1/5. Was (and is) the abdication of Benedict XVI canonically valid? (by google-translate from Polish)
- What errors, visible to people who do not know Latin and canon law, can be seen in the declaration of resignation of Benedict XVI, starting with the words Non solum propter?
- Were these mistakes made intentionally? Where does this application come from?
The official document announcing the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, starting with the words Non solum propter, contained a lot of errors. Brother Alexis Bugnolo mentions over 40[1] (including six canonical[2]), but here will be presented only those which people who do not know Latin and canon law can see. There are three such:
1. instead of ,,vita” - ,,vitae”,
2. instead of ,,hora 20” - ,,hora 29”,
3. instead of ,,commisso” - ,,commissum”.
The first ("vitae") and third ("commissum") were disseminated by the official Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano[3], while the second ("hora 29") has already been corrected in it (we learn about its existence from other sources)[4]. When we listen to the statements of Pope Benedict XVI during the announcement of his resignation, on February 11, 2013, it turns out that while reading he corrected the first two. However, the third, most important, because in the sentence contained the essence of the case, was no longer corrected by him. Instead of "commisso", the pope said "commissum," and then he did a pause not resulting from the sentence syntax[5]. On the official Vatican website this has been corrected[6].
Were these mistakes made intentionally? Yes. Pope Benedict is fluent in Latin, one mistake would be enough to arouse suspicion. And there were lots of them! Considering the importance of the event itself, it can be assumed that the pope had read the document many times before reading it publicly. In addition, when asked why he had chosen Latin, he replied that he could make some mistakes in Italian, and that he feels good enough in Latin to not do it[7]. Excluding causes such as absent-mindedness or a strong eclipse of the mind and taking into account the aforementioned premises, the conclusion comes to itself - it did it on purpose. In this way, the Pope wanted to draw attention to the document of his resignation so that it could be looked at more closely. So let's do it.
[1] fromrome.info/…/clamorous-error…
[2] fromrome.info/…/pope-benedicts-…
[3] es-es.facebook.com/…/298557120350256… ; 1.bp.blogspot.com/…/lor112pp.jpg
[4] www.elnuevodiario.com.ni/…/277204-declarac…
[5] www.youtube.com/watch (mistake ,,commissum”- minute 1:15)
[6] www.vatican.va/…/hf_ben-xvi_spe_…
[7]https://books.google.pl/books?redir_esc=y&hl=pl&id=KkHqDAAAQBAJ&q=latin#v=snippet&q=latin&f=false, p.18. In book Last Testament: In His Own Words (Pope Benedict XVI, Peter Seewald) papież Benedykt, zapytany, dlaczego rezygnację napisał właśnie w języku łacińskim, odpowiedział: Because you are doing something so important in Latin. In addition, Latin is a language that I have learned so well that I can write in it correctly. I could write in Italian, but with the danger that there could be some mistakes there.
- Were these mistakes made intentionally? Where does this application come from?
The official document announcing the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, starting with the words Non solum propter, contained a lot of errors. Brother Alexis Bugnolo mentions over 40[1] (including six canonical[2]), but here will be presented only those which people who do not know Latin and canon law can see. There are three such:
1. instead of ,,vita” - ,,vitae”,
2. instead of ,,hora 20” - ,,hora 29”,
3. instead of ,,commisso” - ,,commissum”.
The first ("vitae") and third ("commissum") were disseminated by the official Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano[3], while the second ("hora 29") has already been corrected in it (we learn about its existence from other sources)[4]. When we listen to the statements of Pope Benedict XVI during the announcement of his resignation, on February 11, 2013, it turns out that while reading he corrected the first two. However, the third, most important, because in the sentence contained the essence of the case, was no longer corrected by him. Instead of "commisso", the pope said "commissum," and then he did a pause not resulting from the sentence syntax[5]. On the official Vatican website this has been corrected[6].
Were these mistakes made intentionally? Yes. Pope Benedict is fluent in Latin, one mistake would be enough to arouse suspicion. And there were lots of them! Considering the importance of the event itself, it can be assumed that the pope had read the document many times before reading it publicly. In addition, when asked why he had chosen Latin, he replied that he could make some mistakes in Italian, and that he feels good enough in Latin to not do it[7]. Excluding causes such as absent-mindedness or a strong eclipse of the mind and taking into account the aforementioned premises, the conclusion comes to itself - it did it on purpose. In this way, the Pope wanted to draw attention to the document of his resignation so that it could be looked at more closely. So let's do it.
[1] fromrome.info/…/clamorous-error…
[2] fromrome.info/…/pope-benedicts-…
[3] es-es.facebook.com/…/298557120350256… ; 1.bp.blogspot.com/…/lor112pp.jpg
[4] www.elnuevodiario.com.ni/…/277204-declarac…
[5] www.youtube.com/watch (mistake ,,commissum”- minute 1:15)
[6] www.vatican.va/…/hf_ben-xvi_spe_…
[7]https://books.google.pl/books?redir_esc=y&hl=pl&id=KkHqDAAAQBAJ&q=latin#v=snippet&q=latin&f=false, p.18. In book Last Testament: In His Own Words (Pope Benedict XVI, Peter Seewald) papież Benedykt, zapytany, dlaczego rezygnację napisał właśnie w języku łacińskim, odpowiedział: Because you are doing something so important in Latin. In addition, Latin is a language that I have learned so well that I can write in it correctly. I could write in Italian, but with the danger that there could be some mistakes there.