Code of Canon Law Can. 332 §2.

The Roman Pontiff resigning his office.

"A pope cannot retire, as it is an elected office (elected by Cardinals through Holy Spirit). He either accepts it or he doesn't." @Still_I_Rise

Popes can, however, resign. Quoting what you said, "History, tradition, and canon law explain this clearly". Popes -have- resigned in the past (history). It's happened several times -before- (tradition), and Canon law -does- have a provision for it.

Benedict resigned due to age and failing strength -which in practice is retirement. Benedict chose the title Pope Emeritus for himself. There is nothing in Canon Law prohibiting this title. Technically, he wears an episcopal ring which -does- correspond to the rank of bishop.

Accusing me of ignoring "the truth" is both unjust and ironic when, once again, you accuse me falsely of "defending an antipope"..

I don't. I acknowledge the validity of Francis' claim to the office. He is not an antipope. Benedict lawfully resigned in accordance with Canon Law. Francis was lawfully elected in accordance with Canon Law. Lastly, and most importantly, Benedict himself has fully acknowledged the succession. So-called "antipopes" exist when two men are both making a claim to hold the office of Pope. Benedict is not. He has said, repeatedly, he resigned.

Furthermore, my acknowledgement that Pope Francis has a valid claim to the office in no way implies support for his policies while in office.

Obama was a bad president, but he -was- still president. I've explained this distinction to you directly numerous times before, I've used this very example often enough and yet still you persist in repeating the same falsehoods.

It is YOU who ignore the truth.

Another truth you ignore is that you're not a psychic.

You don't know what Francis does or doesn't believe in. You assume, you surmise, and then you present both as fact.

You have a wretched habit of uttering entirely unsupportable claims about what other people "know", what they "think" and so on, all without a single shred of proof.

"who note that B16 didn't resign in accordance with law,"

...and every single time you've tried to argue that claim against me you've lost. :D

So, you resort to the same tactic you always use: repeat the same falsehoods in the full knowledge you can't support them.

You repeatedly misrepresent my views while covering up the fact you can't defend your own.

Hey, you want to try arguing Canon law with me again, go for it. Bone up on Anne Barnhardt, watch some moar of her inspirational YouTube vids, then step up and take your best shot. I'll be happy to give you another bloody nose.

"and cannot be pope emeritus."

ORLY? Quote Canon Law prohibiting the existence of title. Cite title, chapter, section.

In law there is a maxim "nulla poena sine lege" (i.e. "no punishment without a law"). If the title "can not be" then it must be prohibited.. Quote the law doing so, please.

As for Mizz Barndhardt's question...

"If Pope Benedict is the first-ever 'Pope Emeritus', doesn’t that mean that his ontological state is DIFFERENT from the Popes who actually resigned?"

Benedict's self-chosen title "emeritus", by its very definition, describes an honarary title given to someone who no longer holds an office. Simply put, an emeritus is someone who is -not- something anymore. In this case, not-pope.

A resigned pope is someone who is not pope anymore. As a title, a pope emeritus is someone who is not pope anymore.

The ontological state of the resigned pope and the pope emeritus is identical in that they are both NOT pope.

...all of which I've explained to you, directly, long before applying it to Anne Barnhardt's nonsense.

You just ignored it like you do with all information that contradicts your beliefs.

As I said, it is you who ignore the truth... the most painful one of all being you can't defend your beliefs which in this context makes them meaningless.

So Bishop Emeritus means Bransfield retired and was no longer bishop. His successor was. Good to know. Amazing how there wasn't any confusion over the matter or the meaning of "emertus". Bransfield didn't have a legion of yammering little fanboys insisting he was still the bishop since the title was still getting used as a courtesy.

...a courtesy charity might compel, but his own actions certainly didn't merit on their own. Bransfield was bad people.

This stinks of the Vatican turning a blind eye to "one of their own". They can't find this guy? He's vanished? Cut his benefits, his stipend, and see how quickly he turns up to complain. His car is Church property. Report it stolen. The police will find this guy within a week.

"A plan to ensure he makes some reparation for financial and sexual misconduct has still not been implemented."

Surprise, surprise. Without checking, I'm confident that same "plan" was one of the major concession points in keeping him from being laicized. Then, like so often happens, he simply doesn't follow through. He does just the opposite:

"Bransfield has denied the allegations of sexual harassment of seminarians and priests. He has said his staff was responsible for diocese’s finances. He previously told the Washington Post he thinks he improved the diocese’s financial situation."

Talk about passing the buck! Fairly certain the staff weren't the ones shopping in jewelry boutiques. ...because spending over a million dollars on yourself is an improvement of the diocese' financial situation. :P

"Instead of receiving an ordinary bishop’s stipend, Bransfield must accept a stipend of only $736 per month, equal to the stipend of a retired priest who had served 13 years in the diocese. The diocese will still provide the bishop’s Medicare supplemental health care coverage..."

So he gets retirement benefits as well. Harsh deal. :P

"Bransfield must either purchase or return the car he was provided upon his retirement."

Obviously THAT hasn't happened either. This stinks of the Vatican turning a blind eye to "one of their own". They can't find this guy? He's vanished? Cut his benefits, his stipend, and see how quickly he turns up to complain.

His car is Church property. Report it stolen. The police will find this guy within a week.

I am reminded of all the insults hurled at faithful Catholics who only wanted Latin liturgy, accusations of everything from psychosocial problems to being overwhelmed by a tyrannical appetite for nostalgia.

Meanwhile, Bransfield, McCarrick, two bishops from Florida, et al . . .