Gloria.tv And Coronavirus: Huge Amount Of Traffic, Standstill in Donations
Clicks3.5K
en.news
80

Tosatti: Ratzinger Considers Himself Pope

MarcoTosatti.com (February 15) reports the claim of a “very high” Vatican prelate, likely a cardinal, that Joseph Ratzinger feels he is "Pope" and "not retired."

He published the Ratzinger/Sarah book to make this manifest, the source insists.

According to the prelate, Francis understood this and "got scared,” which caused him to change the text of “Querida Amazonia.”

The problem: Ratzinger keeps vigorously contradicting such claims.

Picture: © Mazur, CC BY-NC-SA, #newsPzyypohqmi

Ultraviolet
"...render your position void of credibility."

Only facts can do that, Crackers and you present only empty claims.

Now then... show where I have falsely accused you Thors Catholic Hammer Also show where I've falsely accused Fra Bugnolo of something. All you do is make things up and then walk away from them pretending your claim is the proof.

"Both he and I believe Benedict is still …More
"...render your position void of credibility."

Only facts can do that, Crackers and you present only empty claims.

Now then... show where I have falsely accused you Thors Catholic Hammer Also show where I've falsely accused Fra Bugnolo of something. All you do is make things up and then walk away from them pretending your claim is the proof.

"Both he and I believe Benedict is still pope."

That's nice. Believe what you please. Neither of you have any factual support for your belief.

"I have not told lies as you constantly allege. A lie is a deliberate falsehood"

...and now Crackers starts his dance around the truth, once again. :D

"I have yes made mistakes but I have not told lies as you incessantly allege..."

Every time you deliberately repeat a "mistake" after it's been debunked, you do so in the knowledge it's factually false. That's telling a lie. This differs from simply having a different opinion since you present no evidence in support of your opinion. You just go back to repeating them every single day. Need I remind you of The Fisherman's Ring?

"concerning almost everything I write on the issue of Benedict’s faulty resignation"

Case in point. Even here, even now. Even while denying that you tell lies you tell one. There's nothing "faulty" about Benedict's resignation any more than he's "under guard".

When I accuse you of telling a lie, Crackers, you forget it's invariably in the context of presenting the truth that contradicts the lie. I have every right to call a lie for what it is. I've earned it.

"You are free to disagree with our positions but you render your arguments devoid of merit on account of the sheer hatred and calumnies you consistently issue."

...and you're back to your hypocritical "victim" routine. You and even our "saintly" Franciscan friar have no problem voicing your ire. So don't whine when it's returned in kind.

You'd better check the definition of "calumnies", Crackers. When Fra and myself use it, we understand its meaning. You don't and it shows.

The only thing that renders an argument devoid of merit is factual refutation which neither you nor he have provided.
Thors Catholic Hammer
Pope Benedict xvi lives I believe in fear of his life and is effectively under Vatican house arrest being monitored 24/7.
The statements made by +Ganswein concerning his unusually detailed knowledge of Pope Benedict’s lifestyle could only be made by a man who has total and complete control over every single and minute aspect of the popes existence.

SUCH CONTROL IS ONLY POSSIBLE BY A WARDEN…
More
Pope Benedict xvi lives I believe in fear of his life and is effectively under Vatican house arrest being monitored 24/7.
The statements made by +Ganswein concerning his unusually detailed knowledge of Pope Benedict’s lifestyle could only be made by a man who has total and complete control over every single and minute aspect of the popes existence.

SUCH CONTROL IS ONLY POSSIBLE BY A WARDEN IN A GAOL


.
Thors Catholic Hammer
Fot the attention of poster @
@Ultraviolet

The endless hatred and false accusations you vent at myself and Br.Bugnolo render your position void of credibility.
Both he and I believe Benedict is still pope.
I have not told lies as you constantly allege.
A lie is a deliberate falsehood
I have yes made mistakes but I have not told lies as you incessantly allege concerning almost everything I …More
Fot the attention of poster @
@Ultraviolet

The endless hatred and false accusations you vent at myself and Br.Bugnolo render your position void of credibility.
Both he and I believe Benedict is still pope.
I have not told lies as you constantly allege.
A lie is a deliberate falsehood
I have yes made mistakes but I have not told lies as you incessantly allege concerning almost everything I write on the issue of Benedict’s faulty resignation
You are free to disagree with our positions but you render your arguments devoid of merit on account of the sheer hatred and calumnies you consistently issue.
comfort ye
So many of us wish this were true, but this report is sooo tenuous.
Thors Catholic Hammer
Ask yourself is it normal for the allegedly retired top man in any organisation to be treated in the tightly controlled and monitored fashion that Pope Benedict xvi is.
Is it normal that his literary communications and associations be subject to the close supervision of a bishop?

There is something supernaturally abnormal concerning the objectively viewed current position of this man Benedict …
More
Ask yourself is it normal for the allegedly retired top man in any organisation to be treated in the tightly controlled and monitored fashion that Pope Benedict xvi is.
Is it normal that his literary communications and associations be subject to the close supervision of a bishop?

There is something supernaturally abnormal concerning the objectively viewed current position of this man Benedict who supposedly resigned from the office of pope.
Ultraviolet
Also ask yourself is it normal for an ailing, dying 92 year old man NOT to be looked after carefully. If Benedict was simply wandering around, Thor and the gang would claim he's being neglected and then claim that since he's in public, he's still really the Pope. They don't care so long as they can use the poor man to justify their attack on Pope Francis.

Incidentally, it's Pope Emeritust …More
Also ask yourself is it normal for an ailing, dying 92 year old man NOT to be looked after carefully. If Benedict was simply wandering around, Thor and the gang would claim he's being neglected and then claim that since he's in public, he's still really the Pope. They don't care so long as they can use the poor man to justify their attack on Pope Francis.

Incidentally, it's Pope Emeritust Benedict. That's his true title, by his own choice See, this is Thor telling a lie again.
Angie W.
The stubborn Bergoglians do not want to listen, they want to impose on us a heretic.
Thors Catholic Hammer
Indeed yes.
Bergoglio is a heretic who has usurped the See of St .Peter.
The true pope is Benedict xvi who lives in fear of his life under Vatican house arrest.
Benedict’s statements are not freely made but coerced.
H
e cleverly managed to get his views on celibacy published and the fall out is now everywhere to be seen.
Ultraviolet
"Ultaviolet is indeed a pedantic troll quibbling over the most petty of details"

...as contrasted with @Thors Catholic Hammer who believes making claims up out thin air and telling lies constitutes proof. ;-)

Or a cup-rattling shill who's quick to complain about "public calumny" then calumniates someone who beat him at his own game of arm-chair canonical lawyer.

In a way, Frà Alexis Bugno…More
"Ultaviolet is indeed a pedantic troll quibbling over the most petty of details"

...as contrasted with @Thors Catholic Hammer who believes making claims up out thin air and telling lies constitutes proof. ;-)

Or a cup-rattling shill who's quick to complain about "public calumny" then calumniates someone who beat him at his own game of arm-chair canonical lawyer.

In a way, Frà Alexis Bugnolo this bitterness from you is music to my ears. Honestly. I might be flippant here, but unlike your buddy Thor, I'm truthful.

I was exceedingly curious what rejoinder you were going offer when I deconstructed your arguments on Canon Law. Here, I thought, is a polyglot who's poured through Canon Law. Why were his canonical arguments so flawed, so easily countered? He must be advancing them as pawns for some clever checkmate conclusion.

It had to be something predicated on me decisively knocking them down..It's some kind of a trap... But what? I admit, truly, I was nervous.

And what do I get instead? "durr hurr yerra troll. cuz you disagree wiff me." Tell me I haven't overestimated you THAT badly, Fra! Say it ain't so!

Or was that your best shot at playing pro bono canon lawyer for Benedict? And then you wonder why the legal minds in the Vatican don't even give your letter the courtesy of a reply, Latin notwithstanding. If I can tear through your argument with nothing more than, well, let's call it a layperson's understanding of the law, how many more opportunities must present themselves to the professionals?

Strange you should call me a troll these days, no less. Seems you've forgotten nearly all my comments on this subject are replies to Thor's endless fabrications. GTV now has a parrot squawking the same baseless accusations about Pope Francis and Benedict's resignation over and over again. He's been caught in so many falsehoods, they're becoming redundant.

Yet that doesn't attract your ire even when those comments are dropped like guano on just about every post, regardless of the subject. As with your pretensions at Canon Law you see only what you wish to and ignore the rest.

As I've said before, I don't like Francis and I've said so repeatedly to you, Frà Alexis Bugnolo .I wish Francis wasn't Pope. So why claim otherwise with your twaddle about defending the St. Gallens mafia?

Why resort to the same kind of deliberate falsehoods you apparently admire in that "courageous interlocutor"? Are you that petty? Does the truth count so little to supposedly devout Catholic Fransiscan friar?

Seems birds of a feather flock together, including Butthurt Bluejays and Falsehood Finches. ;-)
Thors Catholic Hammer
@
Ultraviolet
The endless hatred and false accusations you vent at myself and Br.Bugnolo render your position void of credibility.
Both he and I believe Benedict is still pope.
I have not told lies as you constantly allege.
You are free to disagree with our positions but you render your arguments devoid of merit on account of the sheer hatred and calumnies you consistently issue.
Angie W.
🤨 According to the stubborn Bergoglians, it is no longer necessary to profess the Catholic faith, so that someone can become a pope. They put a heretic over the Magisterium that teaches that it is impossible for a heretic to become Pope. As I said Obstinacy in the error that leads to final impenitence is a sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. ✍️
Thors Catholic Hammer
Agreed.
Pope Benedict xvi needs our prayers.
Ultraviolet
I'm surprised to hear from you @Angie W.! After all, you're the one who doesn't want to be contacted and got very unhappy when I corrected your errors. But when it suits you, my, my, my.... you're quick to quote ain'tcha? ;-) You're also quoting a deliberate error. I haven't imposed any falsehoods. What I find is that people here have a nasty habit of doing what you're doing. 1.) throwing …More
I'm surprised to hear from you @Angie W.! After all, you're the one who doesn't want to be contacted and got very unhappy when I corrected your errors. But when it suits you, my, my, my.... you're quick to quote ain'tcha? ;-) You're also quoting a deliberate error. I haven't imposed any falsehoods. What I find is that people here have a nasty habit of doing what you're doing. 1.) throwing nasty accusations and then crying when their nastiness gets a similar reply. 2.) making empty claims and then refusing to support them with Canon Law. 3.) foolishly thinking Bold Text Sentences is an adequate substitute for what they should be doing in 2.)

If what you say about Pope Francis is true, then the same is also true for the last four popes. Crackers The Parrot pulls every one of his rhetorical tricks to avoid confronting that fact.

Now mind you, I'm not claiming that any of the last four Popes -are- heretics, only that others have found vast amounts of info to support such claims, just as you (and others) claim is the case for Francis.

As I've told Crackers the Parrot, we need to apply Church teaching and Canon Law equally to ALL Popes, not just the ones we like or dislike. Or , we give them the benefit of the doubt.

Here's some light reading that you'll no doubt ignore once you realize it exposes your selective (and hypocritical) use of Church teachings. . :)

Saint John XXIII was supposedly and anti-pope, apostate and heretic.

introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/…/the-case-agains…
stevensperay.wordpress.com/…/pope-st-john-xx…
www.amazon.com/…/B0007F89MO
romancatholicfaith.weebly.com/…/the_scandals_an…

Paul VI was supposedly an anti-pope, apostate and heretic.

novusordowatch.org/paul-vi/
crc-internet.org/…/6-book-against-…
pontifexverus.wordpress.com/…/answering-a-fre…
romancatholicfaith.weebly.com/…/the_scandals_an…

John Paul I was supposedly an anti-pope, apostate and heretic.

novusordowatch.org/john-paul-i/
www.ncronline.org/…/shortest-pontif…
www.scribd.com/…/The-Scandals-an…

Saint John Paul II was supposedly an anti-pope, apostate and heretic.

www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php
www.calefactory.org/misc-v2-heresiesofjp2.htm

Benedict XVI was supposedly an anti-pope, apostate and heretic.

www.calefactory.org/misc-v2-heresiesofb16.htm
www.opusdeialert.com/footnotes.htm
www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/…/anti-pope-bened…
www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/…/principles-of-c…
holywar.org/Ratzinger.htm
novusordowatch.org/benedict-xvi/
Angie W.
Bergoglio is not a pope because he had already deviated from the Catholic faith in Argentina. The Bergoglians have placed the schismic, apostate& heresiarch Jorge Mario Bergoglio above the Magisterium and above the obedience that we all owe to the Laws of God and to the laws of the Church. Obstinacy in the error that leads to final impenitence is a sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
Thors Catholic Hammer
Very well said.
The formal heresies of Amoris Laetitia were promulgated by Bergolio while he was an alleged pope.
This has never occurred before in the history of the Catholic Church.
Of course once promulgated Bergolio ceased to be any type of pope assuming he was one in the first place.
I have always had doubts about this truly sinister and dangerous individual and they were confirmed with the …More
Very well said.
The formal heresies of Amoris Laetitia were promulgated by Bergolio while he was an alleged pope.
This has never occurred before in the history of the Catholic Church.
Of course once promulgated Bergolio ceased to be any type of pope assuming he was one in the first place.
I have always had doubts about this truly sinister and dangerous individual and they were confirmed with the publication of Amoris Laetitia.
Angie W.
Rafał_Ovile16 feb:

Ultraviolet Your comments are useless similar to a neo-marxist mind which considers truth as imposition of views whilst imposing falsehoods on adversaries. Get yourself a life. Start reading and learning or else your mind will rot to the point of extreme defect.
Ultraviolet
"Everything you disagree with must be a lie." -Thors Catholic Hammer

Wrong. A deliberate falsehood is a lie - and you tell them daily on GTV.

"Pope Benedict has indeed retained elements of the papacy including titles, dress, places of residence, how he continues to be called your Holiness."

Are you going to repeat the one about Benedict still wearing his Papal ring or have I finally broke…More
"Everything you disagree with must be a lie." -Thors Catholic Hammer

Wrong. A deliberate falsehood is a lie - and you tell them daily on GTV.

"Pope Benedict has indeed retained elements of the papacy including titles, dress, places of residence, how he continues to be called your Holiness."

Are you going to repeat the one about Benedict still wearing his Papal ring or have I finally broken you of that? :D

"Benedict said that he continues to wear the papal white cassock for “purely practical reasons.” “At the moment of my resignation there were no other clothes available,”"

catholicherald.co.uk/…/benedict-xvi-di…

You're not calling the man a liar, are you? ;-). He resigned and said he resigned and explained why he wears the clothes he does after he resigned and nothing you can say will change that.

Pope Emeritus Benedict can do as he pleases. Now Crackers... re-read what I wrote::

"there is NO provision in Canon Law allowing for a Pope resigning and still retaining elements of the papacy."

If you wish to refute that, post Canon Law where such provisions exist.

You didn't because you either a.) don't know how to read b.) do know and then chose to deliberately misinterpret it.

Given your record for equal amounts of stupidity and falsehoods (you know... lies) both are equally possible. I do appreciate the irony of you launching an attack with "your understanding of English is backward" and then demonstrating your own is all but non-existent. Or deliberately false and twisted.

Nice move, Thor. As I've told you before, go be stupid somewhere else.

"Ultraviolet you are such a liar," -Frà Alexis Bugnolo

Gee... maybe I better call up my attorney and start whining about Public Calumny. :P Better watch out, Fra. GTV's Sensitive Snowflake might start criticizing you for "bullying", eh? ;-)

"the word resignation is not found either in the Latin text of the Declaratio nor in the Italian statements made by Benedict."

I said Benedict resigned. Please quote me verbatim where I made the claim that Benedict XVI specifically used the word "resignation."

A man can say, "I quit" or "I'm retiring" or "take this job and shove it" or "I'm retiring effectively immediately" or a variety of similar phrases all meaning the same thing, namely the man resigned.

In point of fact, Benedict did use the word "resign" in his last General Audience as Pope.

"My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this."

www.vatican.va/…/hf_ben-xvi_aud_…

What's Benedict doing there, Fra? Hey, how about that... He's explaining why he decided to resign. Fancy that!

He also used the word "renounce" in reference to his Papacy.

"For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant and a Conclave to elect the new Supreme Pontiff will have to be convoked by those whose competence it is."

www.vatican.va/…/hf_ben-xvi_spe_…

So yes, my statement "He (Benedict XVI) resigned, verbally and in writing." is correct. He did so in writing. He did so verbally and even used the word you choose to fixate on.

Therefore, my dear Fraudulent Fra Bugnolo, you owe me an apology. One made with the same assertiveness as your now-demonstrably false accusation. Not that I expect to see one from the likes of you.

Must be a slow day at the Ordo Mercinarius.:P Now with your accusation disposed of let's address your error.

"Also, the only word in Latin by which one can resign FULLY the papal office is munus, because that is the only word required by Canon 332.2"

Wrong. Canon 332.2 makes NO such requirement for a resignation. Nor does it expressly require the use of the word "munus".Or claim that only "munus" may be used for "fully" resigning the papacy. Doesn't make any claim the papacy can be partially (as opposed to FULLY) resigned, either. You're either pope or you're not.

Canon 332.2 provides only two requirements for a valid resignation: "it is required for validity that the resignation is made freely and properly manifested" that's it!

www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P16.HTM

There is no requirement in that section stipulating the word "munus" be used or that the resignation must be first defined using "munus" or any such similar nonsense (which I've seen you advancing in various places).

Bringing up Canon 17 was a really dumb idea. :D Firstly, Benedict XVI wasn't writing ecclesiatical laws. He was resigning his Papacy. Canon 17 makes no mention of resignations, btw. In reference to writing ecclesiastical laws it states: : "If the meaning remains doubtful and obscure, recourse must be made to parallel places, if there are such, to the purpose and circumstances of the law, and to the mind of the legislator."

For the mind of the "legislator", we're fortunate that Pope Emeritus Benedict himself addressed the validity of his resignation.

"“There is absolutely no doubt regarding the validity of my resignation from the Petrine ministry. The only condition for the validity of my resignation is the complete freedom of my decision. Speculations regarding its validity are simply absurd.”

catholicherald.co.uk/…/benedict-xvi-di…

Hey, how about that! There's that word again: resignation. Same one you were demanding he use

Simply put, Canon 17 doesn't even apply. Benedict's resignation does not "remain doubtful and obscure" at all. The only people who find fault Benedict XVI's resignation are a tiny group cynically exploiting the fact a 92 year old man in poor health refuses to spend his last remaining years endlessly addressing every last one of their bad-faith claims that he didn't "truly" resign.

As I've said before, the only resignation your kind will ever accept is the one Benedict doesn't make. There will always be another new definition, a new requirement, yet another extra-Canonical interpretation. You don't want him to resign. You don't like his successor. Great. Neither do I. But unlike you, I realize Benedict XVI DID resign. He resigned freely and he's said so repeatedly which by now certainly covers "properly manifesting" his resignation.

You need recognize two things: One, you're not going to badger Benedict into repudiating his own resignation. You're not going to "force" him back and somehow oust Francis. Frankly, I think it's despicable for anyone to believe they can do otherwise, much less the monstrous arrogance of believing they have the right.

Two, you're not a king-maker, Fra, and you never will be. You're not going to decide who's running things in the Vatican by writing about it on your blog anymore than you'll re-take the Holy Land with your fantasy mercenaries.
Thors Catholic Hammer
@Ultraviolet

Like your aggressive and bullying self , your understanding of English is backward .
Everything you disagree with must be a lie.
Pope Benedict has indeed retained elements of the papacy including titles, dress, places of residence, how he continues to be called your Holiness.
That he has done so clearly manifests substantial error in his thinking that he has properly left the …
More
@Ultraviolet

Like your aggressive and bullying self , your understanding of English is backward .
Everything you disagree with must be a lie.
Pope Benedict has indeed retained elements of the papacy including titles, dress, places of residence, how he continues to be called your Holiness.
That he has done so clearly manifests substantial error in his thinking that he has properly left the office of pope
HE iS therefore in substantial error concerning the object of his intended resignation

That conforms to the requirement of an invalid resignation per canon 188

Boiling over with the self righteous intolerance of the profoundly ignorant you roar and spit at everyone who disputes or disagrees with you.
Argument based on objective reason with a imbecile such as you is not possible.

( cue the usual pathetic HOWLING from poster Ultraviolet that everything I write is a lie)
Frà Alexis Bugnolo
Thor, on the contrary, you are one of the most intelligent and honest and courageous interlocutors on Gloria TV in the English language. I really do not know why Ultraviolet is not flagged as a troll. He clearly wants the St Gallen Mafia to eat its cake in peace.
Thors Catholic Hammer
Ultaviolet is indeed a pedantic troll quibbling over the most petty of details
comfort ye
But this is "Ratzinger". To believe that he did not "resign" as pope because he is "in substantial error concerning the object of his intended resignation" is fairly impossible. Perhaps he did have a gun at his back....
Frà Alexis Bugnolo
@comfort ye Your statement shows that you are either blind or completely ignore the norm of Canon 332 .2 which requires a renunciation of munus as the essential act. When you renounce something else, you have posited an act of another essence and thus the substance of the entire juridical acts is corrupted by a error. That is what substantial error means in the worst possible scenario. It does …More
@comfort ye Your statement shows that you are either blind or completely ignore the norm of Canon 332 .2 which requires a renunciation of munus as the essential act. When you renounce something else, you have posited an act of another essence and thus the substance of the entire juridical acts is corrupted by a error. That is what substantial error means in the worst possible scenario. It does not have to do with liberty of action.
Thors Catholic Hammer
@@comfort ye
It is entirely possible for any pope to make a mistake in the manner and motivation for which he undertakes his resignation.
The church’s canon law allows for this
Ultraviolet
"A" resignation includes "any" resignation.

@Thors Catholic Hammer We are discussing what Canon 188 said, not what you say it means. My English is perfect, as is my ability to catch you when you're dancing around the truth trying to cover up your lies.

What Canon Law 188 said is "a resignation". YOU said Canon Law used the word "any". It does not. You lied. Further, "A" and "ANY" are …More
"A" resignation includes "any" resignation.

@Thors Catholic Hammer We are discussing what Canon 188 said, not what you say it means. My English is perfect, as is my ability to catch you when you're dancing around the truth trying to cover up your lies.

What Canon Law 188 said is "a resignation". YOU said Canon Law used the word "any". It does not. You lied. Further, "A" and "ANY" are entirely different. The former indicating one given item and the latter indicating a selection absent criteria.

Let's recall your lie from yesterday (your exact words) "Canon 188 states clearly that any resignation made in substantial error is invalid.":

The word "any" does not appear anywhere in Canon Law 188 at all. So no, Canon Law 188 does NOT "state clearly that any resignation". that's a lie. You love adding those endless adjectives to bolster your falsehoods and this is what comes of it. Serves you right.

"Only the greatest of thick’s would fail to see that."

No True Scotsman Fallacy.

"The word 'all' means 'every.' "

...and NEITHER word appears in Canon 188, either.

You should learn to READ basic English before you try "explaining" it to me or anyone else.

"This error has occurred because it is crystal clear that Pope Benedict failed to properly define what he was resigning from and what elements of the papacy he wished to retain."

Neither of which is required for a valid resignation under Canon 332 section 2.

Further, there is NO provision in Canon Law allowing for a Pope resigning and still retaining elements of the papacy. This is YOU making up Canon Law which does not exist. This is you telling a lie again.
Thors Catholic Hammer
@@Ultraviolet
It is obvious now that English is either not your first language or that you lack basic intelligence.
“A “resignation includes “any “ resignation.
Only the greatest of thick’s would fail to see that.
Cannon 188 was designed to include all resignations from clerical positions including that of papal office.
The word “all “ means “every.”
(I must alas now explain basic English to …More
@@Ultraviolet
It is obvious now that English is either not your first language or that you lack basic intelligence.
“A “resignation includes “any “ resignation.
Only the greatest of thick’s would fail to see that.
Cannon 188 was designed to include all resignations from clerical positions including that of papal office.
The word “all “ means “every.”
(I must alas now explain basic English to you,)
Pope Benedict’s resignation is erroneous because of SUBSTANTIAL ERROR.
This error has occurred because it is crystal clear that Pope Benedict failed to properly define what he was resigning from and what elements of the papacy he wished to retain.
(Next you will roar that Benedict has not retained elements of the papacy despite much visible evidence to the contrary that everybody but you can see.)
Your assertion that you would like to see Benedict as still pope is rejected on the basis of your fanatical and unthought out support for antipope francis who you see as a useful tool in your war on the Catholic Church as it now is post VAT2.
Ultraviolet
"Canon 188 states clearly that any resignation made in substantial error is invalid."

First, Canon 188 does NOT say anything about "full and complete abandonment of the office of pope." like you claimed. So your latest lie is that I lied. You really are a piece of work, Thors Catholic Hammer I've run into some epic screw-ups on forums, but, no joke, you're the absolute worst in over 25 …More
"Canon 188 states clearly that any resignation made in substantial error is invalid."

First, Canon 188 does NOT say anything about "full and complete abandonment of the office of pope." like you claimed. So your latest lie is that I lied. You really are a piece of work, Thors Catholic Hammer I've run into some epic screw-ups on forums, but, no joke, you're the absolute worst in over 25 years online.

Second, Canon 188 "a resignation" not "any" So your statement is, right there, false

Third, just because YOU claim Benedict's resignation was in "substantial error" does not prove it ever was. That's all you EVER do around here is make things up. Always unproven except for your endless repeating of them, unsupported by any fact as always. It's just another one of your, wait for it, lies.

Your next lie is the idea "That Benedict is still pope is anathema..." to me. Wrong again. I wish Benedict XVI still was Pope. So no, it isn't anathema. That's another one of your lies. All you do is lie. ..and then play the victim, bawww about "vituperation"

"this complex and confused situation."

There is nothing complex or confused except your lies. Benedict XVI resigned. The Curia elected Francis. That's the way it is. I don't like Francis, but he's the current Pope. All your delusions and ranting about "howling" won't change what happened.
Thors Catholic Hammer
Certain fanatical traditionalist Catholics only recognize francis because he seemingly validates their contempt for what they wrongly describe as the conciliar or VAT2 Church.
Francis is a useful tool for their vituperation.
That Benedict is still pope is anathema to some of these traditionalist catholic fanatics like Ultraviolet who howl constant abuse at anybody seeking clarity in this …More
Certain fanatical traditionalist Catholics only recognize francis because he seemingly validates their contempt for what they wrongly describe as the conciliar or VAT2 Church.
Francis is a useful tool for their vituperation.
That Benedict is still pope is anathema to some of these traditionalist catholic fanatics like Ultraviolet who howl constant abuse at anybody seeking clarity in this complex and confused situation.
In desperation they cling to a past notion of papal election that Pope Benedict XVI has effectively made partially redundant and certainly in need of radical reforms.
Thors Catholic Hammer
@Ultraviolet

MORE LIES & DISTORTIONS FROM ULTRAVIOLET,
Canon 188 states clearly that any resignation made in substantial error is invalid.
Contrary to the constant stream of lies spewing from Ultraviolet it is indeed a basic requirement of all canon law that resignations are not tainted with substantial error.
Ultraviolet is incapable of understanding many basic concepts such as “ substanti…More
@Ultraviolet

MORE LIES & DISTORTIONS FROM ULTRAVIOLET,
Canon 188 states clearly that any resignation made in substantial error is invalid.
Contrary to the constant stream of lies spewing from Ultraviolet it is indeed a basic requirement of all canon law that resignations are not tainted with substantial error.
Ultraviolet is incapable of understanding many basic concepts such as “ substantial error” and his vicious antagonism and slanders towards those he disagrees with further reduce any credibility his “arguments “ might have.
Ultraviolet
"Canon 188 refers to substantial error that invalidates a papal resignation. Pope Benedict’s resignation was substantially erroneous because it is clear he has not addressed properly the issue of a full and complete abandonment of the office of pope."

...except he did. He resigned, verbally and in writing. Thors Catholic Hammer, you are fabricating a new requirement for resignation: the "full…More
"Canon 188 refers to substantial error that invalidates a papal resignation. Pope Benedict’s resignation was substantially erroneous because it is clear he has not addressed properly the issue of a full and complete abandonment of the office of pope."

...except he did. He resigned, verbally and in writing. Thors Catholic Hammer, you are fabricating a new requirement for resignation: the "full and complete abandonment of the office of pope." That does not appear in Canon 332:2 and it doesn't appear in Canon 188. Once again, you're making things up again. You're telling lies again.

Just because YOU claim something is "substantially erronious" doesn't make it so. You do this daily. Tell a lie, use some "canonical sounding" vocabulary while telling the lie, and then repeat the lie constantly pretending it's true.

"He hangs on to aspects of the papal office including name, title, form of address, area of residence and use of papal blessing plus fisherman’s ring."

Perfect example of you repeating one of your lies, even after getting debunked repeatedly.

Benedict XVI's Papal ring is quite distinctive and carries his Papal title.
www3.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Pope+Benedict+X…

www.pope2you.net/…/papal-ring.jpg

c8.alamy.com/…/pope-benedict-x…

You can not and will not find a photo of Pope Emeritus Benedict wearing that ring after he retired. What you'll find is many photos of Benedict wearing a flattened band. NOT the Fisherman's Ring. Only the Pope wears the Fisherman's Ring. Pope Francis, to be exact.

"What Benedict says could be coerced..."

Something he personally denied. You have a horrid habit of making up fantasy "coulds" and pretening they happened, Crackers. It's obviously deliberate on your part.

Here's what Benedict said after he retired:.

"The only condition for the validity of my resignation is the complete freedom of my decision. Speculations regarding its validity are simply absurd."

catholicherald.co.uk/…/benedict-xvi-di…

"all the trappings of office of a partially active pope."

There is no such thing.

A man is either Pope or he is not. You are telling another lie, inventing a new kind of imaginary papal status.

Cite Canon Law giving the criteria for a "partially active Pope". Time to deliver some proof of your squawking, Crackers.

Oh yeah, a shot of Pope Emeritus Benedict wearing his Fisherman's Ring would be just lovely, too. Even better, let's see you post one where he's wearing his papal ring in the presence of Francis.

"IT NEVER HAPPENED."

Benedict himself refuted that claim.

"Speculations regarding its (his resignation's) validity are simply absurd."

All you do is repeat the same old lies.
Frà Alexis Bugnolo
Ultraviolet you are such a liar, you know well that the word resignation is not found either in the Latin text of the Declaratio nor in the Italian statements made by Benedict. You also know it is a lie to say that the only cause of the invalidity of a papal renunciation is liberty of action. Unless of course you never read canon 332.2.
Frà Alexis Bugnolo
Also, the only word in Latin by which one can resign FULLY the papal office is munus, because that is the only word required by Canon 332.2 As canon 17 shows, no other word in the code of canon law of 1983 is as coextensive or significant of every aspect of the papal office. If you do not use it, you have to use a lot more words and ministry IS NOT ONE OF THEM.
Gesù è con noi
The Catholic Church has had several periods even up to 4 years without a pope and periods in which an antipope has usurped the papacy.
Periods without a pope: between St Marcelino (296-304) and St Marcelo (308-309), between St Eusebio (309) and St Melquiades (311-314), between St Clement IV 1265-1268 and Blessed Gregory X 1272 -1276.
The list of anti-pope is long one of the most notorious is the …More
The Catholic Church has had several periods even up to 4 years without a pope and periods in which an antipope has usurped the papacy.
Periods without a pope: between St Marcelino (296-304) and St Marcelo (308-309), between St Eusebio (309) and St Melquiades (311-314), between St Clement IV 1265-1268 and Blessed Gregory X 1272 -1276.
The list of anti-pope is long one of the most notorious is the anti-pope known as Anacletus II or Pietro Pierleoni. «Anacleto who was implanted in a non-canonical election after Innocent II, the true Pope, already elected. Despite his invalid and non-canonical election, the antipope Anacleto II obtained control of Rome and the support of the majority of the College of Cardinals. Anacleto had the support of almost the entire population of Rome, until the true Pope regained control of the city in 1138 (The Catholic Encyclopedia, "Anacleto", vol. 1, 1907, p. 447). »
GChevalier
It's simpler than that. The conciliar has at the moment two popes, namely, an asset in the person of Bergoglio, and a liability in the person of Ratzinger. And with that, everyone is happy because everyone finds his own pope, namely, the tradis Ratzinger, and the other Bergoglio. Needless to say, there is nothing Catholic about all this.
Thors Catholic Hammer
There is no such thing as a conciliar or post Vat2 church or church of Bergoglio [tho he wants to make one].
There is only the Roman catholic church.
It has and can have only one valid pope at any one time.
Clearly a formal heretic like Bergoglio can not be a pope .
Therefore either the See is vacant or Benedict never properly resigned.
I think the preponderence of evidence all points to …More
There is no such thing as a conciliar or post Vat2 church or church of Bergoglio [tho he wants to make one].
There is only the Roman catholic church.
It has and can have only one valid pope at any one time.
Clearly a formal heretic like Bergoglio can not be a pope .
Therefore either the See is vacant or Benedict never properly resigned.
I think the preponderence of evidence all points to Benedict is still pope [BIP].
Ultraviolet
Crackers the Parrot believes bold-text turns lies into truth.

There is only one "valid" Pope. Benedict XVI resigned and the Curia elected Francis. If Francis can not be Pope because he is a "formal heretic" the same is true for Benedict XVI.

Now here's what's going to happen. Crackers the Parrot (aka @Thors Catholic Hammer) is going to lie and say something like "you have never once shown …More
Crackers the Parrot believes bold-text turns lies into truth.

There is only one "valid" Pope. Benedict XVI resigned and the Curia elected Francis. If Francis can not be Pope because he is a "formal heretic" the same is true for Benedict XVI.

Now here's what's going to happen. Crackers the Parrot (aka @Thors Catholic Hammer) is going to lie and say something like "you have never once shown any heresy for Benedict. All you do is flounder in sedevacantist websites"

I'm going to repost a big bunch of sites covering the many heresies Benedict XVI has advanced over the years. Crackers can't refute those heresies or disprove them. So he's going to lie again and l claim I haven't shown anything because I didn't personally re-write each example.

...because, you know, a valid working URL to site content isn't really "proof" online. :P

His newer gimmick is to argue that Benedict XVI's heresies weren't officially taught.

I'm going to challenge Crackers to cite Canon Law on this. He's going to pull out every one of his dishonest rhetorical tricks to avoid doing what he should. a.) refuting the heresies Benedict XVI advanced b.) showing which Canon Law covers and describes the qualifications for heresies taught by a Pope.

Most likely, Crackers will fall back on passive-voice claims, "It has been already shown" (which is a lie) "These are well known" (which is why he can't cite them directly) or some other rot.

Just watch, everyone. I've gone up againt GTV's BS Parrot enough times I can almost write his own lies for him.
nereid2
Ultraviolet
I've seen this argument before, though never so boldly stated. "For the renunciation of the papacy to be valid, the man who is pope has to explicitly renounce the office by name. This is stated quite explicitly in the 1983 Code of Canon Law (canon 332.2)

That is a lie, readily disproven by the Vatican's own site. Canon 332:2 says no such thing
www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P16.HTM

More
I've seen this argument before, though never so boldly stated. "For the renunciation of the papacy to be valid, the man who is pope has to explicitly renounce the office by name. This is stated quite explicitly in the 1983 Code of Canon Law (canon 332.2)

That is a lie, readily disproven by the Vatican's own site. Canon 332:2 says no such thing
www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P16.HTM

Well! That was easy. Saves me picking apart his next umpteen paragraphs of faulty logic. This is why I constantly decry "youtube scholars" whether they're on youtube or not.
Hildebrand
"The problem: Ratzinger keeps vigorously contradicting such claims." ...through the likes of Apb/ Georg Ganswein, whom Apb. Vigano has accused of being Benedict's Gaoler.
Thors Catholic Hammer
Pope Benedict xvi lives in fear of his life and is effectively under Vatican house arrest being monitored 24/7.
The statements made by +Ganswein concerning his detailed knowledge of Pope Benedict’s lifestyle could only be made by a man who has total and complete control over every minute aspect of the popes existence.

Such control is only exercised by WARDER in a Gaol.
Ultraviolet
I'm not harassing you, Angie W. I'm correcting you and one reply hardly counts as "harrassment" which implies both malice and repetition.

Second, this is a public site with public comments. When you present your views, you are "imposing" them just as much as anyone else is.

If you want a venue where you can spout your falsehoods without facing correction, I'm delighted that I can provide an …More
I'm not harassing you, Angie W. I'm correcting you and one reply hardly counts as "harrassment" which implies both malice and repetition.

Second, this is a public site with public comments. When you present your views, you are "imposing" them just as much as anyone else is.

If you want a venue where you can spout your falsehoods without facing correction, I'm delighted that I can provide an effective solution.

Get a blog and disable the comments section. Then you can post whatever you please without ever facing the risk of having the information debunked.

Glad I could help you out there so your opinion won't face "harassment" when they're shown to be wrong.
Rafał_Ovile
Ultraviolet Your comments are useless similar to a neo-marxist mind which considers truth as imposition of views whilst imposing falsehoods on adversaries. Get yourself a life. Start reading and learning or else your mind will rot to the point of extreme defect.
Rafał_Ovile
St Cuthbert Mayne is very creative ... unfortunately in publishing lies.
Ultraviolet
"similar to a neo-marxist mind which considers truth as imposition of views"

You really have no idea what you're talking about do you, darling? :)

"whilst imposing falsehoods on adversaries."

Demonstrate the falsehood I have "imposed" Rafał_Ovile

If you can't then YOU are imposing a falsehood! Put up or shut up.
Rafał_Ovile
Ultraviolet are you a member of the gay ( darling?") mafia lobby supporting your boss?
Ultraviolet
No, @Rafał_Ovile I'm being catty while poking fun at your bad English. That reminds me. If you're going to use English idioms, use them correctly. It's "get a life" not "get yourself a life".

To write English properly, you must THINK in English. Don't translate directly from Polish or your writing gets awkward "to the point of extreme defect." :P

But that is secondary. I'm WAITING, Rafal. …More
No, @Rafał_Ovile I'm being catty while poking fun at your bad English. That reminds me. If you're going to use English idioms, use them correctly. It's "get a life" not "get yourself a life".

To write English properly, you must THINK in English. Don't translate directly from Polish or your writing gets awkward "to the point of extreme defect." :P

But that is secondary. I'm WAITING, Rafal. Waiting for YOU.

You claimed I'm "imposing falsehoods on adversaries". Post proof. You made the claim now prove it. Or YOU are the one "imposing falsehoods".

And imposing falsehoods in bad English, which somehow makes even worse.
Rafał_Ovile
Ultraviolet stick to subject matter ,( on investigating true pope in the shared Petrine Office) or else you'll keep drifting from reality into abstractive... You act more bully than educated, unwilling to learn and eager to offend.
Ultraviolet
I am sticking to "subject matter", @Rafał_Ovile. You claimed I'm "imposing falsehoods on adversaries".

Post proof. Show a falsehood I have imposed. I am not going to allow you to throw that kind of filth unchallenged.

You made the claim now you prove it. If you can not prove your claim,. then admit you lied and apologize.
Ultraviolet
Always nice to see Thors Catholic Hammer repeating same old lies about "cannon" law. Except as usual his "cannon" is shooting blanks.

"Cannon" 188 doesn't apply. Benedict XVI has repeatedly said he freely resigned. Your conspiracy fantasies aren't true just because you go into Crackers The Parrot mode and repeat them again. Your only "proof" is your say-so.

There isn't a thing you or anyone …More
Always nice to see Thors Catholic Hammer repeating same old lies about "cannon" law. Except as usual his "cannon" is shooting blanks.

"Cannon" 188 doesn't apply. Benedict XVI has repeatedly said he freely resigned. Your conspiracy fantasies aren't true just because you go into Crackers The Parrot mode and repeat them again. Your only "proof" is your say-so.

There isn't a thing you or anyone else on GTV has raised about canon 332 section (not number) 2 that hasn't been refuted over and over and over again.. Canon law does not define "proper manifestation". Benedict XVI resigned orally and in writing and made both very public. As such, he "properly manifested" his resignation of the Papacy.

Sorry, Crackers. Repeating your lies isn't going to change that they ARE lies.

"Catholic Church law is the sole protection afforded to Catholics in this unprecedented situation"

...except it ISN'T "unprecedented". Other Popes have resigned before. That's why there IS Canon Law on the subject. Again, another lie from you. What else is new.
Rafał_Ovile
Ultraviolet Pope Benedict XVI's documents available on va site prove you wrong. Your above arguments are rudementary that of a primitive intellect.
Rafał_Ovile
St Cuthbert Mayne where is more defficiency, in your gray or white matter? If you have problems with finding public documents... Do not give in to laziness...
One more comment from Rafał_Ovile
Rafał_Ovile
St Cuthbert Mayne less psychology and more metaphysics. AGAIN read and learn or elese all your matter will completely detoriorate to a vegetable state. 🙏 😀
Krystian N.
The tragedy is that all "mainstream traditionals" support the idea Francis being the pope. I know in their hearts they don't believe in Francis-pope but for their convenience the don't argue that matter.
- FSSPX
- Remnant
...
Someone should cut this Gordian knot!
Thors Catholic Hammer
The R&R traditionalist Catholics only recognize francis because he seemingly validates their contempt for what they wrongly describe as the conciliar or VAT2 Church.
Francis is a useful tool for their vituperation.
That Benedict is still pope is anathema to these traditionalist catholic fanatics.
Thors Catholic Hammer
Pope Benedict’s resignation was never effective due to serious violations (ongoing) of the church law governing such matters.
The applicable laws are cannons 188 ( a resignation made in substantial error) and canon 332 no 2. ( a resignation not properly manifested/ failure to resign the office itself)
Catholic Church law is the sole protection afforded to Catholics in this unprecedented situati…More
Pope Benedict’s resignation was never effective due to serious violations (ongoing) of the church law governing such matters.
The applicable laws are cannons 188 ( a resignation made in substantial error) and canon 332 no 2. ( a resignation not properly manifested/ failure to resign the office itself)
Catholic Church law is the sole protection afforded to Catholics in this unprecedented situation.
Thors Catholic Hammer
@Ultraviolet.
Canon 188 refers to substantial error that invalidates a papal resignation. Pope Benedict’s resignation was substantially erroneous because it is clear he has not addressed properly the issue of a full and complete abandonment of the office of pope.
He is therefore in manifest error concerning the object of his act,
He hangs on to aspects of the papal office including name, title, …More
@Ultraviolet.
Canon 188 refers to substantial error that invalidates a papal resignation. Pope Benedict’s resignation was substantially erroneous because it is clear he has not addressed properly the issue of a full and complete abandonment of the office of pope.
He is therefore in manifest error concerning the object of his act,
He hangs on to aspects of the papal office including name, title, form of address, area of residence and use of papal blessing plus fisherman’s ring.
What Benedict says could be coerced and in any event contradicts itself both in word at times and at all times in his continued utilization of all the trappings of office of a partially active pope.
Only blind fools like you think this man has actuated or rendered a properly manifested abandonment of the papal office,
IT NEVER HAPPENED.
la verdad prevalece
🤨 The poor arguments pro-heresiarch Bergoglio to defending a heretic and apostate are those that make no sense. Since the the Magisterium of the Catholic Church makes it impossible for a heretic to become Pope.
The Catholic Encyclopedia repeats this truth declared by Pope Paul IV by asserting that the election of a heretic as pope would, of course, be completely null and void.
The Catholic …More
🤨 The poor arguments pro-heresiarch Bergoglio to defending a heretic and apostate are those that make no sense. Since the the Magisterium of the Catholic Church makes it impossible for a heretic to become Pope.
The Catholic Encyclopedia repeats this truth declared by Pope Paul IV by asserting that the election of a heretic as pope would, of course, be completely null and void.
The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Papal Elections,” 1914, Vol. 11, p. 456: "Of course, the election of a heretic, schismatic, or female [as Pope] would be null and void." Bull of Pope Paul IV Against Heretics: "Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio"
Rafał_Ovile
All true Catholics who still contradict pope Benedict XVI of he being pope Benedict XVI and purposely blind to see pope Benedict XVI to relieve themselcves from duty to accept amd adhere to truth, with all its consequences, should read and try to understand the following description which logically and intergrally explains all events which lead to present shared Petrine Office by two diffrerent …More
All true Catholics who still contradict pope Benedict XVI of he being pope Benedict XVI and purposely blind to see pope Benedict XVI to relieve themselcves from duty to accept amd adhere to truth, with all its consequences, should read and try to understand the following description which logically and intergrally explains all events which lead to present shared Petrine Office by two diffrerent men. The latter is existing fact in reality proven by papal documents and Abp. Ganswein's public testimony...
How Benedict has defeated “Francis”
Thors Catholic Hammer
Pope Benedict’s resignation was never effective due to serious violations (ongoing) of the law governing such matters.
They are cannons 188 ( a resignation made in substantial error) and canon 332 no 2. ( a resignation not properly manifested)
la verdad prevalece
Bergoglio admits the www.youtube.com/watch his www.youtube.com/watch that is contrary to the One Instituted by Christ. The fabrication of the office of a 'pope emeritus' is contrary to what Christ taught.
la verdad prevalece
(Bergoglio) wondered if "Nowadays, what with us living longer, can we lead a Church once we get to a certain age with all those aches and pains? Benedict resigned with courage and prayer, and with Science and Theology. He opened this door. But there is only one Pope, the other one is a Pope Emeritus. Perhaps in the future there will be two or three, but they are Emeritus.â?

Vatican Insider. “…
More
(Bergoglio) wondered if "Nowadays, what with us living longer, can we lead a Church once we get to a certain age with all those aches and pains? Benedict resigned with courage and prayer, and with Science and Theology. He opened this door. But there is only one Pope, the other one is a Pope Emeritus. Perhaps in the future there will be two or three, but they are Emeritus.â?

Vatican Insider. “Seventy years ago, popes emeritus didn’t exist. What will happen with popes emeritus? We need to look at Benedict XVI as an institution, he opened a door, that of the popes emeritus. The door is open, whether there will be others, only God knows. I believe that if a bishop of Rome feels he is losing his strength, he must ask himself the same questions Pope Benedict XVI did.”

Cardinal Brandmüller expressed his frustration with Benedict’s resignation.

“The figure of ‘Pope Emeritus’ does not exist in the entire history of the Church,” he told theFrankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, continuing: “The fact that a Pope comes along and topples a 2,000-year-old tradition bowled over not just us cardinals.” (The Irish Catholic)
laurelmarycecilia
Of course he does !!! Why else would he co-author that book with Cardinal Sarah...... use common sense !
Dr Bobus
He co-authored the book because he knew that his name would help oppose any relaxation of celibacy
Angie W.
Fr Paul Kramer:
February 2 at 1:12 PM ·
Canon Law distinguishes between office, munus, and ministry. They are not the same thing:

Can. 1331 — § 1. Excommunicatus vetatur:
1° ullam habere participationem ministerialem in celebrandis Eucharistiae Sacrificio vel quibuslibet aliis cultus caerimoniis;
2° sacramenta vel sacramentalia celebrare et sacramenta recipere;
3° ecclesiasticis officiis vel …More
Fr Paul Kramer:
February 2 at 1:12 PM ·
Canon Law distinguishes between office, munus, and ministry. They are not the same thing:

Can. 1331 — § 1. Excommunicatus vetatur:
1° ullam habere participationem ministerialem in celebrandis Eucharistiae Sacrificio vel quibuslibet aliis cultus caerimoniis;
2° sacramenta vel sacramentalia celebrare et sacramenta recipere;
3° ecclesiasticis officiis vel ministeriis vel muneribus quibuslibet fungi vel actus regiminis ponere.
actus regiminis ponere.
§ 2. Quod si excommunicatio irrogata vel declarata sit, reus:
1° si agere velit contra praescriptum § 1, n. 1, est arcendus aut a liturgica actione est cessandum, nisi gravis obstet causa;
2° invalide ponit actus regiminis, qui ad normam § 1, n. 3, sunt illiciti;
3° vetatur frui privilegiis antea concessis;
4° nequit valide consequi dignitatem, officium aliudve munus in Ecclesia;
5° fructus dignitatis, officii, muneris cuiuslibet, pensionis, quam quidem habeat in Ecclesia, non facit suos.

The ministry flows from the office, which is a stable munus; and thus, renouncing the exercise of the ministry cannot logically be equivalent to a resignation of the munus or office; since, "the substance holds all the potentia of the being of a thing, and thus to renounce anything which flows from the substance is not and cannot be a renunciation of the substance".
Angie W.
It is not necessary to be a canonist to know that Bergoglio is not a pope for the simple reason that the Church teaches that the elevation of a heretic to the Papacy is invalid and void.
Angie W.
@Ultraviolet I do not like to be harassed by a layman please do not try to impose on me your ideas Pro heresiarch Bergoglio.
comfort ye
As distasteful as argumentation may be, it has not reached the level that would be called harassment, Just my observation. However, common decency has been violated as if it is necessary for making a point. Sad.
Ultraviolet
@Angie W. Canon Law 331 section 2 does not require a Pope to renounce "the munus as Vicar of Christ" It lists exactly two conditions for a valid resignation of the office. They are: "the resignation is made freely and properly manifested " That's it. Benedict did both. He anticipated the nay-sayers on both counts. He resigned orally and in writing, which certainly counts as "properly …More
@Angie W. Canon Law 331 section 2 does not require a Pope to renounce "the munus as Vicar of Christ" It lists exactly two conditions for a valid resignation of the office. They are: "the resignation is made freely and properly manifested " That's it. Benedict did both. He anticipated the nay-sayers on both counts. He resigned orally and in writing, which certainly counts as "properly manifested" and he said he resigned freely and later reiterated the point.

...and he did renounce the "munus". ( publicly and freely in accordance with Canon Law), in his last General Audience one day before his resignation went into effect.

"I no longer bear the power of office for the governance of the Church"
www.vatican.va/…/hf_ben-xvi_aud_…

Munus: Noun, third declension. Translanted as: duty, office, function
latin-dictionary.net/definition/27439/munus-muneris

Benedicts own public statement used the very word people like you claimed is required. It isn't required but you still got what you wanted and it still isn't good enough. As I've said before, elsewhere, the only "valid" resignation your kind will ever accept from Benedict is whatever he didn't say. You refuse to accept that he did resign. Consequently you will always "interpret" Canon Law to include yet another requirement that isn't there which he didn't fulfill.

Almost forgot... your own source contradicts your agument, love. ;-)

"
simply adding the epithet “emeritus”. The latter is very significant because, when Pope Gregory XII resigned, he was again a cardinal, and when Pope Celestine V resigned, he became a monk again. This was not established by Pope Benedict XVI."

Benedict chose the title "emeritus" and according to your source "the latter is very signficant".

Indeed it is. An "emeritus" is an honorary title and refers to one who has retired from office. So says Merriam -Webster
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emeritus

Benedict personally chose a title that applies only to someone who retired from office.That disproves the claim you people put in his mouth that he "only intended to resign the ministry of the Papacy and retain the office, etc. etc. etc."

His own self-chosen title applies only to those who resigned office.

A year later after his resignation an obviously exasperated Benedict clarified this issue for the last time, "The only condition for the validity of my resignation is the complete freedom of my decision. Speculations regarding its validity are simply absurd.”

catholicherald.co.uk/…/benedict-xvi-di…
Rand Miller
They're both obstinate heretics and therefore neither are Catholics.
Angie W.
Of course, since Pope Benedict XVI never renounced the munus as Vicar of Christ. Bergoglio was disqualified because he was already a heretic and apostate in Argentina. Even Bergoglio introduced himself as Bishop of Rome not as Pope. 🤨
Angie W.
Tosatti: Benedict XVI Considers Himself Pope www.marcotosatti.com/…/se-benedetto-si…
iwirawan
Yes, I believe the Heaven consider him the real Holy Father, and we have been deceived. I believe there probably some reason why they have not killed him. Remember he knows everything, all dirt and he even knows the third secret. He probably have some insurance policy in case they killed him.
Vatican is a scary scary place. Remember JP1? Remember Paul VI double? All has been going on and we have …More
Yes, I believe the Heaven consider him the real Holy Father, and we have been deceived. I believe there probably some reason why they have not killed him. Remember he knows everything, all dirt and he even knows the third secret. He probably have some insurance policy in case they killed him.
Vatican is a scary scary place. Remember JP1? Remember Paul VI double? All has been going on and we have no idea.
Lalanz
Benedict is being held hostage in the Vatican...
Claudius Cartapus
Catherine Emmerich saw that, two centuries ago ! - The prophecy of the two popes:
August 10, 1820
“I see the Holy Father in great anguish. He lives in a palace other than before
[notice how Pope Benedict XVI no longer lives in the Papal residence?] and he admits only a limited number of friends near him. I fear that the Holy Father will suffer many more trials before he dies. I see that the …More
Catherine Emmerich saw that, two centuries ago ! - The prophecy of the two popes:
August 10, 1820
“I see the Holy Father in great anguish. He lives in a palace other than before
[notice how Pope Benedict XVI no longer lives in the Papal residence?] and he admits only a limited number of friends near him. I fear that the Holy Father will suffer many more trials before he dies. I see that the false Church of darkness is making progress and I see the dreadful influence it has on the people. The Holy Father and the Church are verily in so great a distress that one must implore God night and day…”
“I have been told to pray much for the Church and the Pope…The people must pray earnestly for the extirpation (rooting out) of the dark church.”
Ultraviolet
Only one problem with that, Claude. Pope Benedict XVI resigned. He isn't the "Holy Father" anymore. So Catherine Emmerich's prophecy must apply to some future pope.

As for the hostage claims...
Benedict XVI to Pope Francis: Your goodness is my home and the place where I feel safe
Lalanz
That’s because Benedict is the real Pope
Ultraviolet
@Claudius Cartapus The "true Pope" isn't wearing The Ring Of The Fisherman again. :P en.wikipedia.org

Benedict XVI's Papal ring is quite distinctive. It's oval, shows St. Peter, and carries his Papal title.
www3.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Pope+Benedict+X…

www.pope2you.net/…/papal-ring.jpg

c8.alamy.com/…/pope-benedict-x…

The flattened band he's wearing in your photo is his Bishop's Ring... …More
@Claudius Cartapus The "true Pope" isn't wearing The Ring Of The Fisherman again. :P en.wikipedia.org

Benedict XVI's Papal ring is quite distinctive. It's oval, shows St. Peter, and carries his Papal title.
www3.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Pope+Benedict+X…

www.pope2you.net/…/papal-ring.jpg

c8.alamy.com/…/pope-benedict-x…

The flattened band he's wearing in your photo is his Bishop's Ring... because, you know, he retired and the Curia elected a new Pope and stuff. :P

Here are better shots of Benedict wearing his "retirement ring", same one in your photo...
media.voltron.voanews.com/…/A2F0BA95-6354-4…

bostonglobe-prod.cdn.arcpublishing.com/…/5OHNVTGOK4I6HMO…

www.thenation.com/…/Popes_Francis_B…
Caroline03
Don't mean to start a new conspiracy , but the man in that photograph doesn't look anything like Pope Benedict does from the side .....Oh dear! 😌
Claudius Cartapus
The true pope is on the left.