Why shouldn't a Pope be able to resign / retire like Pope Emeritus Benedict? ...

JMJ

This is why:

I am convinced that:

If Pope Benedict Emeritus had:

faced down the wolves and made public the issues the we hear about (financial pressures etc),
faced down the various heretics and liberal Catholics that are casting dirt upon Catholic Truth,
not resigned and gave way to the likes of Pope Francis

Then he would have:

Given the Church the strength to rediscover its true beliefs, values and assumptions (ie culture)
Caused the shaking of the basket as 'separation' of the non-Catholic elements and those who hold them would have been accelerated.
Died shortly thereafter.

Instead, he now wastes away as did Pope John Paul II.

Indeed the Catholic Church is of Divine origin, with men such as these for Her leaders any human organization would have vanished centuries ago.

Do not give up hope as in the failings of the Popes we see the way to emerge from this crisis.

Laity, and faithful Priests, Bishops and Cardinals: do your duty. Challenge heretics and liberal Catholics, stand your ground.

If they cast you out into the streets, then so-be-it.

At least you will have done your duty.

At least you will have kept your honour defending the honour of Our King Jesus Christ and the honour of the Catholic Church.

P^3

Comments

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making. It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX. The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience. The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members. It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

America Magazine: Why liturgy is not a space for self-expression

+ JMJ Introduction I subscribed to Jesuit Review America Magazine in order to improve my perspective on the crisis of the Church. At first, I found that I had a hard time reading through the articles that caught my attention. Actually, at best, I didn't get further than a few sentences. Mostly due to demands on what time I have left on this Good Earth. Then a title caught my eye in a latest article ... someone is saying that the Liturgy is not a space for self-expression. Then there's the Performative Piety? What does this mean? What is Performative Piety? I had a sense that "Performative Piety" is the practice of making external acts of piety to be seen by others and Matthew 6:1 (link) confirms this thought. Let's break down the Knox translation: Be sure you do not perform your acts of piety before men , for them to watch ; if you do that, you have no title to a reward from your Father who is in heaven. If you stopped after the first ph...

The Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, 1991 and 2015 - Some Perspectives

+ JMJ In defense of the recent consecration of Fr. Faure by Bishop Williamson, some have argued that the 1991 consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) by the Bishops of the SSPX present an equivalent standard of action and principles. From this they conclude that the SSPX's condemnation of Bishop Williamson's action is flawed as the principles of the 1991 consecration and that of 2015 are equivalent.

Canonical Mission and State of Emergency - A Response to Mr. John Salza - Part B

+ JMJ I was trying to think of a way to map out the time course I discussed in Part A of this article. Early this morning it came to me that this is more about obedience and duty than canon law. As is my wont, I mapped out my thoughts (see image) to draw linkages between the core concepts. My conclusion is that, at least subjectively, Archbishop Lefebvre had sufficient information to make good decisions concerning whether or not he was obliged to obey. I know that the Jesuits, some Sedevacantists and the priests that left over the years will not agree with my thoughts. So be it. The core pieces of information include: Attacks against the SSPX were launched because they kept the Tridentine Mass and the pre-conciliar understanding of the Truths of the Faith. The authorities in the Church were willing to go against the laws of the Church. The same authorities encouraged the various dangers to the Faith embedded in popular interpretations of ambiguo...

Did Rome believe that the Bishops of the SSPX incurred the penalty of excommunication? - Updated

+ JMJ See Update below ... A reader asked me the following question: Hi P^3 Help me straighten out a friend, can you please get me the Vatican documentation saying that the Bishops were not guilty of excommunication, my friend thinks the Vatican still considered all guilty but removed the excommunication of the 4 Bishops as a sign of good will. Thanks A.S. I think your friend is materially correct - here's the section of the letter the remits the excommunication: On the basis of the powers expressly granted to me by the Holy Father Benedict XVI, by virtue of the present Decree I remit the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae incurred by Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, and declared by this Congregation on 1 July 1988. At the same time I declare that, as of today's date, the Decree issued at that time no longer has juridical effect. So, as far as Rome was concerned,...

Tradicat

Search This Blog