decision. By adding  pro “of the life of the Church”, he is showing that his act will enliven and save the true Church from that which is grasping its deadly hands around Her. As such, this one phrase is a masterpiece of Latinity, which hides its true meaning from the ignorant, who read vobis as an error for vobiscum and decisio in the juridical modern sense commonly used, as the official Vatican translations render it.

There follows in the Declaration, the preamble which explains the Pope’s motivations for public consumption and serves to deflect analysis of the text by the power hungry cardinals. I will simply republish my translation of this from this version here.

Having scouted out my conscience again and again before God, I have arrived at certain cognition — my strengths by my worsening age are no longer apt — to administer the Munus petrinum equitably. I am well conscious that this Munus according to his spiritual essence ought to be pursued not only by doing and speaking, but no less by suffering and by praying. Yet, however, in the world of our season, subjected to hasty acts of change, and perturbed by questions of great value on behalf of the life of faith, a certain vigor of body and soul is necessary to steer the Barque of Saint Peter and the Gospel to announce, which (strength) in me in these furthest months is lessening in such a manner, that to well administer the ministry committed to me, I ought to acknowledge my incapacity.

And now for the key phrase regarding the Renunciation:

Quapropter (5) bene conscius ponderis huius actus plena libertate declaro me ministerio (6) Episcopi Romae, Successoris Sancti Petri, mihi per manus Cardinalium (7) die 19 aprilis MMV commisso (8) renuntiare ita ut a die 28 februarii MMXIII, hora 20, sedes Romae (9), sedes Sancti Petri vacet (10) et  Conclave ad eligendum novum Summum Pontificem ab his quibus competit convocandum esse (11).

On which account (5), well conscious of the weight of this act I declare in full liberty, that I renounce the ministry (6) of the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of Saint Peter, committed (8) to me  through the hands of the Cardinals (7) on the 19th of April, 2005, to leave unused (10) from the 28th of February, at 20:00 hours, Rome time (9), the See of Saint Peter, and that a Conclave to elect a new Supreme Pontiff is to be convoked by those who are competent (11).

NOTES

(5) Pope Benedict opens this key section with the significant word, “On which account”, (quapropter) which refers to all which has been said above from the first key phrase onward as his motivation.

(6) Then he declares — he does not renounce — he declares that he renounces.  This utterly voids the act of any juridical value since a declaration is not a juridical act, it is merely an administrative act of informing others about an action taken or being take or to be taken. In this case the second and latter. He furthermore does NOT fulfil canon 332 §2, which requires the renunciation of the papal munus. He renounces instead the ministerium.  By doing so he withdraws all possibility of the Cardinals and the Roman Curia of sharing in its exercise. And thus separates his office from them! And thus nullifies in advance all canonical acts made after his departure.  He thus also separates himself ecclesiologically from the Cardinals and all the Bishops, since the petrine ministry is to confirm them in the Faith.  Such a decision is an apocalpytic one. And it is explained by the last words in this section.  This is the explanation of the vobis decisionem magni momenti pro Ecclesia vitae of the first phrase.

(7) The ministry received through the hands of the Cardinals is not even the Petrine Ministry, which flows naturally from the Office which is conferred by Christ directly upon the one who accepts his canonical election. In this, Benedict seems to be saying, I am giving back to you what you gave me, nothing. I am not going to be a puppet leader in your hands any longer. I want nothing more to do with you.

(8) When Benedict read his Declaratio aloud, at this point he said commissum, not commisso.  This was seen as an error by all, but it actually says something profound. By saying commissum he is saying, that he committed himself to his Papal office from the day of his election.  And thus implies that the Cardinals are the ones who have betrayed Christ, not he. He did his duty inasmuch as he was able.

(9) There are still those who follow the others translations and get this wrong. So I repeat it here, that it refers to time zones, not to the papal office.

(10) To leave unused the see of St. Peter.  Here the Latin does not speak of a sede vacante, it uses rather the root verb, “to leave unused” (vacet). This explains his renunciation of minsterium rather than of munus. It also shows exactly what is going on in the Church for 8 years.

(11)  And that a new Conclave is to be called — sometime in the future — by those who are competent. That is, not by you who are in my presence, since as I have said, I have declared that you are cut-off from me.

The Declaration finishes thus:

Dearest Brothers: from my whole heart you I thank for all your physical love and the work, by which you bore with me the weight of my ministry and I ask pardon for all my failings. Moreover, now We completely trust the Holy Church of God to the care of the Most High Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and We implore His holy Mother, Mary, to assist with Her maternal goodness, the Cardinal fathers in electing a new supreme pontiff. As far as regards myself, I would also wish to serve with my whole heart in a future by a life dedicated to prayer for Holy Mother Church.

COMMENTARY

Finally, at the end, by using the subjunctive, the Holy Father shows that he is speaking contrary to fact. Because he has not abdicated, so there is no need for him to ask what to do after Feb. 28, 2013, as Pontiff he can do as he pleases, and indeed no one has dared disturb him in that.

In conclusion, I believe the above translation which is faithful to Latin grammar is the only one fully consonant with the facts of history before and after Feb. 11, 2013, in which Benedict XVI was hated and opposed by all inside and outside of the Roman Curia and thus declared his separation rather than renounced his office, so that with the help of the Holy Spirit, the effects of being separated from the Successor of St Peter might show themselves in the Church and reveal to all the faithful both the comploters and the conspiracy against Her in act.

This translation also explains why Benedict XVI refuses to speak with nearly all the Cardinals and Bishops after Feb. 28, 2013.

Canonically, the Declaratio of Pope Benedict XVI on Feb. 11, 2013 is to totally uproot the College of Cardinals as an institution which participates in the election of the Roman Pontiff, since now that they have elected an antipope and adhered to him they are excommunicate in virtue of canon 1364 and separated from the Church completely. Therefore, they lose all their offices and thus their right to elect the Pope.  And this means, that the actual result of the Declaratio is to sanction as legitimate the election of his successor by the Faithful of the Church of Rome, as St. Peter determined so long ago: these are the ones who are competent to elect his successor. — This is something the Roman Pontiff could not have achieved by a direct declaration, because in the very preparation of such a document he would have been opposed or assassinated. And that explains his cleverness and subtlety in acting as he has done.

IN REMEMBRANCE OF THE 14TH ANNIVERSARY OF ITS PUBLICATION

FROMROME.INFO REPRINTS BR. ALEXIS BUGNOLO’s

ENGLISH TRANSLATION

OF

The Apostolic Letter

“Motu Proprio data”

Summorum Pontificum

 of His Holiness Pope

Benedict XVI

Gloriously Reigning

EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION — In this the present Holy Father, Benedict XVI, affirms the immemorial principle of interpreting Papal pronouncements:  what is not explicitly mentioned is not enacted, abrogated, derogated, or obrogated.  It also refutes the erroneous opinion published by the Congregation for Divine Worship (On 28 October 1974), which claimed that the Apostolic Constitution of Paul VI obrogated that of St. Pius V, and that the New Missal was obligatory for all clergy.

 English translation © 2007 Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The Supreme Pontiffs’ care has been, now and ever, that Christ’s Church would offer a due worship of the Divine Majesty, « to the praise and glory of His Name » and « for the utility of His entire Holy Church ».

From time immemorial just as even unto the future, the principle to be kept is « in accord with this that each particular Church ought to concord with the Universal Church not only in regard to the doctrine of the Faith and the sacramental Signs, but even in regard to the uses universally accepted by Apostolic and continuous Tradition, which are to be observed not only to avoid errors, but even to hand down the integrity of the Faith, because the Church’s law of praying may respond to Her law of believing ».¹

Among the Pontiffs, who employed such a due care, the name of Saint Gregory the Great stands out, who cared to transmit to the peoples of Europe as much the Catholic Faith as the treasures of the worship and culture accumulated by the Romans in the preceding ages.  He commanded that there be defined and conserved the form of the Sacred Liturgy as much of the Sacrifice of the Mass as of the Divine Office.  He fostered most of all the monks, who serving under the Rule of St. Benedict illustrated with their life everywhere that most salubrious sentence of the Rule together with the annunciation of the Gospel, « that nothing is to be placed before the work of God » (chapter 43).  In such a manner the sacred liturgy according to the Roman custom made fecund not only the faith and piety but even the culture of many nations.  It is established, indeed, that the Latin liturgy in its various forms stimulated very many of the Saints of the Church in the spiritual life in all the ages of Christian history and strengthened all peoples in the virtue of religion and fecundated their piety.

Moreover so that the Sacred Liturgy more efficaciously fulfill this duty, several other Roman Pontiffs during the course of the ages expended peculiar solicitude, among whom Saint Pius V stands out, who with great pastoral study, at the exhortation of the Council of Trent, innovated [innovavit] the whole worship of the Church, took care to emend the liturgical books and « restore [instauratorum] them to the norm of the Fathers » and granted to the Latin Church that they be used.

Among the liturgical books of the Roman Rite it is clear that the Missale Romanum stands forth, which grew up in the City of Rome, and assumed (its) forms gradually with the passing of ages, which (books) have a great similarity to that in force in more recent generations.

« Which same proposal with the progress of time the Roman Pontiffs have pursued, when they accommodated the liturgical books of the rite to, or determined them for, new times, and (when) they then at the beginning of our century embraced (their) now more ample restoration [redintegrationem] ».²  Thus, indeed, did Our Predecessors Clement VIII, Urban VIII, St. Pius X,³ Benedict XV, Pius XII and Bl. John XXII act.

Moreover, in more recent times, the Second Vatican Council expressed the desire, that due observance and reverence would again be restored [instauraretur] toward divine worship and that it would be adapted to the necessities of Our age.  Moved by which desire, Our Predecessor the Supreme Pontiff, Paul VI, approved for the Latin Church the restored and partially innovated liturgical books in the year 1970; which having been converted into the very many vulgar tongues of earth, were received by the Bishops and priests and faithful willingly.  John Paul II, recognized the Third Typical Edition of the Roman Missal.  Thus the Roman Pontiffs have worked so that « this liturgical edifice » might appear « again splendid in dignity and elegance ».⁴

But in some regions not a few of the faithful adhered and continued to adhere with great love and affection to the antecedent liturgical forms, which imbued their culture and spirit so profoundly, such that the Supreme Pontiff, John Paul II, moved by the pastoral care of these faithful, conceded in the year 1984, by the special Indult “Quattuor abhinc annos”, issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship, the faculty of using the Missale Romanum of John XXIII, published in 1962; moreover in the year 1988 John Paul II again, with the Apostolic Letter “Ecclesia Dei”, given as a Motu Proprio, exhorted the Bishops to employ such a faculty broadly and generously in favor of all the faithful petitioning for it.

With the pressing prayers of these faithful pondered over for a long time by Our Predecessor John Paul II, (and) heard also in the Consistory held by Our Father Cardinals in the month of March of the year 2006, being all maturely pondered, having invoked the Holy Spirit and confiding in God’s help, we decree with the present Letters Apostolic those (things) which follow:

Article 1.  Let the Missale Romanum promulgated by Paul VI be held as the ordinary expression of the “Law of prayer” of the Catholic Church of the Latin Rite.  But let the Missale Romanum promulgated by St. Pius V and published anew by Bl. John XXIII be held as the extraordinary expression of the same “Law of prayer” of the Church and let it enjoy due honor on account of its venerable and ancient use.  Let these two expression of the Church’s “law of praying”, lead, least of all, to a division in the Church’s “law of believing”; for they are two uses of the unique roman rite.

Next, it is licit that one celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass, according to the typical edition of the Missale Romanum promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in the year 1962 and never abrogated,* as the extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church.  However, the conditions established by the antecedent documents, “Quattuor abhinc annos” and “Ecclesia Dei” for the use of this Missale, are substituted as follows:

Article 2.  In Masses celebrated without the people, any catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or religious, is able to use either the Missale Romanum published by Bl. John XXIII in the year 1962, or the Missale Romanum promulgated by the Supreme Pontiff Paul VI in the year 1970, and indeed on any day, except the Sacred Triduum.  For such a celebrated according to one or the other Missal, the priest needs no permission [nulla licentia], neither from the Apostolic See nor from his own Ordinary.

Article. 3. If the communities of the Institutes of consecrated life and of the Societies of apostolic life of pontifical or diocesan right desire to have a celebration of the Holy Mass according to the edition of the Missale Romanum promulgated in the year 1962, in their own oratories, as a conventual or communal celebration, it is licit for them. If each community or the whole Institute and/or Society wants to perform very frequently and/or permanently such celebrations, let the matter be discerned by the major superiors according to the norm of law and their own particular laws and statutes.

Article 4.  The Christian faithful, who ask for this on their own initiative, can also be admitted to the celebrations of the Holy Mass which were (spoken of) above in Article 2, having observed what is to be observed according to the law

Article 5, §1.  In the parishes, where a gathering [coetus] of the faithful exists adhering as a group [continenter]¹ to the antecedent liturgical tradition, let the pastor freely [libenter] take up their petitions to celebrate the Holy Mass according to the rite of the Missale Romanum published in the year 1962.  Let him see that good of these faithful be harmonized  with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the rule of the bishop according to the norms of canon 392, by avoiding discord and by fostering the unity of the whole Church.

• 2. The celebration of the Missal of Bl. John XXIII can take place on ferial days; but on Sundays and Feasts there can also be one celebration of this kind.
• 3. With the faithful or priests asking for this, let the pastor permit celebrations, in this extraordinary form even in additional particular (circumstances), such as are weddings, funerals and occasional celebrations, v. g. pilgrimages.
• 4. Priest using the Missale of Bl. John XXIII, ought to be fit and (ought) not be impeded.
• 5. In churches, which are neither parochial nor conventual, there is a conceding of permission concerning what was (mentioned) above to the Rector of the Church.

Article 6. In Masses according to the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, celebrated with the people, the Lectiones can be proclaimed also in the vernacular tongue, by using the editions (of the readings) recognized by the Apostolic See.

Article 7.  Where any gathering of the lay faithful, does not obtain from (their) pastor by a petition made in accord with Article 5, § 1, let the diocesan Bishop make certain of the matter.  The Bishop is eagerly asked to hear out their wish.  If he cannot provide for a celebration of this kind, le the matter be referred to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”.

Article 8.  The Bishop, who wants to provide for petitions of this kind by the Christian lay faithful, but who is impeded on account of various causes, can commit the matter to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, which will give him counsel and assistance.

Article 9, § 1.  The pastor, likewise, having considered all (things) well, (and) having been persuaded to it for the good of souls, can concede permission to use the more ancient ritual in the administration of the sacraments of Baptism, Matrimony, Penance and the Anointing of the Infirm.

• 2. Moreover the faculty is conceded to the Ordinaries, (who) have been persuaded to it for the good of souls, of celebrating the Sacrament of Confirmation by using the ancient Roman Pontifical.
• 3. It is allowed to clerics constituted in sacred (orders) to use also the Roman Breviary promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in the year 1962.

Article 10.  It is allowed to the Ordinary of the place, if he would judge it opportune, to erect a personal parish according to the norm of canon 518 for celebrations according to the more ancient form of the roman rite or to nominate a rector and/or chaplain, having observed what is to be observed according to the law.

Article 11.  The Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, erected by John Paul II in the year 1988,⁵ continues to fulfill its duty.

Which Commission is to have the form, duties and norms of acting, which the Roman Pontiff willed to attribute to it.

Article 12. The same Commission, besides the faculties which it already enjoys, will exercise the authority of the Apostolic See, by being vigilant for the observance and application of these dispositions.

On the other hand, we command that all these, whatsoever has been decreed by Us in these Letters Apostolic, given as a Motu Proprio, be firm and ratified and (we command that they) be observed from the 14th day of September of this year, on the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, not withstanding any contrary things.

Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s, on the 7th day of the month of July, in the year of Our Lord 2007, in the third (year) or our Pontificate.

Pope Benedict XVI.

[1] Institutio generalis Missalis Romani, Editio tertia, 2002, 397

[2] Ioannes Paulus Pp. II, Litt. ap. Vicesimus quintus annus (4 Decembris 1988), 3: AAS 81 (1989), 899.

[3]Ibid.

[4]S. Pius Pp. X, Litt. Ap. Motu proprio datae Abhinc duos annos (23 Octobris 1913): AAS 5 (1913), 449-450; cfr Ioannes Paulus II, Litt. ap. Vicesimus quintus annus (4 Decembris 1988), 3: AAS 81 (1989), 899.

[5] Cfr Ioannes Paulus Pp. II, Litt. ap. Motu proprio datae Ecclesia Dei (2 iulii 1988), 6: AAS 80 (1988), 1498.

———-

*  Translator’s Note:  The Missale Romanum promulgated by Pope St. Pius V, by his Apostolic Constitution, Quo Primum, is only a liturgical book, as such it cannot be abrogated, because it is not a legal document.  In saying, therefore, that it was “never abrogated,” H. H. Benedict XVI testifies solemnly that the Apostolic Constitution by which it was promulgated remains in force with all its effects, thus clarifying the great confusion sown by the enemies of the Apostolic See and the partisans of discord, who falsely claimed and claim that the Apostolic Constitution, Missale Romanum of Pope Paul VI, touched the Apostolic Constitution of he saintly predecessor, and in some manner either totally or in part abrogated, derogated, or obrogated it.

—————

TRANSLATORS FOOTNOTES

1 – The Latin continenter is being variously rendered by unofficial English translation as continuously, stable, uninterruptedly; but these are all faulty because they contradict the historical and pastoral context of the document, which is to provide for the faithful who request the Ancient Rite, who do not have access to this Rite.  The more general notion of continenter is “as in a manner held together”, that is, “as a body”, “as a group”, “commonly”, “together”, and thus the sense is who petition for this as a group.